Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

bicycle-forum.net
Promoting biking discussion.

Main

Date: 30 Jun 2005 04:56:30
From: __________
Subject: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

Does anybody here have an Action Bent tadpole trike?

http://www.actionbent.com/TWTRIKE.html

Has anybody here ridden one? I'm looking for ride impressions. The design
looks great! For $1295 with a redesigned composite hardshell
adjustable-angle seat and disc brakes, I doubt if anything can touch it for
value. But how does it handle? How is the brake steer? What is it like
at speed?

Date: 30 Jun 2005 14:42:54
From: Leif
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

__________ wrote:
> Does anybody here have an Action Bent tadpole trike?
>
> http://www.actionbent.com/TWTRIKE.html
>
> Has anybody here ridden one? I'm looking for ride impressions. The design
> looks great! For $1295 with a redesigned composite hardshell
> adjustable-angle seat and disc brakes, I doubt if anything can touch it for
> value. But how does it handle? How is the brake steer? What is it like
> at speed?

...I don't know... the steering mechanism looks kinda lame.

Date: 30 Jun 2005 23:53:26
From: __________
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Leif" <LeifEric@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1120167774.215213.228810@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> __________ wrote:
>> Does anybody here have an Action Bent tadpole trike?
>>
>> http://www.actionbent.com/TWTRIKE.html
>>
>> Has anybody here ridden one? I'm looking for ride impressions. The
>> design
>> looks great! For $1295 with a redesigned composite hardshell
>> adjustable-angle seat and disc brakes, I doubt if anything can touch it
>> for
>> value. But how does it handle? How is the brake steer? What is it
>> like
>> at speed?
>
> ...I don't know... the steering mechanism looks kinda lame.

It's very difficult to tell from photos, even if you know what you're
looking for, IMO. But, conversely, looks don't matter if the steering is
awful (again, IMO).

I'm also curious to hear how people like the seat angle. It's nice that
it's adjustable somewhat. I wish my Catrike Speed had adjustable seat angle.

Date: 01 Jul 2005 22:19:36
From: Larry Varney
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

__________ wrote:
> "Leif" <LeifEric@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1120167774.215213.228810@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>>__________ wrote:
>>
>>>Does anybody here have an Action Bent tadpole trike?
>>>
>>>http://www.actionbent.com/TWTRIKE.html
>>>
>>>Has anybody here ridden one? I'm looking for ride impressions. The
>>>design
>>>looks great! For $1295 with a redesigned composite hardshell
>>>adjustable-angle seat and disc brakes, I doubt if anything can touch it
>>>for
>>>value. But how does it handle? How is the brake steer? What is it
>>>like
>>>at speed?
>>
>>...I don't know... the steering mechanism looks kinda lame.
>
>
> It's very difficult to tell from photos, even if you know what you're
> looking for, IMO. But, conversely, looks don't matter if the steering is
> awful (again, IMO).
>
> I'm also curious to hear how people like the seat angle. It's nice that
> it's adjustable somewhat. I wish my Catrike Speed had adjustable seat angle.
>
>

I am currently reviewing the Action Bent tadpole for BentRider
Online. I haven't quite finished yet - I do like to be thorough with
these reviews; I rode the WizWheelz Edge on a weekend tour (Horsey
Hundred) then followed it up with the week-long GITAP - but at this
point I can say that I have been favorably impressed with the AB trike.
Brake steer? It doesn't have any. The seat angle isn't as adjustable
as I would like - but then, many trikes don't have an adjustable recline
at all.
Anyway, look for me to complete this review in another week or two. I
expected to cut this little trike some slack simply because it's so
relatively inexpensive, but it looks like it can stand on its own three
wheels with no condescending help at all!

Date: 04 Jul 2005 07:52:07
From: __________
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net > wrote in message
news:88180$42c5f9b9$d844239e$1618@FUSE.NET...
> __________ wrote:
>> "Leif" <LeifEric@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1120167774.215213.228810@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>__________ wrote:
>>>
>>>>Does anybody here have an Action Bent tadpole trike?
>>>>
>>>>http://www.actionbent.com/TWTRIKE.html
>>>>
>>>>Has anybody here ridden one? I'm looking for ride impressions. The
>>>>design
>>>>looks great! For $1295 with a redesigned composite hardshell
>>>>adjustable-angle seat and disc brakes, I doubt if anything can touch it
>>>>for
>>>>value. But how does it handle? How is the brake steer? What is it
>>>>like
>>>>at speed?
>>>
>>>...I don't know... the steering mechanism looks kinda lame.
>>
>>
>> It's very difficult to tell from photos, even if you know what you're
>> looking for, IMO. But, conversely, looks don't matter if the steering is
>> awful (again, IMO).
>>
>> I'm also curious to hear how people like the seat angle. It's nice that
>> it's adjustable somewhat. I wish my Catrike Speed had adjustable seat
>> angle.
>
> I am currently reviewing the Action Bent tadpole for BentRider Online.
> I haven't quite finished yet - I do like to be thorough with these
> reviews; I rode the WizWheelz Edge on a weekend tour (Horsey Hundred) then
> followed it up with the week-long GITAP - but at this point I can say that
> I have been favorably impressed with the AB trike.
> Brake steer? It doesn't have any. The seat angle isn't as adjustable as
> I would like - but then, many trikes don't have an adjustable recline at
> all.
> Anyway, look for me to complete this review in another week or two. I
> expected to cut this little trike some slack simply because it's so
> relatively inexpensive, but it looks like it can stand on its own three
> wheels with no condescending help at all!

Some review coverage requests, if I may:

Give specifics about build quality issues (if any) and resolutions thereof.
Compare handling to Catrike, Greenspeed, Trice, TerraTrike, etc.
Compare/contrast high speed handling vs. other mainstream trikes.
How well does the headrest work on bumpy roads?
Lots of photos, including steering and seat details plus catalog shots.
Discuss cargo rack, fender and water bottle mounting options.

Thanks for the preview, Larry. We'll look forward to your full BROL review
of the Action Bent Tadpole Trike.

Date: 04 Jul 2005 13:37:43
From: Larry Varney
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

__________ wrote:
<snip >
>>
>> I am currently reviewing the Action Bent tadpole for BentRider Online.
>>I haven't quite finished yet - I do like to be thorough with these
>>reviews; I rode the WizWheelz Edge on a weekend tour (Horsey Hundred) then
>>followed it up with the week-long GITAP - but at this point I can say that
>>I have been favorably impressed with the AB trike.
>> Brake steer? It doesn't have any. The seat angle isn't as adjustable as
>>I would like - but then, many trikes don't have an adjustable recline at
>>all.
>> Anyway, look for me to complete this review in another week or two. I
>>expected to cut this little trike some slack simply because it's so
>>relatively inexpensive, but it looks like it can stand on its own three
>>wheels with no condescending help at all!
>
>
> Some review coverage requests, if I may:
>
> Give specifics about build quality issues (if any) and resolutions thereof.
> Compare handling to Catrike, Greenspeed, Trice, TerraTrike, etc.
> Compare/contrast high speed handling vs. other mainstream trikes.
> How well does the headrest work on bumpy roads?
> Lots of photos, including steering and seat details plus catalog shots.
> Discuss cargo rack, fender and water bottle mounting options.
>
> Thanks for the preview, Larry. We'll look forward to your full BROL review
> of the Action Bent Tadpole Trike.
>
>
>

One thing I don't do, whoever you are, is compare one bike or trike
to another - at least, not as an integral part of the review, and I try
to restrict it to objective comparisons. "Handling" is sometimes a
subjective thing; what is "twitchy" to one person is "responsive" to
another. Some people may prefer the handling of the GT3, for instance,
while others may prefer the Speed. I try to stick to objective
comparisons, such as wheelbase and weight. I discuss whether or not I
feel that the handling of the bike or trike *on its own* is good or bad,
and not so much in comparison with others.
As for the photographs, I try not to bury the reader in them - I love
taking pictures, and the toughest part of my job is deciding what
pictures *not* to include! And, I try to use my own pictures and not
those supplied by the manufacturer - the reader can retrieve those from
the builder's website on his own.

Date: 04 Jul 2005 13:41:26
From: Mark Leuck
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net > wrote in message
news:4115c$42c973e9$d8442365$20688@FUSE.NET...
>
> As for the photographs, I try not to bury the reader in them - I love
> taking pictures, and the toughest part of my job is deciding what
> pictures *not* to include! And, I try to use my own pictures and not
> those supplied by the manufacturer - the reader can retrieve those from
> the builder's website on his own.

I would normally agree with you Larry however many of the images of the
bikes leave much to be desired on manufacturers web pages
...(cough)...Optima...(cough) :)

Date: 04 Jul 2005 14:53:18
From: Larry Varney
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

k Leuck wrote:
> "Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net> wrote in message
> news:4115c$42c973e9$d8442365$20688@FUSE.NET...
>
>> As for the photographs, I try not to bury the reader in them - I love
>>taking pictures, and the toughest part of my job is deciding what
>>pictures *not* to include! And, I try to use my own pictures and not
>>those supplied by the manufacturer - the reader can retrieve those from
>>the builder's website on his own.
>
>
> I would normally agree with you Larry however many of the images of the
> bikes leave much to be desired on manufacturers web pages
> ...(cough)...Optima...(cough) :)
>
>

Yep, sometimes they are - and in those cases, then the requested
"catalog shots" aren't going to be any better if I post them! And that's
why I prefer to take my own pictures. I might miss something, some
particular feature that a reader wants to see, and through the miracle
of digital cameras and internet-based publishing, I can provide that
picture - assuming I still have the bike or trike in question, which
isn't always the case. I do have a habit of selling the bikes and
trikes I buy...

Date: 03 Jul 2005 20:24:58
From: Joshua Goldberg
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

It is about time, I have been waiting almost 3 years for that tadpole to
arrive and now I don't need one, well I need it but the wife will kill me (4
bents at anyone time is her limit)

Joshua

"Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net > wrote in message
news:88180$42c5f9b9$d844239e$1618@FUSE.NET...
> __________ wrote:
>> "Leif" <LeifEric@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1120167774.215213.228810@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>__________ wrote:
>>>
>>>>Does anybody here have an Action Bent tadpole trike?
>>>>
>>>>http://www.actionbent.com/TWTRIKE.html
>>>>
>>>>Has anybody here ridden one? I'm looking for ride impressions. The
>>>>design
>>>>looks great! For $1295 with a redesigned composite hardshell
>>>>adjustable-angle seat and disc brakes, I doubt if anything can touch it
>>>>for
>>>>value. But how does it handle? How is the brake steer? What is it
>>>>like
>>>>at speed?
>>>
>>>...I don't know... the steering mechanism looks kinda lame.
>>
>>
>> It's very difficult to tell from photos, even if you know what you're
>> looking for, IMO. But, conversely, looks don't matter if the steering is
>> awful (again, IMO).
>>
>> I'm also curious to hear how people like the seat angle. It's nice that
>> it's adjustable somewhat. I wish my Catrike Speed had adjustable seat
>> angle.
>
> I am currently reviewing the Action Bent tadpole for BentRider Online.
> I haven't quite finished yet - I do like to be thorough with these
> reviews; I rode the WizWheelz Edge on a weekend tour (Horsey Hundred) then
> followed it up with the week-long GITAP - but at this point I can say that
> I have been favorably impressed with the AB trike.
> Brake steer? It doesn't have any. The seat angle isn't as adjustable as
> I would like - but then, many trikes don't have an adjustable recline at
> all.
> Anyway, look for me to complete this review in another week or two. I
> expected to cut this little trike some slack simply because it's so
> relatively inexpensive, but it looks like it can stand on its own three
> wheels with no condescending help at all!

Date: 03 Jul 2005 01:12:15
From: nget
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

Larry Varney Wrote:
> __________ wrote:
> > "Leif" <LeifEric@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:1120167774.215213.228810@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> >
> >>__________ wrote:
> >>
> >>>Does anybody here have an Action Bent tadpole trike?
> >>>
> >>>http://www.actionbent.com/TWTRIKE.html
> >>>
> >>>Has anybody here ridden one? I'm looking for ride impressions. The
> >>>design
> >>>looks great! For $1295 with a redesigned composite hardshell
> >>>adjustable-angle seat and disc brakes, I doubt if anything can touc
> it
> >>>for
> >>>value. But how does it handle? How is the brake steer? What i
> it
> >>>like
> >>>at speed?
> >>
> >>...I don't know... the steering mechanism looks kinda lame.
> >
> >
> > It's very difficult to tell from photos, even if you know wha
> you're
> > looking for, IMO. But, conversely, looks don't matter if th
> steering is
> > awful (again, IMO).
> >
> > I'm also curious to hear how people like the seat angle. It's nic
> that
> > it's adjustable somewhat. I wish my Catrike Speed had adjustable sea
> angle.
> >
> >
>
> I am currently reviewing the Action Bent tadpole for BentRider
> Online. I haven't quite finished yet - I do like to be thorough with
> these reviews; I rode the WizWheelz Edge on a weekend tour (Horsey
> Hundred) then followed it up with the week-long GITAP - but at this
> point I can say that I have been favorably impressed with the A
> trike.
> Brake steer? It doesn't have any. The seat angle isn't as adjustable
> as I would like - but then, many trikes don't have an adjustabl
> recline
> at all.
> Anyway, look for me to complete this review in another week or two. I
> expected to cut this little trike some slack simply because it's so
> relatively inexpensive, but it looks like it can stand on its ow
> three
> wheels with no condescending help at all!

When you get a trike like this for a review,is it the same as wha
anyone who is an unknown person such as myself would get?In othe
words, do the people who send you items for review know beforehand wha
it is you are up to

--
nget

Date: 02 Jul 2005 16:07:03
From: Larry Varney
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

nget wrote:
> Larry Varney Wrote:
>
>>__________ wrote:
>>
>>>"Leif" <LeifEric@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:1120167774.215213.228810@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>__________ wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Does anybody here have an Action Bent tadpole trike?
>>>>>
>>>>>http://www.actionbent.com/TWTRIKE.html
>>>>>
>>>>>Has anybody here ridden one? I'm looking for ride impressions. The
>>>>>design
>>>>>looks great! For $1295 with a redesigned composite hardshell
>>>>>adjustable-angle seat and disc brakes, I doubt if anything can touch
>>
>>it
>>
>>>>>for
>>>>>value. But how does it handle? How is the brake steer? What is
>>
>>it
>>
>>>>>like
>>>>>at speed?
>>>>
>>>>...I don't know... the steering mechanism looks kinda lame.
>>>
>>>
>>>It's very difficult to tell from photos, even if you know what
>>
>>you're
>>
>>>looking for, IMO. But, conversely, looks don't matter if the
>>
>>steering is
>>
>>>awful (again, IMO).
>>>
>>>I'm also curious to hear how people like the seat angle. It's nice
>>
>>that
>>
>>>it's adjustable somewhat. I wish my Catrike Speed had adjustable seat
>>
>>angle.
>>
>>>
>>I am currently reviewing the Action Bent tadpole for BentRider
>>Online. I haven't quite finished yet - I do like to be thorough with
>>these reviews; I rode the WizWheelz Edge on a weekend tour (Horsey
>>Hundred) then followed it up with the week-long GITAP - but at this
>>point I can say that I have been favorably impressed with the AB
>>trike.
>>Brake steer? It doesn't have any. The seat angle isn't as adjustable
>>as I would like - but then, many trikes don't have an adjustable
>>recline
>>at all.
>>Anyway, look for me to complete this review in another week or two. I
>>expected to cut this little trike some slack simply because it's so
>>relatively inexpensive, but it looks like it can stand on its own
>>three
>>wheels with no condescending help at all!
>
>
> When you get a trike like this for a review,is it the same as what
> anyone who is an unknown person such as myself would get?In other
> words, do the people who send you items for review know beforehand what
> it is you are up to?
>
>

Definitely. Otherwise, they might expect me to actually buy the bikes
or trikes they send me! But seriously, yes, they know who I am, that I'm
reviewing it for publication, etc. The bike or trike in question is the
same as what anyone else would get, though I don't know of a good way of
proving that, short of visiting other recipients and checking what
they've got, or literally buying the things under an assumed name.
Either option isn't too likely, though.

Date: 03 Jul 2005 07:00:13
From: nget
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

Larry wrote.
>>I am currently reviewing the Action Bent tadpole for BentRider
>>Online. I haven't quite finished yet - I do like to be thoroug
with
>>these reviews; I rode the WizWheelz Edge on a weekend tour (Horsey
>>Hundred) then followed it up with the week-long GITAP - but at this
>>point I can say that I have been favorably impressed with the AB
>>trike.
>>Brake steer? It doesn't have any. The seat angle isn't as adjustable
>>as I would like - but then, many trikes don't have an adjustable
>>recline
>>at all.
>>Anyway, look for me to complete this review in another week or two
I
>>expected to cut this little trike some slack simply because it's so
>>relatively inexpensive, but it looks like it can stand on its own
>>three
>>wheels with no condescending help at all![/color]
>
>
> When you get a trike like this for a review,is it the same as what
> anyone who is an unknown person such as myself would get?In other
> words, do the people who send you items for review know beforehan
what
> it is you are up to?
>
>[/color]

Definitely. Otherwise, they might expect me to actually buy the bikes
or trikes they send me! But seriously, yes, they know who I am, tha
I'm
reviewing it for publication, etc. The bike or trike in question i
the
same as what anyone else would get, though I don't know of a good wa
of
proving that, short of visiting other recipients and checking what
they've got, or literally buying the things under an assumed name.
Either option isn't too likely, though.
Thanks for the honest reply Larry,it's good to know you are out ther
looking out for me

--
nget

Date: 02 Jul 2005 06:43:08
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net > wrote in message
news:88180$42c5f9b9$d844239e$1618@FUSE.NET...
[...]
> I am currently reviewing the Action Bent tadpole for BentRider Online.
> I haven't quite finished yet - I do like to be thorough with these
> reviews; I rode the WizWheelz Edge on a weekend tour (Horsey Hundred) then
> followed it up with the week-long GITAP - but at this point I can say that
> I have been favorably impressed with the AB trike.
> Brake steer? It doesn't have any. The seat angle isn't as adjustable as
> I would like - but then, many trikes don't have an adjustable recline at
> all.
> Anyway, look for me to complete this review in another week or two. I
> expected to cut this little trike some slack simply because it's so
> relatively inexpensive, but it looks like it can stand on its own three
> wheels with no condescending help at all!

Larry Varney is one of the ARBR old timers who used to be a regular poster
to ARBR. Frankly I miss him. I feel a bit guilty as I treated him rather
badly when he was last here, but I have resolved to be a better man and not
go berserk all the time just because I don't see eye to eye with my
adversary.

Larry is a good reviewer of bikes and trikes and most important he is a fair
reviewer. I hope he will grace us here with his presence once again as he
always had interesting points of view on everything. Furthermore, he knows
how to write and how to post, no small matters considering some of the other
characters this group is presently afflicted with.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 02 Jul 2005 20:38:35
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:z_udnUjadZ1L4FvfRVn-uQ@prairiewave.com...
>
>
> Larry Varney is one of the ARBR old timers who used to be a regular poster
> to ARBR. Frankly I miss him. I feel a bit guilty as I treated him rather
> badly when he was last here, but I have resolved to be a better man and
> not go berserk all the time just because I don't see eye to eye with my
> adversary.
>

I like this Ed Dolan. The truth be told, however, I liked the other one too.
Just for you Ed, a message post the way you like it. Keep those wheels
turning!

Jeff

Date: 03 Jul 2005 06:09:18
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jeff@door7 > wrote in message
news:11cecv5f6nvksfe@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:z_udnUjadZ1L4FvfRVn-uQ@prairiewave.com...
>>
>>
>> Larry Varney is one of the ARBR old timers who used to be a regular
>> poster to ARBR. Frankly I miss him. I feel a bit guilty as I treated him
>> rather badly when he was last here, but I have resolved to be a better
>> man and not go berserk all the time just because I don't see eye to eye
>> with my adversary.
>>
>
> I like this Ed Dolan. The truth be told, however, I liked the other one
> too. Just for you Ed, a message post the way you like it. Keep those
> wheels turning!
>
> Jeff

I think Jeff must have looked up the expressions "pulling your leg" and "
tongue in cheek" as I previously recommended that he do. It has gotten to
the point where even I don't know what I mean half the time.

If we can't have some fun here on ARBR, we should just forget about it and
spend our time contemplating our navels and pursuing other solitary
pastimes. The besetting sin of way too many of us is that they we are way
too serious. We need to lighten up and find some humor in the games that we
play with one another on ARBR.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

PS. Jeff needs to quote me not only when I am saying good things, but also
when I am saying bad things. The reason for this is that sometimes the good
things will turn out bad and the bad things will turn out good. We can never
be sure which way things are going.

Date: 03 Jul 2005 10:13:38
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:IbadnYb9BbjCWlrfRVn-rQ@prairiewave.com...
>
> PS. Jeff needs to quote me not only when I am saying good things, but also
> when I am saying bad things. The reason for this is that sometimes the
> good things will turn out bad and the bad things will turn out good. We
> can never be sure which way things are going.
>

Well Ed, I like to think of myself as a considerate person (no surprise
there) so I will quote you the way you want to be quoted. Don't jump down my
throat if I get it wrong once in a while but I will be considerate of your
wishes as I have asked you to do for others. As for politics I think it
would be fun to go toe to toe with you but probably not here. Neither one of
us is afraid of our ideas and I think that in cases where you are not trying
to save the group from destruction, you would be respectful while strongly
disagreeing.

Keep on rollin'

Jeff

Date: 04 Jul 2005 04:42:52
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jeff@door7 > wrote in message
news:11cfsnl8prqd55d@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:IbadnYb9BbjCWlrfRVn-rQ@prairiewave.com...
>>
>> PS. Jeff needs to quote me not only when I am saying good things, but
>> also when I am saying bad things. The reason for this is that sometimes
>> the good things will turn out bad and the bad things will turn out good.
>> We can never be sure which way things are going.
>>
>
> Well Ed, I like to think of myself as a considerate person (no surprise
> there) so I will quote you the way you want to be quoted. Don't jump down
> my throat if I get it wrong once in a while but I will be considerate of
> your wishes as I have asked you to do for others.

It is not just the way I want, it is the correct way. Everything will go
much smoother when everyone observes the proper conventions of posting as
set forth by Google.

As for politics I think it
> would be fun to go toe to toe with you but probably not here. Neither one
> of us is afraid of our ideas and I think that in cases where you are not
> trying to save the group from destruction, you would be respectful while
> strongly disagreeing.

We do not want to resurrect politics here on ARBR. That is what almost
destroyed the group the last time around. We conservatives never start these
kind of fights. In the entire history of ARBR, I have always been nothing
but a responder.

I wonder where Mr. Tom Sherman, my nemesis, has gone to. I kind of miss him.
He was a stalwart of ARBR, but I could not forgive him for not taking on the
criminal vandal troll. I simply can't comprehend such cowardice.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 04 Jul 2005 07:05:22
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:0IednWooObMDmVTfRVn-2g@prairiewave.com...
>
> We do not want to resurrect politics here on ARBR. That is what almost
> destroyed the group the last time around. We conservatives never start
> these kind of fights. In the entire history of ARBR, I have always been
> nothing but a responder.
>
I agree. I just think that you and I might have an interesting discussion
some day. Maybe we'll be on the same ride at some point although I haven't
gotten out to the rides you do yet! But I completely agree that this is not
the place for it. Much better to stay on or close to topic.

Date: 05 Jul 2005 05:14:07
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jeff@door7 > wrote in message
news:11ci61sr6o6cc00@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:0IednWooObMDmVTfRVn-2g@prairiewave.com...
>>
>> We do not want to resurrect politics here on ARBR. That is what almost
>> destroyed the group the last time around. We conservatives never start
>> these kind of fights. In the entire history of ARBR, I have always been
>> nothing but a responder.
>>
> I agree. I just think that you and I might have an interesting discussion
> some day. Maybe we'll be on the same ride at some point although I haven't
> gotten out to the rides you do yet! But I completely agree that this is
> not the place for it. Much better to stay on or close to topic.

When embarked on a bike tour with others I NEVER discuss politics or
religion or anything else half way serious. It is always best to stay away
from anything personal too - you know, all that business about what do you
do. Only supreme jerks do that sort of thing. I know you would not do it
either.

The proper subjects for discussion on a bike tour with others is the tour
itself and the daily events that take place in connection with it. Even a
child should know that much at least.

I am an ideal person to go on a bike tour with because I know what are the
proper subjects for conversation and what subjects to stay off of. I can
talk about the weather and the suffering it is causing me all day long.

However, for those who ask for it, I can also talk well into the night at
the drop of a hat about such subjects as prostate cancer, high blood
pressure, regurgitating heart valves, stroke and the eminence of death. I
have a whole catalog of epitaphs for our headstones that we need to
consider. I assure you, there is never a dull moment with me around.

My philosophy of group bike tours is that you do not ever want to get to
know anyone at all well. You want to keep everything on a very casual basis.
After all, we are just ships passing in the night and when the tour is over
then the relationships should also be over. Thus spake Zarathustra!

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 05 Jul 2005 08:25:40
From: Larry Varney
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Jeff Grippe" <jeff@door7> wrote in message
> news:11ci61sr6o6cc00@news.supernews.com...
>
>>"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
>>news:0IednWooObMDmVTfRVn-2g@prairiewave.com...
>>
>>>We do not want to resurrect politics here on ARBR. That is what almost
>>>destroyed the group the last time around. We conservatives never start
>>>these kind of fights. In the entire history of ARBR, I have always been
>>>nothing but a responder.
>>>
>>
>>I agree. I just think that you and I might have an interesting discussion
>>some day. Maybe we'll be on the same ride at some point although I haven't
>>gotten out to the rides you do yet! But I completely agree that this is
>>not the place for it. Much better to stay on or close to topic.
>
>
> When embarked on a bike tour with others I NEVER discuss politics or
> religion or anything else half way serious. It is always best to stay away
> from anything personal too - you know, all that business about what do you
> do. Only supreme jerks do that sort of thing. I know you would not do it
> either.
>
> The proper subjects for discussion on a bike tour with others is the tour
> itself and the daily events that take place in connection with it. Even a
> child should know that much at least.
>
> I am an ideal person to go on a bike tour with because I know what are the
> proper subjects for conversation and what subjects to stay off of. I can
> talk about the weather and the suffering it is causing me all day long.
>
> However, for those who ask for it, I can also talk well into the night at
> the drop of a hat about such subjects as prostate cancer, high blood
> pressure, regurgitating heart valves, stroke and the eminence of death. I
> have a whole catalog of epitaphs for our headstones that we need to
> consider. I assure you, there is never a dull moment with me around.
>
> My philosophy of group bike tours is that you do not ever want to get to
> know anyone at all well. You want to keep everything on a very casual basis.
> After all, we are just ships passing in the night and when the tour is over
> then the relationships should also be over. Thus spake Zarathustra!
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>
>
>
>

And here is another of those areas where Ed Dolan and I differ:
unless it turns personal, I love to discuss politics and other "serious"
subjects while on a bike tour. I've found that a glance at the visible
portion of a news paper in a vending machine can lead to hours of
interesting conversations.
Of course, if I find that someone can't discuss such topics without
becoming belligerent and obnoxious, I will limit my conversations with
them to the other topics you mention - the weather and the tour itself -
and try to make a point of avoiding conversational proximity with those
riders for the remainder of the tour.
Finally, I find that I have made some of my best friends while on
bike tours. I have gotten to know several extremely well, and have
enjoyed seeing them again on subsequent tours. We exchange emails and
phone calls, and our lives are made richer by the lucky accident of
having met on a bike tour.
Incidentally, one of the most fun an innovative things I've seen on a
bike tour was on this past GITAP - a nightly discussion group organized
by the Humanities Coucil of Illinois (or some such name as that). It was
called "Velosophie". We had various things to read and discuss delivered
to us before the tour - such things as Thoreau's essay, "Walking" and
Willa Cather's "O Pioneers!". Each night (except one) after dinner, we
gathered together (as if you can gather separately!) and discussed these
works, with the help of three representatives from this Humanities
council. There was an article about it in the Sunday, June 26th issue of
the Chicago Tribune. Lots of fun, got to know each other better, and
far more enjoyable than just saying "it's dark, nothing else to do but
go to sleep."

Date: 05 Jul 2005 12:55:41
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net > wrote in message
news:916bd$42ca7c47$d8440f9c$18949@FUSE.NET...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "Jeff Grippe" <jeff@door7> wrote in message
>> news:11ci61sr6o6cc00@news.supernews.com...
>>
>>>"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
>>>news:0IednWooObMDmVTfRVn-2g@prairiewave.com...
>>>
>>>>We do not want to resurrect politics here on ARBR. That is what almost
>>>>destroyed the group the last time around. We conservatives never start
>>>>these kind of fights. In the entire history of ARBR, I have always been
>>>>nothing but a responder.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I agree. I just think that you and I might have an interesting discussion
>>>some day. Maybe we'll be on the same ride at some point although I
>>>haven't gotten out to the rides you do yet! But I completely agree that
>>>this is not the place for it. Much better to stay on or close to topic.
>>
>>
>> When embarked on a bike tour with others I NEVER discuss politics or
>> religion or anything else half way serious. It is always best to stay
>> away from anything personal too - you know, all that business about what
>> do you do. Only supreme jerks do that sort of thing. I know you would not
>> do it either.
>>
>> The proper subjects for discussion on a bike tour with others is the tour
>> itself and the daily events that take place in connection with it. Even a
>> child should know that much at least.
>>
>> I am an ideal person to go on a bike tour with because I know what are
>> the proper subjects for conversation and what subjects to stay off of. I
>> can talk about the weather and the suffering it is causing me all day
>> long.
>>
>> However, for those who ask for it, I can also talk well into the night at
>> the drop of a hat about such subjects as prostate cancer, high blood
>> pressure, regurgitating heart valves, stroke and the eminence of death. I
>> have a whole catalog of epitaphs for our headstones that we need to
>> consider. I assure you, there is never a dull moment with me around.
>>
>> My philosophy of group bike tours is that you do not ever want to get to
>> know anyone at all well. You want to keep everything on a very casual
>> basis. After all, we are just ships passing in the night and when the
>> tour is over then the relationships should also be over. Thus spake
>> Zarathustra!
>>
>> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>>
>
> And here is another of those areas where Ed Dolan and I differ: unless
> it turns personal, I love to discuss politics and other "serious" subjects
> while on a bike tour. I've found that a glance at the visible portion of a
> news paper in a vending machine can lead to hours of interesting
> conversations.

Nope! Only jerks do this sort of thing. Or else very lonely types who do not
get enough human contact in the course of their every day lives. I feel
sorry for those who want to discuss anything other than the bike tour
itself. They strike me as being hopelessly desperate for human contact. Of
course, a hermit like myself is an expert on this subject. Frankly, I do not
understand social types like Larry Varney.

> Of course, if I find that someone can't discuss such topics without
> becoming belligerent and obnoxious, I will limit my conversations with
> them to the other topics you mention - the weather and the tour itself -
> and try to make a point of avoiding conversational proximity with those
> riders for the remainder of the tour.

No need to avoid anyone. Just confine yourself to sensible topics of
conversation - like the weather and the tour itself. Those two topics alone
provide plenty of fodder for conversation. Who the hell wants to know what
anyone else thinks about anything else. I sure don't!

> Finally, I find that I have made some of my best friends while on bike
> tours. I have gotten to know several extremely well, and have enjoyed
> seeing them again on subsequent tours. We exchange emails and phone
> calls, and our lives are made richer by the lucky accident of having met
> on a bike tour.

I consider anyone I meet on a bike tour who is more or less compatible with
me to be good for the duration, but that is it. I would get along with Larry
Varney just fine on a bike tour, but I would never allow him to discuss
anything with me other than the tour itself and closely related cycling
subjects.

> Incidentally, one of the most fun an innovative things I've seen on a
> bike tour was on this past GITAP - a nightly discussion group organized by
> the Humanities Coucil of Illinois (or some such name as that). It was
> called "Velosophie". We had various things to read and discuss delivered
> to us before the tour - such things as Thoreau's essay, "Walking" and
> Willa Cather's "O Pioneers!". Each night (except one) after dinner, we
> gathered together (as if you can gather separately!) and discussed these
> works, with the help of three representatives from this Humanities
> council. There was an article about it in the Sunday, June 26th issue of
> the Chicago Tribune. Lots of fun, got to know each other better, and far
> more enjoyable than just saying "it's dark, nothing else to do but go to
> sleep."

Mr. Varney and I have totally different purposes in doing a bike tour. I
have noted his type on the various tours I have done and I never have
anything to do with them. They are on vacation and want to meet people. They
want to be entertained, as if the bike tour itself was not entertainment
enough. Ugh! Double Ugh! Such a thing as attending an evening entertainment
or discussion group would never even occur to me.

What I like to do in the event that I arrive at the end destination before
dark is to ride my bike around the town and have a look at it. I am an
explorer and I like to see new and different places. I do not waste my time
blathering with other cyclists about subjects not related to the tour. I
would rather look at grass grow than do that.

Just before dark I like to walk about the campground and look at the
different bikes, especially the recumbent bikes. I am very good at casual
conversation with those I meet, but I make damn sure that it stays casual.
Anyone who wants to talk about anything other than the tour itself I
consider a jerk.

After dark I have my solitary evening meal (not much) and plan for the next
day. Those who only want to shower, eat, be entertained and sleep at the end
of the day are intellectually bereft. They are too much into creature
comforts. They are more to be pitied than condemned I suppose.

When I do a bike tour, I am strictly in a cycling mode and I do not want to
hear or even think about anything else. I most especially do not want to
waste time and effort getting to know anyone. I can do that here at home if
I want to do that. No, when I am a bike tour, that is what I am doing and
nothing else. The last thing I need is outside entertainment and meeting
people (making friends). The bike tour itself is entertainment enough and
the people you will encounter, however casually, more than suffices.

I submit to one and all that Mr. Larry Varney is one very strange person.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 05 Jul 2005 19:52:28
From: Larry Varney
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net> wrote in message
> news:916bd$42ca7c47$d8440f9c$18949@FUSE.NET...
>
>>Edward Dolan wrote:
>>
>>>"Jeff Grippe" <jeff@door7> wrote in message
>>>news:11ci61sr6o6cc00@news.supernews.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:0IednWooObMDmVTfRVn-2g@prairiewave.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>We do not want to resurrect politics here on ARBR. That is what almost
>>>>>destroyed the group the last time around. We conservatives never start
>>>>>these kind of fights. In the entire history of ARBR, I have always been
>>>>>nothing but a responder.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I agree. I just think that you and I might have an interesting discussion
>>>>some day. Maybe we'll be on the same ride at some point although I
>>>>haven't gotten out to the rides you do yet! But I completely agree that
>>>>this is not the place for it. Much better to stay on or close to topic.
>>>
>>>
>>>When embarked on a bike tour with others I NEVER discuss politics or
>>>religion or anything else half way serious. It is always best to stay
>>>away from anything personal too - you know, all that business about what
>>>do you do. Only supreme jerks do that sort of thing. I know you would not
>>>do it either.
>>>
>>>The proper subjects for discussion on a bike tour with others is the tour
>>>itself and the daily events that take place in connection with it. Even a
>>>child should know that much at least.
>>>
>>>I am an ideal person to go on a bike tour with because I know what are
>>>the proper subjects for conversation and what subjects to stay off of. I
>>>can talk about the weather and the suffering it is causing me all day
>>>long.
>>>
>>>However, for those who ask for it, I can also talk well into the night at
>>>the drop of a hat about such subjects as prostate cancer, high blood
>>>pressure, regurgitating heart valves, stroke and the eminence of death. I
>>>have a whole catalog of epitaphs for our headstones that we need to
>>>consider. I assure you, there is never a dull moment with me around.
>>>
>>>My philosophy of group bike tours is that you do not ever want to get to
>>>know anyone at all well. You want to keep everything on a very casual
>>>basis. After all, we are just ships passing in the night and when the
>>>tour is over then the relationships should also be over. Thus spake
>>>Zarathustra!
>>>
>>>Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>>>
>>
>> And here is another of those areas where Ed Dolan and I differ: unless
>>it turns personal, I love to discuss politics and other "serious" subjects
>>while on a bike tour. I've found that a glance at the visible portion of a
>>news paper in a vending machine can lead to hours of interesting
>>conversations.
>
>
> Nope! Only jerks do this sort of thing. Or else very lonely types who do not
> get enough human contact in the course of their every day lives. I feel
> sorry for those who want to discuss anything other than the bike tour
> itself. They strike me as being hopelessly desperate for human contact. Of
> course, a hermit like myself is an expert on this subject. Frankly, I do not
> understand social types like Larry Varney.
>
>

On the contrary. The "jerk" is one who treats his fellow riders as
somehow not worthy of actual contact, meaningful conversations, and the
tour as somehow beneath them, and that it must be keep separate from
their "every day lives". Far from being "hopelessly desparate for human
contact", I do not hide from it, nor do I treat those on the tour as not
worthy of anything but the most meaningless drivel.

>> Of course, if I find that someone can't discuss such topics without
>>becoming belligerent and obnoxious, I will limit my conversations with
>>them to the other topics you mention - the weather and the tour itself -
>>and try to make a point of avoiding conversational proximity with those
>>riders for the remainder of the tour.
>
>
> No need to avoid anyone. Just confine yourself to sensible topics of
> conversation - like the weather and the tour itself. Those two topics alone
> provide plenty of fodder for conversation. Who the hell wants to know what
> anyone else thinks about anything else. I sure don't!
>
>
"Sensible" topics? Hardly. Boring is more the proper term. I do not
care to discuss such things when not on tour, so why confine myself to
it while riding? As you put it, who the hell wants to know what someone
thinks about the weather?

>> Finally, I find that I have made some of my best friends while on bike
>>tours. I have gotten to know several extremely well, and have enjoyed
>>seeing them again on subsequent tours. We exchange emails and phone
>>calls, and our lives are made richer by the lucky accident of having met
>>on a bike tour.
>
>
> I consider anyone I meet on a bike tour who is more or less compatible with
> me to be good for the duration, but that is it. I would get along with Larry
> Varney just fine on a bike tour, but I would never allow him to discuss
> anything with me other than the tour itself and closely related cycling
> subjects.
>
>
You wouild not "allow" me to discuss anything else? Ha! Not to worry
- whenever I encounter someone so boring, so contempuous, so full of
himself that he would decide what I am "allowed" to discuss - and then
limit it to the weather! - I avoid that person on the tour as I would in
"everyday life".
Why limit yourself to such tiresome drivel? Why relegate fellow
riders to the "duration only" category? What are you afraid of?

>> Incidentally, one of the most fun an innovative things I've seen on a
>>bike tour was on this past GITAP - a nightly discussion group organized by
>>the Humanities Coucil of Illinois (or some such name as that). It was
>>called "Velosophie". We had various things to read and discuss delivered
>>to us before the tour - such things as Thoreau's essay, "Walking" and
>>Willa Cather's "O Pioneers!". Each night (except one) after dinner, we
>>gathered together (as if you can gather separately!) and discussed these
>>works, with the help of three representatives from this Humanities
>>council. There was an article about it in the Sunday, June 26th issue of
>>the Chicago Tribune. Lots of fun, got to know each other better, and far
>>more enjoyable than just saying "it's dark, nothing else to do but go to
>>sleep."
>
>
> Mr. Varney and I have totally different purposes in doing a bike tour. I
> have noted his type on the various tours I have done and I never have
> anything to do with them. They are on vacation and want to meet people. They
> want to be entertained, as if the bike tour itself was not entertainment
> enough. Ugh! Double Ugh! Such a thing as attending an evening entertainment
> or discussion group would never even occur to me.
>
> What I like to do in the event that I arrive at the end destination before
> dark is to ride my bike around the town and have a look at it. I am an
> explorer and I like to see new and different places. I do not waste my time
> blathering with other cyclists about subjects not related to the tour. I
> would rather look at grass grow than do that.
>
> Just before dark I like to walk about the campground and look at the
> different bikes, especially the recumbent bikes. I am very good at casual
> conversation with those I meet, but I make damn sure that it stays casual.
> Anyone who wants to talk about anything other than the tour itself I
> consider a jerk.
>
> After dark I have my solitary evening meal (not much) and plan for the next
> day. Those who only want to shower, eat, be entertained and sleep at the end
> of the day are intellectually bereft. They are too much into creature
> comforts. They are more to be pitied than condemned I suppose.
>
> When I do a bike tour, I am strictly in a cycling mode and I do not want to
> hear or even think about anything else. I most especially do not want to
> waste time and effort getting to know anyone. I can do that here at home if
> I want to do that. No, when I am a bike tour, that is what I am doing and
> nothing else. The last thing I need is outside entertainment and meeting
> people (making friends). The bike tour itself is entertainment enough and
> the people you will encounter, however casually, more than suffices.
>

Why do you not want to meet people? Why do you not want to hear
anythihng else but talk about the weather and the tour? Why is it that
you "can do that at home", but you don't want to do it on a tour? Why
limit yourself? The tour is "entertainment enough"? Why? What are you
afraid of?

> I submit to one and all that Mr. Larry Varney is one very strange person.

And I submit that you are truly pathetic, in the most literal sense,
and your comments further explain your behavior on this newsgroup.

>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>
>
>
>

Date: 06 Jul 2005 05:28:22
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net > wrote in message
news:3361$42cb1d40$d8441fc3$19108@FUSE.NET...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net> wrote in message
>> news:916bd$42ca7c47$d8440f9c$18949@FUSE.NET...
>>
>>>Edward Dolan wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Jeff Grippe" <jeff@door7> wrote in message
>>>>news:11ci61sr6o6cc00@news.supernews.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
>>>>>news:0IednWooObMDmVTfRVn-2g@prairiewave.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>We do not want to resurrect politics here on ARBR. That is what almost
>>>>>>destroyed the group the last time around. We conservatives never start
>>>>>>these kind of fights. In the entire history of ARBR, I have always
>>>>>>been nothing but a responder.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I agree. I just think that you and I might have an interesting
>>>>>discussion some day. Maybe we'll be on the same ride at some point
>>>>>although I haven't gotten out to the rides you do yet! But I completely
>>>>>agree that this is not the place for it. Much better to stay on or
>>>>>close to topic.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>When embarked on a bike tour with others I NEVER discuss politics or
>>>>religion or anything else half way serious. It is always best to stay
>>>>away from anything personal too - you know, all that business about what
>>>>do you do. Only supreme jerks do that sort of thing. I know you would
>>>>not do it either.
>>>>
>>>>The proper subjects for discussion on a bike tour with others is the
>>>>tour itself and the daily events that take place in connection with it.
>>>>Even a child should know that much at least.
>>>>
>>>>I am an ideal person to go on a bike tour with because I know what are
>>>>the proper subjects for conversation and what subjects to stay off of. I
>>>>can talk about the weather and the suffering it is causing me all day
>>>>long.
>>>>
>>>>However, for those who ask for it, I can also talk well into the night
>>>>at the drop of a hat about such subjects as prostate cancer, high blood
>>>>pressure, regurgitating heart valves, stroke and the eminence of death.
>>>>I have a whole catalog of epitaphs for our headstones that we need to
>>>>consider. I assure you, there is never a dull moment with me around.
>>>>
>>>>My philosophy of group bike tours is that you do not ever want to get to
>>>>know anyone at all well. You want to keep everything on a very casual
>>>>basis. After all, we are just ships passing in the night and when the
>>>>tour is over then the relationships should also be over. Thus spake
>>>>Zarathustra!
>>>>
>>>>Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>>>>
>>>
>>> And here is another of those areas where Ed Dolan and I differ: unless
>>> it turns personal, I love to discuss politics and other "serious"
>>> subjects while on a bike tour. I've found that a glance at the visible
>>> portion of a news paper in a vending machine can lead to hours of
>>> interesting conversations.
>>
>>
>> Nope! Only jerks do this sort of thing. Or else very lonely types who do
>> not get enough human contact in the course of their every day lives. I
>> feel sorry for those who want to discuss anything other than the bike
>> tour itself. They strike me as being hopelessly desperate for human
>> contact. Of course, a hermit like myself is an expert on this subject.
>> Frankly, I do not understand social types like Larry Varney.
>>
>>
>
> On the contrary. The "jerk" is one who treats his fellow riders as
> somehow not worthy of actual contact, meaningful conversations, and the
> tour as somehow beneath them, and that it must be keep separate from their
> "every day lives". Far from being "hopelessly desparate for human
> contact", I do not hide from it, nor do I treat those on the tour as not
> worthy of anything but the most meaningless drivel.

There is always plenty to talk about with other cyclists on subjects related
to the tour or to cycling in general without getting onto other subjects.
The classic opening line for jerks is "What do you do?" Such jerkdom is
beyond me!

>>> Of course, if I find that someone can't discuss such topics without
>>> becoming belligerent and obnoxious, I will limit my conversations with
>>> them to the other topics you mention - the weather and the tour itself -
>>> and try to make a point of avoiding conversational proximity with those
>>> riders for the remainder of the tour.
>>
>>
>> No need to avoid anyone. Just confine yourself to sensible topics of
>> conversation - like the weather and the tour itself. Those two topics
>> alone provide plenty of fodder for conversation. Who the hell wants to
>> know what anyone else thinks about anything else. I sure don't!
>>
>>
> "Sensible" topics? Hardly. Boring is more the proper term. I do not care
> to discuss such things when not on tour, so why confine myself to it while
> riding? As you put it, who the hell wants to know what someone thinks
> about the weather?

It is how the weather relates to the ability to do the ride. There is
actually no subject under the sun that is boring provided you have an
interesting person like me involved. Boring people are boring no matter what
the subject under discussion is.

>>> Finally, I find that I have made some of my best friends while on bike
>>> tours. I have gotten to know several extremely well, and have enjoyed
>>> seeing them again on subsequent tours. We exchange emails and phone
>>> calls, and our lives are made richer by the lucky accident of having met
>>> on a bike tour.
>>
>>
>> I consider anyone I meet on a bike tour who is more or less compatible
>> with me to be good for the duration, but that is it. I would get along
>> with Larry Varney just fine on a bike tour, but I would never allow him
>> to discuss anything with me other than the tour itself and closely
>> related cycling subjects.
>>
>>
> You wouild not "allow" me to discuss anything else? Ha! Not to worry -
> whenever I encounter someone so boring, so contempuous, so full of himself
> that he would decide what I am "allowed" to discuss - and then limit it to
> the weather! - I avoid that person on the tour as I would in "everyday
> life".
> Why limit yourself to such tiresome drivel? Why relegate fellow riders
> to the "duration only" category? What are you afraid of?

It takes two to tango. I would avoid you like the plague if you came up to
me asking me what it is that I do. The moment you mentioned a current event
I would likewise confine you to the dust bin. The biggest jerks on GRABAAWR
were the ones who wanted to talk about the Tour de France which normally
occurrs during that ride. But at least that is a bike related subject. A
group bike ride provides enough interest for discussion without looking
elsewhere for something to talk about. But jerks will be jerks, no matter
what.

>>> Incidentally, one of the most fun an innovative things I've seen on a
>>> bike tour was on this past GITAP - a nightly discussion group organized
>>> by the Humanities Coucil of Illinois (or some such name as that). It was
>>> called "Velosophie". We had various things to read and discuss delivered
>>> to us before the tour - such things as Thoreau's essay, "Walking" and
>>> Willa Cather's "O Pioneers!". Each night (except one) after dinner, we
>>> gathered together (as if you can gather separately!) and discussed these
>>> works, with the help of three representatives from this Humanities
>>> council. There was an article about it in the Sunday, June 26th issue of
>>> the Chicago Tribune. Lots of fun, got to know each other better, and
>>> far more enjoyable than just saying "it's dark, nothing else to do but
>>> go to sleep."
>>
>>
>> Mr. Varney and I have totally different purposes in doing a bike tour. I
>> have noted his type on the various tours I have done and I never have
>> anything to do with them. They are on vacation and want to meet people.
>> They want to be entertained, as if the bike tour itself was not
>> entertainment enough. Ugh! Double Ugh! Such a thing as attending an
>> evening entertainment or discussion group would never even occur to me.
>>
>> What I like to do in the event that I arrive at the end destination
>> before dark is to ride my bike around the town and have a look at it. I
>> am an explorer and I like to see new and different places. I do not waste
>> my time blathering with other cyclists about subjects not related to the
>> tour. I would rather look at grass grow than do that.
>>
>> Just before dark I like to walk about the campground and look at the
>> different bikes, especially the recumbent bikes. I am very good at casual
>> conversation with those I meet, but I make damn sure that it stays
>> casual. Anyone who wants to talk about anything other than the tour
>> itself I consider a jerk.
>>
>> After dark I have my solitary evening meal (not much) and plan for the
>> next day. Those who only want to shower, eat, be entertained and sleep at
>> the end of the day are intellectually bereft. They are too much into
>> creature comforts. They are more to be pitied than condemned I suppose.
>>
>> When I do a bike tour, I am strictly in a cycling mode and I do not want
>> to hear or even think about anything else. I most especially do not want
>> to waste time and effort getting to know anyone. I can do that here at
>> home if I want to do that. No, when I am a bike tour, that is what I am
>> doing and nothing else. The last thing I need is outside entertainment
>> and meeting people (making friends). The bike tour itself is
>> entertainment enough and the people you will encounter, however casually,
>> more than suffices.
>>
>
> Why do you not want to meet people? Why do you not want to hear
> anythihng else but talk about the weather and the tour? Why is it that you
> "can do that at home", but you don't want to do it on a tour? Why limit
> yourself? The tour is "entertainment enough"? Why? What are you afraid of?

I meet people on the basis that I am there in the first place - doing a bike
tour. Anything else is extraneous to that purpose. Meeting people is the
easiest thing in the world. I can do that sort of thing every day of the
year here in my home town. When I am doing a bike tour I am doing something
very special and that is all I want to be doing. I am entering a bike world
with other cyclists and that is the only world I want to be in for the
duration of the tour.

>> I submit to one and all that Mr. Larry Varney is one very strange person.
>
> And I submit that you are truly pathetic, in the most literal sense, and
> your comments further explain your behavior on this newsgroup.

Mr. Varney is of a type that is legion on a bike tour. He has no idea how
absurd he appears to a sane person like myself. These social butterflies
amuse me no end. They act like teenagers even though they are old men and
falling into their graves.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

PS. If Jeff Grippe is following any of this, please note how Varney posts.
He does it the right way, leaving no doubt whatsoever that he has been
around newsgroups for awhile. It is a pleasure to respond to Varney because
he knows how to post the RIGHT way.

Date: 06 Jul 2005 20:15:05
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:OrGdnbCD-erWL1bfRVn-uA@prairiewave.com...
>
> The classic opening line for jerks is "What do you do?" Such jerkdom is
> beyond me!
>

What do you do Ed? Now you've got me curious.

> PS. If Jeff Grippe is following any of this, please note how Varney posts.
> He does it the right way, leaving no doubt whatsoever that he has been
> around newsgroups for awhile. It is a pleasure to respond to Varney
> because he knows how to post the RIGHT way.
>

But Eddie, how could I possibly emulate him? You, my exalted master have
yourself labeled him a jerk and an idiot. I can't emulate him now. I don't
have the ability to contextulize behavior so you mustn't point out examples
to me where the person has been labeled an idiot by you. My puny brain can
not deal with the dissonant messages.

Jeff

Date: 07 Jul 2005 07:26:44
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com > wrote in message
news:11cot1o8ge8eheb@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:OrGdnbCD-erWL1bfRVn-uA@prairiewave.com...
>>
>> The classic opening line for jerks is "What do you do?" Such jerkdom is
>> beyond me!

You should have put a <snip > or something like what I do [...] to indicate
that you have edited the message to which you are responding. You will never
go far wrong if you follow my example.

> What do you do Ed? Now you've got me curious.

This thread is already about me more than I would like. You should at least
know by now that I am not a conventional person with conventional views. I
leave that to the Varney's of the world.

>> PS. If Jeff Grippe is following any of this, please note how Varney
>> posts. He does it the right way, leaving no doubt whatsoever that he has
>> been around newsgroups for awhile. It is a pleasure to respond to Varney
>> because he knows how to post the RIGHT way.
>>
>
> But Eddie, how could I possibly emulate him? You, my exalted master have
> yourself labeled him a jerk and an idiot. I can't emulate him now. I don't
> have the ability to contextulize behavior so you mustn't point out
> examples to me where the person has been labeled an idiot by you. My puny
> brain can not deal with the dissonant messages.

"contextulize" is not a word. Only I am allowed to make up words here on
ARBR.

Do not emulate Varney with respect to his content, but rather with respect
to the manner of his posting. He does do that right. Even a stopped clock is
right twice a day.

Varney is not overall an idiot and/or a jerk, just with respect to certain
things that he says and stands for. We could say the same about any of us -
even me!

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 07 Jul 2005 10:11:52
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:s8-dnQAPgbwXglDfRVn-2g@prairiewave.com...

> "contextulize" is not a word. Only I am allowed to make up words here on
> ARBR.
>

Well I didn't make it up. Language being the living thing that it is does
not confine itself to a book so I won't attempt to give you a dictionary
def.

Context is a noun. Contextulize is a ver derived from the noun. It means (as
I used it) "To put into context"

> Do not emulate Varney with respect to his content, but rather with respect
> to the manner of his posting. He does do that right. Even a stopped clock
> is right twice a day.
>

Eddie, you already know that I go my own way on this one. I shall not be
emulating anyone in my posting style. Don't look for snips from me. If htere
is one thing I am not, it is a Dolanite (now that is a made up word. Sorry
to steal your thunder.)

So, Ah, What do you do Ed? That is to say assuming that someone pay you to
do something, what is it that they pay you to do? You've got me curious. You
shouldn't
have brought it up.

Jeff

Date: 08 Jul 2005 06:55:23
From: Jon Meinecke
Subject: NGM: What's his name's game [was: Action Bent]

"Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com > wrote
>
> it is a Dolanite

Word speak volumes:

"Now will you believe me when I tell you that I am crazy
as a Minnesota loon?"

"[re: moderating newsgroup] I would be a regular Adolf Hitler
about it. You would either do things the right way or you would
be sent off to the gas chambers."

"I decided long ago not to spend my life cursing God. He
probably did the best job that He could do."

"What I have mostly against middle aged white liberals like
you is that you do not know how to hate the proper people."

"Is it possible that I have very good moral cats who
do not go crazy with sex (unlike us humans)?"

"I am strictly into quality posts, not quantity posts like so
many others here."

"I am a very high minded individual and far superior to
99.99% of all mankind."

Nothing particularly unique, as trolling technique... More self-parody
than irony.

Jon Meinecke
net.subtle-apteryx

Date: 21 Jul 2005 04:44:11
From: HHS
Subject: Re: What's his name's game [was: Action Bent]

Date: 21 Jul 2005 08:25:38
From: Jon Meinecke
Subject: Re: What's his name's game [was: Action Bent]

"HHS" <hhs@nospam.com > wrote
>
> Nice collection of Dolanisms.

Used to read...

> Most of them are self-parody,

Coupled with abuse,-- a baiting master with
a limited repertoire.

> As a technique this seems to work well for him.

Nothing new or unique.
Serious or not. Parody or not. Bigot or not.
The intent and effect has been deconstructive.
Typical.

> What's truly amusing after a while is how seriously
> people can take this and how outraged they can be.

That's common, too, poster's choice. It cannot
be mistaken for good humor overall. See the archives.

> Are you thinking of publishing a wider collection?

No. Some other guy was.

Jon Meinecke

Date: 21 Jul 2005 14:37:10
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: What's his name's game [was: Action Bent]

"Jon Meinecke" <jonmein@nospam.net > wrote in message
news:1121952237.cc9a8e7b76532167e904228548b6ae4d@teranews...
> "HHS" <hhs@nospam.com> wrote
[...]

>> What's truly amusing after a while is how seriously
>> people can take this and how outraged they can be.
>
> That's common, too, poster's choice. It cannot
> be mistaken for good humor overall. See the archives.

Good humor overall is a terrific bore. See Jeff Grippe's latest efforts on
the yak fat thing in this regard. I mean to make some points as I go along
and you can only do that by getting under the skin and causing some
irritation. I am very good at this and poor Jeff hasn't a clue. Meinecke to
his credit does not even attempt to do what I do. Therefore, he comes across
as a nicer guy, but infinitely duller. Same for Jeff Grippe.

Not everyone can do what I do because it requires unconventional thinking
combined with intelligence and the courage to say what others fear to say
due to political correctness.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 27 Jul 2005 22:14:54
From: Slugger
Subject: Re: What's his name's game [was: Action Bent]

> Not everyone can do what I do because it requires unconventional thinking
> combined with intelligence and the courage to say what others fear to say
> due to political correctness.
>
> Ed Doltan the Great - Minnesota
>
>
Poor eddie thinks he's a wiz at sarcasm. But his excessive wordiness
gets in the way of any possile humor he may be attempting. One also has
to realize that sarcasm is hard to detect in the written word. eddie
isn't One.

Date: 28 Jul 2005 02:50:48
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: What's his name's game [was: Action Bent]

"Slugger" <upyer@bumbum.com > wrote in message
news:270720051514082998%upyer@bumbum.com...
>
>> Not everyone can do what I do because it requires unconventional thinking
>> combined with intelligence and the courage to say what others fear to say
>> due to political correctness.
>>
>> Ed Doltan the Great - Minnesota
>>
>>
> Poor eddie thinks he's a wiz at sarcasm. But his excessive wordiness
> gets in the way of any possile humor he may be attempting. One also has
> to realize that sarcasm is hard to detect in the written word. eddie
> isn't One.

Nope, the humor even when present is incidental to what I am saying which
is invariably fairly serious. Others make the mistake of getting tripped up
on the humor and miss the point. The humor is there only to entice. I always
try to say something that matters. Slugger surely falls into that class of
reader who can't see the forest for the trees.

Sometimes it seems I am most funny when I am being most serious. It is only
in retrospect that I realize that I have said something that others find
amusing. But it all springs from my unconventional thinking about things.
Also, I will not be seduced by political correctness, the main trap that
almost all liberals fall into.

As to being too wordy, I supply just enough words to get across what I mean
to say, no more and no less.

A Canadian liberal like Slugger is not even getting the news unbiased. The
CBC is notorious for slanting the news in a liberal direction. They are even
worse than the BBC. Canadian liberals like Slugger are hopeless. They do not
even know what is going on in the world because of the CBC. I recommend that
Slugger at least look in on the O'Reilly Factor for some intelligent
commentary and he should also be following Fox News for fair and balanced
reporting.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 28 Jul 2005 21:36:28
From: Slugger
Subject: Re: What's his name's game [was: Action Bent]

In article <-PednXABeaPAE3XfRVn-rA@prairiewave.com >, Edward Dolan
<edolan@iw.net > wrote:

> "Slugger" <upyer@bumbum.com> wrote in message
> news:270720051514082998%upyer@bumbum.com...
> >
> >> Not everyone can do what I do because it requires unconventional thinking
> >> combined with intelligence and the courage to say what others fear to say
> >> due to political correctness.
> >>
> >> Ed Doltan the Great - Minnesota
> >>
> >>
> > Poor eddie thinks he's a wiz at sarcasm. But his excessive wordiness
> > gets in the way of any possile humor he may be attempting. One also has
> > to realize that sarcasm is hard to detect in the written word. eddie
> > isn't One.
>
> Nope, the humor even when present is incidental to what I am saying which
> is invariably fairly serious. Others make the mistake of getting tripped up
> on the humor and miss the point. The humor is there only to entice. I always
> try to say something that matters. Slugger surely falls into that class of
> reader who can't see the forest for the trees.
>
> Sometimes it seems I am most funny when I am being most serious. It is only
> in retrospect that I realize that I have said something that others find
> amusing. But it all springs from my unconventional thinking about things.
> Also, I will not be seduced by political correctness, the main trap that
> almost all liberals fall into.
>
> As to being too wordy, I supply just enough words to get across what I mean
> to say, no more and no less.
>
> A Canadian liberal like Slugger is not even getting the news unbiased. The
> CBC is notorious for slanting the news in a liberal direction. They are even
> worse than the BBC. Canadian liberals like Slugger are hopeless. They do not
> even know what is going on in the world because of the CBC. I recommend that
> Slugger at least look in on the O'Reilly Factor for some intelligent
> commentary and he should also be following Fox News for fair and balanced
> reporting.
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

If you take Fox and O'Reilly as "fair and balanced" you've got more
issues than a news stand. As for the CBC and being a Canadian
Liberal...well I'm no liberal. Liberals in Canada are more like
conservatives in the US. And the CBC is good news. They aren't afraid
to speak their minds or do some investigative journalism. Have you ever
watched the CBC or are you just spouting off as usual? Trying to sound
like an expert eh? You need to sit down with "The Fifth Estate" for an
hour a week to counter that tabloid nonsense you watch. Make sure you
get a copy of their special on 9/11 too.

Watching Fox is always good for a laugh though. Everyone has their
panties in a knot over something. I can see where you get your drivel
from. I like Fox because of all the fancy graphics and rendering they
use. It really makes me believe that what their saying is true! hehe!

Date: 29 Jul 2005 11:25:33
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: What's his name's game [was: Action Bent]

"Slugger" <upyer@bumbum.com > wrote in message
news:280720051435438732%upyer@bumbum.com...
> In article <-PednXABeaPAE3XfRVn-rA@prairiewave.com>, Edward Dolan
> <edolan@iw.net> wrote:
[...]
>> A Canadian liberal like Slugger is not even getting the news unbiased.
>> The
>> CBC is notorious for slanting the news in a liberal direction. They are
>> even
>> worse than the BBC. Canadian liberals like Slugger are hopeless. They do
>> not
>> even know what is going on in the world because of the CBC. I recommend
>> that
>> Slugger at least look in on the O'Reilly Factor for some intelligent
>> commentary and he should also be following Fox News for fair and balanced
>> reporting.
>>
>> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>
>
> If you take Fox and O'Reilly as "fair and balanced" you've got more
> issues than a news stand. As for the CBC and being a Canadian
> Liberal...well I'm no liberal. Liberals in Canada are more like
> conservatives in the US. And the CBC is good news. They aren't afraid
> to speak their minds or do some investigative journalism. Have you ever
> watched the CBC or are you just spouting off as usual? Trying to sound
> like an expert eh? You need to sit down with "The Fifth Estate" for an
> hour a week to counter that tabloid nonsense you watch. Make sure you
> get a copy of their special on 9/11 too.

>> A Canadian liberal like Slugger is not even getting the news unbiased.
>> The
>> CBC is notorious for slanting the news in a liberal direction. They are
>> even
>> worse than the BBC. Canadian liberals like Slugger are hopeless. They do
>> not
>> even know what is going on in the world because of the CBC. I recommend
>> that
>> Slugger at least look in on the O'Reilly Factor for some intelligent
>> commentary and he should also be following Fox News for fair and balanced
>> reporting.

> Watching Fox is always good for a laugh though. Everyone has their
> panties in a knot over something. I can see where you get your drivel
> from. I like Fox because of all the fancy graphics and rendering they
> use. It really makes me believe that what their saying is true! hehe!

>> A Canadian liberal like Slugger is not even getting the news unbiased.
>> The
>> CBC is notorious for slanting the news in a liberal direction. They are
>> even
>> worse than the BBC. Canadian liberals like Slugger are hopeless. They do
>> not
>> even know what is going on in the world because of the CBC. I recommend
>> that
>> Slugger at least look in on the O'Reilly Factor for some intelligent
>> commentary and he should also be following Fox News for fair and balanced
>> reporting.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 30 Jul 2005 03:35:37
From: Slugger
Subject: Re: What's his name's game [was: Action Bent]

In article <1JSdnQeOONcZxXffRVn-rg@prairiewave.com >, Edward Dolan
<edolan@iw.net > wrote:

> "Slugger" <upyer@bumbum.com> wrote in message
> news:280720051435438732%upyer@bumbum.com...
> > In article <-PednXABeaPAE3XfRVn-rA@prairiewave.com>, Edward Dolan
> > <edolan@iw.net> wrote:
> [...]
> >> A Canadian liberal like Slugger is not even getting the news unbiased.
> >> The
> >> CBC is notorious for slanting the news in a liberal direction. They are
> >> even
> >> worse than the BBC. Canadian liberals like Slugger are hopeless. They do
> >> not
> >> even know what is going on in the world because of the CBC. I recommend
> >> that
> >> Slugger at least look in on the O'Reilly Factor for some intelligent
> >> commentary and he should also be following Fox News for fair and balanced
> >> reporting.
> >>
> >> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> >
> >
> > If you take Fox and O'Reilly as "fair and balanced" you've got more
> > issues than a news stand. As for the CBC and being a Canadian
> > Liberal...well I'm no liberal. Liberals in Canada are more like
> > conservatives in the US. And the CBC is good news. They aren't afraid
> > to speak their minds or do some investigative journalism. Have you ever
> > watched the CBC or are you just spouting off as usual? Trying to sound
> > like an expert eh? You need to sit down with "The Fifth Estate" for an
> > hour a week to counter that tabloid nonsense you watch. Make sure you
> > get a copy of their special on 9/11 too.
>
> >> A Canadian liberal like Slugger is not even getting the news unbiased.
> >> The
> >> CBC is notorious for slanting the news in a liberal direction. They are
> >> even
> >> worse than the BBC. Canadian liberals like Slugger are hopeless. They do
> >> not
> >> even know what is going on in the world because of the CBC. I recommend
> >> that
> >> Slugger at least look in on the O'Reilly Factor for some intelligent
> >> commentary and he should also be following Fox News for fair and balanced
> >> reporting.
>
> > Watching Fox is always good for a laugh though. Everyone has their
> > panties in a knot over something. I can see where you get your drivel
> > from. I like Fox because of all the fancy graphics and rendering they
> > use. It really makes me believe that what their saying is true! hehe!
>
> >> A Canadian liberal like Slugger is not even getting the news unbiased.
> >> The
> >> CBC is notorious for slanting the news in a liberal direction. They are
> >> even
> >> worse than the BBC. Canadian liberals like Slugger are hopeless. They do
> >> not
> >> even know what is going on in the world because of the CBC. I recommend
> >> that
> >> Slugger at least look in on the O'Reilly Factor for some intelligent
> >> commentary and he should also be following Fox News for fair and balanced
> >> reporting.
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

You need to go back to Troll School Dolan. Your missing some of the
basics in usenet posting, starting with content. Then try to post your
"content" in your own quotations. But I can see you missed both of
these opportunities to be the shining star of trolldom.

Date: 30 Jul 2005 10:52:27
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: What's his name's game [was: Action Bent]

"Slugger" <upyer@bumbum.com > wrote in message
news:290720052034541984%upyer@bumbum.com...
[...]
>> > If you take Fox and O'Reilly as "fair and balanced" you've got more
>> > issues than a news stand. As for the CBC and being a Canadian
>> > Liberal...well I'm no liberal. Liberals in Canada are more like
>> > conservatives in the US. And the CBC is good news. They aren't afraid
>> > to speak their minds or do some investigative journalism. Have you ever
>> > watched the CBC or are you just spouting off as usual? Trying to sound
>> > like an expert eh? You need to sit down with "The Fifth Estate" for an
>> > hour a week to counter that tabloid nonsense you watch. Make sure you
>> > get a copy of their special on 9/11 too.
[...]
>> > Watching Fox is always good for a laugh though. Everyone has their
>> > panties in a knot over something. I can see where you get your drivel
>> > from. I like Fox because of all the fancy graphics and rendering they
>> > use. It really makes me believe that what their saying is true! hehe!

Edward Dolan wrote:

>> >> A Canadian liberal like Slugger is not even getting the news unbiased.
>> >> The
>> >> CBC is notorious for slanting the news in a liberal direction. They
>> >> are
>> >> even
>> >> worse than the BBC. Canadian liberals like Slugger are hopeless. They
>> >> do
>> >> not
>> >> even know what is going on in the world because of the CBC. I
>> >> recommend
>> >> that
>> >> Slugger at least look in on the O'Reilly Factor for some intelligent
>> >> commentary and he should also be following Fox News for fair and
>> >> balanced
>> >> reporting.
>>
>> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>
> You need to go back to Troll School Dolan. Your missing some of the
> basics in usenet posting, starting with content. Then try to post your
> "content" in your own quotations. But I can see you missed both of
> these opportunities to be the shining star of trolldom.

When you do not add anything to the conversation except some garbage about
the CBC not being a totally liberal medium when all the world knows that it
is, then I do not see any sense expending any time and effort on you.

Quotation ks are not necessary when I am merely repeating the same
message as it is obvious to all but the terminally stupid exactly what it
is that I am doing.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 29 Jul 2005 17:36:22
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: What's his name's game [was: Action Bent]

Now you see Ed this is where your posting style can be a real problem. In
the proceeding message which is quoted in its entirety below, I couldn't
figure out what you added other than

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

If you look at the message, everything except your signature appears to be
quoted. If you had use my method and just said:

Re: Whatever

<Insert Ed Dolan's comment here >

I would have been able to figure out what you said. What did you say
exactly? Did you say anything or did you just sign your name to Slugger's
last message?

My deepest and sincere apology to anyone who thought that this topic had run
its course and that we should have moved on by now!

Jeff

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:1JSdnQeOONcZxXffRVn-rg@prairiewave.com...
>
> "Slugger" <upyer@bumbum.com> wrote in message
> news:280720051435438732%upyer@bumbum.com...
>> In article <-PednXABeaPAE3XfRVn-rA@prairiewave.com>, Edward Dolan
>> <edolan@iw.net> wrote:
> [...]
>>> A Canadian liberal like Slugger is not even getting the news unbiased.
>>> The
>>> CBC is notorious for slanting the news in a liberal direction. They are
>>> even
>>> worse than the BBC. Canadian liberals like Slugger are hopeless. They do
>>> not
>>> even know what is going on in the world because of the CBC. I recommend
>>> that
>>> Slugger at least look in on the O'Reilly Factor for some intelligent
>>> commentary and he should also be following Fox News for fair and
>>> balanced
>>> reporting.
>>>
>>> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>>
>>
>> If you take Fox and O'Reilly as "fair and balanced" you've got more
>> issues than a news stand. As for the CBC and being a Canadian
>> Liberal...well I'm no liberal. Liberals in Canada are more like
>> conservatives in the US. And the CBC is good news. They aren't afraid
>> to speak their minds or do some investigative journalism. Have you ever
>> watched the CBC or are you just spouting off as usual? Trying to sound
>> like an expert eh? You need to sit down with "The Fifth Estate" for an
>> hour a week to counter that tabloid nonsense you watch. Make sure you
>> get a copy of their special on 9/11 too.
>
>>> A Canadian liberal like Slugger is not even getting the news unbiased.
>>> The
>>> CBC is notorious for slanting the news in a liberal direction. They are
>>> even
>>> worse than the BBC. Canadian liberals like Slugger are hopeless. They do
>>> not
>>> even know what is going on in the world because of the CBC. I recommend
>>> that
>>> Slugger at least look in on the O'Reilly Factor for some intelligent
>>> commentary and he should also be following Fox News for fair and
>>> balanced
>>> reporting.
>
>> Watching Fox is always good for a laugh though. Everyone has their
>> panties in a knot over something. I can see where you get your drivel
>> from. I like Fox because of all the fancy graphics and rendering they
>> use. It really makes me believe that what their saying is true! hehe!
>
>>> A Canadian liberal like Slugger is not even getting the news unbiased.
>>> The
>>> CBC is notorious for slanting the news in a liberal direction. They are
>>> even
>>> worse than the BBC. Canadian liberals like Slugger are hopeless. They do
>>> not
>>> even know what is going on in the world because of the CBC. I recommend
>>> that
>>> Slugger at least look in on the O'Reilly Factor for some intelligent
>>> commentary and he should also be following Fox News for fair and
>>> balanced
>>> reporting.
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>
>
>
>
>

Date: 30 Jul 2005 03:28:26
From: Slugger
Subject: Re: What's his name's game [was: Action Bent]

In article <11el8egq94m3g80@news.supernews.com >, Jeff Grippe
<jeff@door7 > wrote:

> Now you see Ed this is where your posting style can be a real problem. In
> the proceeding message which is quoted in its entirety below, I couldn't
> figure out what you added other than
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>
> If you look at the message, everything except your signature appears to be
> quoted. If you had use my method and just said:
>
> Re: Whatever
>
> <Insert Ed Dolan's comment here>
>
> I would have been able to figure out what you said. What did you say
> exactly? Did you say anything or did you just sign your name to Slugger's
> last message?
>
> My deepest and sincere apology to anyone who thought that this topic had run
> its course and that we should have moved on by now!
>
> Jeff
Yep Same problem here.
Learn to post doltlan.

>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:1JSdnQeOONcZxXffRVn-rg@prairiewave.com...
> >
> > "Slugger" <upyer@bumbum.com> wrote in message
> > news:280720051435438732%upyer@bumbum.com...
> >> In article <-PednXABeaPAE3XfRVn-rA@prairiewave.com>, Edward Dolan
> >> <edolan@iw.net> wrote:
> > [...]
> >>> A Canadian liberal like Slugger is not even getting the news unbiased.
> >>> The
> >>> CBC is notorious for slanting the news in a liberal direction. They are
> >>> even
> >>> worse than the BBC. Canadian liberals like Slugger are hopeless. They do
> >>> not
> >>> even know what is going on in the world because of the CBC. I recommend
> >>> that
> >>> Slugger at least look in on the O'Reilly Factor for some intelligent
> >>> commentary and he should also be following Fox News for fair and
> >>> balanced
> >>> reporting.
> >>>
> >>> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> >>
> >>
> >> If you take Fox and O'Reilly as "fair and balanced" you've got more
> >> issues than a news stand. As for the CBC and being a Canadian
> >> Liberal...well I'm no liberal. Liberals in Canada are more like
> >> conservatives in the US. And the CBC is good news. They aren't afraid
> >> to speak their minds or do some investigative journalism. Have you ever
> >> watched the CBC or are you just spouting off as usual? Trying to sound
> >> like an expert eh? You need to sit down with "The Fifth Estate" for an
> >> hour a week to counter that tabloid nonsense you watch. Make sure you
> >> get a copy of their special on 9/11 too.
> >
> >>> A Canadian liberal like Slugger is not even getting the news unbiased.
> >>> The
> >>> CBC is notorious for slanting the news in a liberal direction. They are
> >>> even
> >>> worse than the BBC. Canadian liberals like Slugger are hopeless. They do
> >>> not
> >>> even know what is going on in the world because of the CBC. I recommend
> >>> that
> >>> Slugger at least look in on the O'Reilly Factor for some intelligent
> >>> commentary and he should also be following Fox News for fair and
> >>> balanced
> >>> reporting.
> >
> >> Watching Fox is always good for a laugh though. Everyone has their
> >> panties in a knot over something. I can see where you get your drivel
> >> from. I like Fox because of all the fancy graphics and rendering they
> >> use. It really makes me believe that what their saying is true! hehe!
> >
> >>> A Canadian liberal like Slugger is not even getting the news unbiased.
> >>> The
> >>> CBC is notorious for slanting the news in a liberal direction. They are
> >>> even
> >>> worse than the BBC. Canadian liberals like Slugger are hopeless. They do
> >>> not
> >>> even know what is going on in the world because of the CBC. I recommend
> >>> that
> >>> Slugger at least look in on the O'Reilly Factor for some intelligent
> >>> commentary and he should also be following Fox News for fair and
> >>> balanced
> >>> reporting.
> >
> > Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Date: 29 Jul 2005 22:38:27
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: What's his name's game [was: Action Bent]

"Slugger" <upyer@bumbum.com > wrote in message
news:290720052027446165%upyer@bumbum.com...
> In article <11el8egq94m3g80@news.supernews.com>, Jeff Grippe
> <jeff@door7> wrote:
>
>> Now you see Ed this is where your posting style can be a real problem. In
>> the proceeding message which is quoted in its entirety below, I couldn't
>> figure out what you added other than
>>
>> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>>
>> If you look at the message, everything except your signature appears to
>> be
>> quoted. If you had use my method and just said:
>>
>> Re: Whatever
>>
>> <Insert Ed Dolan's comment here>
>>
>> I would have been able to figure out what you said. What did you say
>> exactly? Did you say anything or did you just sign your name to Slugger's
>> last message?
>>
>> My deepest and sincere apology to anyone who thought that this topic had
>> run
>> its course and that we should have moved on by now!
>>
>> Jeff
>
> Yep Same problem here.
> Learn to post doltlan.

It is Slugger who keeps this thread going, not me. As far as I am concerned,
this thread died and went to hell long ago. But why should idiots always get
the last word. It of course goes without saying that only Ed Dolan the Great
always gets the BEST word.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 30 Jul 2005 09:38:08
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: What's his name's game [was: Action Bent]

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:rLCdnd_lstuma3ffRVn-pg@prairiewave.com...
>
> It is Slugger who keeps this thread going, not me. As far as I am
> concerned, this thread died and went to hell long ago. But why should
> idiots always get the last word. It of course goes without saying that
> only Ed Dolan the Great always gets the BEST word.
>

Ummm, Errr, Ah,

Gee I hate to break it to you Ed but it is both of you that keep this thread
going (along with me obviously), but I give up on trying to get you guys to
play nice nice. Knock yourselves out (or knock each other out) guys.

Jeff

Date: 29 Jul 2005 22:22:03
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: What's his name's game [was: Action Bent]

"Jeff Grippe" <jeff@door7 > wrote in message
news:11el8egq94m3g80@news.supernews.com...
> Now you see Ed this is where your posting style can be a real problem. In
> the proceeding message which is quoted in its entirety below, I couldn't
> figure out what you added other than
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>
> If you look at the message, everything except your signature appears to be
> quoted. If you had use my method and just said:
>
> Re: Whatever
>
> <Insert Ed Dolan's comment here>
>
> I would have been able to figure out what you said. What did you say
> exactly? Did you say anything or did you just sign your name to Slugger's
> last message?
>
> My deepest and sincere apology to anyone who thought that this topic had
> run its course and that we should have moved on by now!
>
> Jeff

When someone like Slugger does not add anything to the course of the
conversation, it is best to just repeat yourself endlessly like a broken
phonograph record. Repetition is the secret to all learning.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 28 Jul 2005 16:08:51
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: What's his name's game [was: Action Bent]

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:-PednXABeaPAE3XfRVn-rA@prairiewave.com...
>
> I recommend that Slugger at least look in on the O'Reilly Factor for some
> intelligent commentary and he should also be following Fox News for fair
> and balanced reporting.

Well you may say that you are not attempting to be funny, however, the above
paragraph had me in stitches. Thanks for the laugh Eddie.

Date: 29 Jul 2005 11:21:26
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: What's his name's game [was: Action Bent]

"Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com > wrote in message
news:11eies6jelksg26@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:-PednXABeaPAE3XfRVn-rA@prairiewave.com...
>>
>> I recommend that Slugger at least look in on the O'Reilly Factor for some
>> intelligent commentary and he should also be following Fox News for fair
>> and balanced reporting.
>
> Well you may say that you are not attempting to be funny, however, the
> above paragraph had me in stitches. Thanks for the laugh Eddie.

I agree with O'Reilly 95% of the time. And we are both right 95% of the
time. I think it is due to the fact that we of Irish ancestry are just so
much ster than everybody else.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 25 Jul 2005 10:49:20
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: What's his name's game [was: Action Bent]

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:ke-dnbwqz4PlZELfRVn-qQ@prairiewave.com...
>
> Good humor overall is a terrific bore. See Jeff Grippe's latest efforts on
> the yak fat thing in this regard.

No worries mate. I'm not giving up my day job.

Date: 21 Jul 2005 13:20:34
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: What's his name's game [was: Action Bent]

"Jon Meinecke" <jonmein@nospam.net > wrote in message
news:1121952237.cc9a8e7b76532167e904228548b6ae4d@teranews...
> "HHS" <hhs@nospam.com> wrote
>>
>> Nice collection of Dolanisms.
>
> Used to read...
>
>> Most of them are self-parody,
>
> Coupled with abuse,-- a baiting master with
> a limited repertoire.

Coupled with a point too, but it takes someone with a brain in his head to
find it. Parody with a point. I leave it to the intelligent reader to
discover where one leaves off and the other begins.

The abuse is in the eye of the beholder. If you go through life with a chip
on your shoulder, you will never lack for someone to take offense at. For
instance, Meinecke probably thinks I have it in for him. Nothing could be
further from the truth. He does not even exist for me except as a foil. Too
bad he can't say the same about me. I upset him so much that he feels he has
to kill file me. Imagine the kind of juvenile who does that! But Meinecke is
a 100% SERIOUS person, God help us!

>> As a technique this seems to work well for him.

> Nothing new or unique.
> Serious or not. Parody or not. Bigot or not.
> The intent and effect has been deconstructive.
> Typical.
>
>> What's truly amusing after a while is how seriously
>> people can take this and how outraged they can be.
>
> That's common, too, poster's choice. It cannot
> be mistaken for good humor overall. See the archives.

By all means, see the archives! Once you have seen the archives, you will
realize what an incredibly dull person Meinecke is. You will wonder if he is
even alive. He may be what is known as the walking dead - basically a
zombie. He puts stupid smileys in his messages so that maybe we will get the
idea that he is at least trying to be humorous.

Poor Meinecke is jealous of me and always has been from day one. He thinks
he has a wry sense of humor, but his wit is as brainless as he is. He never
can manage to say anything that will get a rise out of anyone. Hells Bells!
He never even manages to say anything that is even remotely interesting -
except when he is discussing Ed Dolan the Great. He is a dead man who only
speaks to other dead men. Let us be thankful that most of us we have more
imagination than him.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 08 Jul 2005 10:05:07
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: What's his name's game [was: Action Bent]

"Jon Meinecke" <jonmein@nospam.net > wrote in message
news:1120823725.14741a38afb3819ec8a86d13bab6d4bd@teranews...
> "Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com> wrote
>>
>> it is a Dolanite
>
> Word speak volumes:
>
> "Now will you believe me when I tell you that I am crazy
> as a Minnesota loon?"
>
> "[re: moderating newsgroup] I would be a regular Adolf Hitler
> about it. You would either do things the right way or you would
> be sent off to the gas chambers."
>
> "I decided long ago not to spend my life cursing God. He
> probably did the best job that He could do."
>
> "What I have mostly against middle aged white liberals like
> you is that you do not know how to hate the proper people."
>
> "Is it possible that I have very good moral cats who
> do not go crazy with sex (unlike us humans)?"
>
> "I am strictly into quality posts, not quantity posts like so
> many others here."
>
> "I am a very high minded individual and far superior to
> 99.99% of all mankind."
>
> Nothing particularly unique, as trolling technique... More self-parody
> than irony.
>
> Jon Meinecke
> net.subtle-apteryx

It is a pity that Jon Meinecke and I do not get along better as he truly is
the only one here who has ever understood me. I can't believe how he goes to
the trouble of looking things up. He would have been a great librarian. Even
though I was a librarian, I was not a very good one as I hated to look up
anything for anyone, even for myself.

Irony takes too much brain power whereas parody is so much easier. Yet, it
appears to be a lost art. The secret to doing parody is to be laughing all
the time you are writing something. That way you will not take yourself at
all seriously or anyone else either for that matter. One needs to see the
world as full of clowns and oneself as the biggest clown of all.

Anyone who takes a newsgroup seriously has got to have rocks in their heads.
A group without a moderator is nothing but a bunch of nattering monkeys.
Since that is the case with ARBR, we should all relax and try to have some
fun. The besetting sin of Mr. Meinecke is that he takes all of this way too
seriously. A newsgroup without a moderator can never be anything but a
circus full of clowns. The criminal vandal troll taught us all that much at
least.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 07 Jul 2005 15:48:54
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com > wrote in message
news:11cqe2p4qbbfjc4@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:s8-dnQAPgbwXglDfRVn-2g@prairiewave.com...
>
>> "contextulize" is not a word. Only I am allowed to make up words here on
>> ARBR.
>>
>
> Well I didn't make it up. Language being the living thing that it is does
> not confine itself to a book so I won't attempt to give you a dictionary
> def.
>
> Context is a noun. Contextulize is a ver derived from the noun. It means
> (as I used it) "To put into context"

That is how I would have put it too, but you are not Great like I am.
Therefore, you are not entitled to make up words. Only I am entitled to do
that.

>> Do not emulate Varney with respect to his content, but rather with
>> respect to the manner of his posting. He does do that right. Even a
>> stopped clock is right twice a day.
>>
>
> Eddie, you already know that I go my own way on this one. I shall not be
> emulating anyone in my posting style. Don't look for snips from me. If
> htere is one thing I am not, it is a Dolanite (now that is a made up word.
> Sorry to steal your thunder.)

You must always indicate by some means that you have edited. Otherwise, it
appears that you are including the entire previous message - which was not
the case. You only included a small snippet of my message. You are
misleading the reader, whether intentional or not. Please read the Google
rules on newsgroup posting.

> So, Ah, What do you do Ed? That is to say assuming that someone pay you to
> do something, what is it that they pay you to do? You've got me curious.
> You shouldn't
> have brought it up.

The point in bringing it up was not to blather about myself but to show that
only supreme jerks ask such questions on first meeting. I don't even think
Varney is that big of a jerk, but group bike tours are full of folks who
should never leave home. They wander about on a bike tour making nuisances
of themselves asking others stupid questions about their livelihood, as if
that mattered in the slightest. I am not capable of such jerkdom myself and
am always taken aback when confronted by those types.

As to what do I do, I am like God that way. I simply am. But unlike God, I
do not insist that my inferiors worship me. I suppose in that respect my
morality is superior to God's.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

aka

Saint Edward - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Date: 07 Jul 2005 19:51:05
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:pamdnX_TCMihCFDfRVn-3w@prairiewave.com...
> As to what do I do, I am like God that way. I simply am. But unlike God, I
> do not insist that my inferiors worship me. I suppose in that respect my
> morality is superior to God's.
>

Eddie, you think way too much of yourself and way too little of others. If
you don't want to answer the question then just say so. All the rest is just
your favorite BS and frankly it is starting to smell.

Now I'll really open a can of worms.

I agree that you are like God. Both of you are much too ridiculous to
believe in.

Just sign me...

Jeff the Non-Theist (I don't like the term Atheist. My beliefs and atheist
beliefs don't match although they do overlap. A Non-Theist such as myself is
simply not concerned with God.)

Date: 08 Jul 2005 09:39:44
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com > wrote in message
news:11crg0siij4pv35@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:pamdnX_TCMihCFDfRVn-3w@prairiewave.com...
>> As to what do I do, I am like God that way. I simply am. But unlike God,
>> I do not insist that my inferiors worship me. I suppose in that respect
>> my morality is superior to God's.
>>
>
> Eddie, you think way too much of yourself and way too little of others. If
> you don't want to answer the question then just say so. All the rest is
> just your favorite BS and frankly it is starting to smell.

But I just answered your question. Too bad for you if you do not like the
answer.

> Now I'll really open a can of worms.
>
> I agree that you are like God. Both of you are much too ridiculous to
> believe in.
>
> Just sign me...
>
> Jeff the Non-Theist (I don't like the term Atheist. My beliefs and atheist
> beliefs don't match although they do overlap. A Non-Theist such as myself
> is simply not concerned with God.)

Yes, agnostics do not have any credibility with me either. It is just a
polite way of not offending too many believers. But non-theist is not any
better. We might as well call ourselves atheists and be done with it. It is
not always easy to have the courage of one's convictions, especially in the
face of believers who think they KNOW! However, I KNOW that all men are in
doubt about their ultimate destiny no matter their faith. To claim that you
know something based on faith is an absurdity.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 08 Jul 2005 10:52:51
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:y8mdnXr_VqWlDVPfRVn-ow@prairiewave.com...
>
> Yes, agnostics do not have any credibility with me either. It is just a
> polite way of not offending too many believers. But non-theist is not any
> better. We might as well call ourselves atheists and be done with it. It
> is not always easy to have the courage of one's convictions, especially in
> the face of believers who think they KNOW! However, I KNOW that all men
> are in doubt about their ultimate destiny no matter their faith. To claim
> that you know something based on faith is an absurdity.
>

Eddie, you call yourself what you like. For me:

Athiests firmly deny the existance of god. That does not describe me.
Agnostics leave it as an open question. That comes closer to me but the
agnostics actually care. That is where they and I part company. I coined the
term non-theist because it most accurately reflects my position. I neither
confirm nor deny god. I very strongly doubt god and most of the time for
brevity I simply call myself an athiest. But my real point of view is that
the question is meaningless and really doesn't concern me except when I find
myself in a discussion with religous types. So I label myself a non-theist.
It is very close to athiest except that I'm not taking the "no god" position
that athiests take. I find that as meaningless as the various theist
positions. You can't really deny the supernatural but I think a very strong
case of doubt is in order.

I certainly don't believe in a god whose ego is so fragile that (s)he needs
and wants my constant praise and devotion. If a creator does exist then I am
grateful for this life. There I said it. That's as much as you're going to
get from me. The creator (if one there be) doesn't need my praise or my
money.

So we seem to agree. You say that to claim to know something based on faith
is an absurdity. I agree. That includes the claim that there is no god.
After playing with the question for years I finally realized that it is a
pointless question. It is an interesting discussion, however. I tend to keep
a very open closed mind (read that as I'll listen to anything but I'm not
likely to believe in the supernatural).

Date: 08 Jul 2005 10:57:22
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com > wrote in message
news:11ct4rm7qlmde71@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:y8mdnXr_VqWlDVPfRVn-ow@prairiewave.com...
>>
>> Yes, agnostics do not have any credibility with me either. It is just a
>> polite way of not offending too many believers. But non-theist is not any
>> better. We might as well call ourselves atheists and be done with it. It
>> is not always easy to have the courage of one's convictions, especially
>> in the face of believers who think they KNOW! However, I KNOW that all
>> men are in doubt about their ultimate destiny no matter their faith. To
>> claim that you know something based on faith is an absurdity.
>>
>
> Eddie, you call yourself what you like. For me:
>
> Athiests firmly deny the existance of god. That does not describe me.
> Agnostics leave it as an open question. That comes closer to me but the
> agnostics actually care. That is where they and I part company. I coined
> the term non-theist because it most accurately reflects my position. I
> neither confirm nor deny god. I very strongly doubt god and most of the
> time for brevity I simply call myself an athiest. But my real point of
> view is that the question is meaningless and really doesn't concern me
> except when I find myself in a discussion with religous types. So I label
> myself a non-theist. It is very close to athiest except that I'm not
> taking the "no god" position that athiests take. I find that as
> meaningless as the various theist positions. You can't really deny the
> supernatural but I think a very strong case of doubt is in order.

I agree with what you are saying by and large, but I still feel that the
atheists have got it exactly right. All of modern science most emphatically
does deny the existence of the supernatural. Science could not exist if the
supernatural also exists. If you think the supernatural may exist, then you
are a candidate for a religion.

When engaged with religious types it is best to take a clear position and
not pretend that you are not interested in the question. The non-theist ploy
is like the agnostic ploy. They are used so as not to offend the religious
sensibilities of believers. The main trouble with the atheist position is
that it does offend the religious sensibilites of others.

> I certainly don't believe in a god whose ego is so fragile that (s)he
> needs and wants my constant praise and devotion. If a creator does exist
> then I am grateful for this life. There I said it. That's as much as
> you're going to get from me. The creator (if one there be) doesn't need my
> praise or my money.
>
> So we seem to agree. You say that to claim to know something based on
> faith is an absurdity. I agree. That includes the claim that there is no
> god.

To say that there is no god is not a claim based on faith. It is based on
evidence. The existence of god needs to be proved, not the reverse.

> After playing with the question for years I finally realized that it is a
> pointless question. It is an interesting discussion, however. I tend to
> keep a very open closed mind (read that as I'll listen to anything but I'm
> not likely to believe in the supernatural).

You will most likely go to your grave not knowing one way or the other for
sure. However, I will go to my grave knowing what I know - for sure! I had
it all figured out by the time I was out of my teens.

One final note. I do not like folks who go about condemning others for their
religious beliefs. It is quite proper and suitable for mankind to be
possessed by religion. Religion was a strategy for coping with our knowledge
of death an did much to insure our survival as a species on this earth.
Even though I am an atheist, I do not like atheists who proselytize. I very
much want most of mankind to believe in something other than our daily
bread. I reserve non-religion for an elite who are able to handle it.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 08 Jul 2005 21:36:02
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:Tv6dnb8dH4P0P1PfRVn-gg@prairiewave.com...
>
> I agree with what you are saying by and large, but I still feel that the
> atheists have got it exactly right. All of modern science most
> emphatically does deny the existence of the supernatural. Science could
> not exist if the supernatural also exists. If you think the supernatural
> may exist, then you are a candidate for a religion.
>

I agree that the burden of proof lies with those that believe. I don't
believe in the supernatural. My point of view is that since it can't
actually be proven, it is pointless to consider.

I have only one position which leaves an opening but it is an opening for
science and not religion. Briefly:

As humans we are limited by human perceptions and a human point of view. To
make matters worse we don't even act on our perceptions but rather convert
them into language and then from language into concepts. At each step there
is a distortion.

So I would say that as humans we don't experience the totality that is
reality. We can't and we never will. We are stuck with human perceptions. So
while I acknowledge that things can exist that we can not experience I don't
give them much importance.

> When engaged with religious types it is best to take a clear position and
> not pretend that you are not interested in the question. The non-theist
> ploy is like the agnostic ploy. They are used so as not to offend the
> religious sensibilities of believers. The main trouble with the atheist
> position is that it does offend the religious sensibilites of others.
>

Religious types tend to be as staunch about thier positions as athiests are.
I am interested in the question but I can't be moved by various
non-scientific mumbo jumbo.

> One final note. I do not like folks who go about condemning others for
> their religious beliefs. It is quite proper and suitable for mankind to be
> possessed by religion. Religion was a strategy for coping with our
> knowledge of death an did much to insure our survival as a species on this
> earth. Even though I am an atheist, I do not like atheists who
> proselytize. I very much want most of mankind to believe in something
> other than our daily bread. I reserve non-religion for an elite who are
> able to handle it.
>

I don't like atheists who proselytize either. An atheist who doesn't I would
call a non-theist. I do condemn religion, however. I think that people who
believe that the good things are coming in the next life are very
frightening. As we know, they will kill to support their beliefs. This is
true of some Muslim extremists, some Christian extremists, and some Jewish
extremists. I sure that other religions that I left out have their share of
extremists as well. Since you can't simply eliminate the extremists, I do
condemn religion. I think it is time to move forward without organized
religion.

If you want to believe, believe, but don't hurt anyone else and pay taxes
like everyone else.

Date: 08 Jul 2005 23:37:17
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com > wrote in message
news:11cuahi7p21e45e@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:Tv6dnb8dH4P0P1PfRVn-gg@prairiewave.com...
>>
>> I agree with what you are saying by and large, but I still feel that the
>> atheists have got it exactly right. All of modern science most
>> emphatically does deny the existence of the supernatural. Science could
>> not exist if the supernatural also exists. If you think the supernatural
>> may exist, then you are a candidate for a religion.
>>
>
> I agree that the burden of proof lies with those that believe. I don't
> believe in the supernatural. My point of view is that since it can't
> actually be proven, it is pointless to consider.
>
> I have only one position which leaves an opening but it is an opening for
> science and not religion. Briefly:
>
> As humans we are limited by human perceptions and a human point of view.
> To make matters worse we don't even act on our perceptions but rather
> convert them into language and then from language into concepts. At each
> step there is a distortion.
>
> So I would say that as humans we don't experience the totality that is
> reality. We can't and we never will. We are stuck with human perceptions.
> So while I acknowledge that things can exist that we can not experience I
> don't give them much importance.

Agreed! Humans are not human without language. It is impossible to even
think without language. Language is the means by which we perceive reality.
It mediates everything except for the most primitive emotions. If you want
to know what a human would be like without language, you would have to find
a "wild boy" who has never had any human contact. Every sociologist would
like to conduct such an experiment, but it is the forbidden experiment.

>> When engaged with religious types it is best to take a clear position and
>> not pretend that you are not interested in the question. The non-theist
>> ploy is like the agnostic ploy. They are used so as not to offend the
>> religious sensibilities of believers. The main trouble with the atheist
>> position is that it does offend the religious sensibilites of others.
>>
>
> Religious types tend to be as staunch about thier positions as athiests
> are. I am interested in the question but I can't be moved by various
> non-scientific mumbo jumbo.
>
>> One final note. I do not like folks who go about condemning others for
>> their religious beliefs. It is quite proper and suitable for mankind to
>> be possessed by religion. Religion was a strategy for coping with our
>> knowledge of death an did much to insure our survival as a species on
>> this earth. Even though I am an atheist, I do not like atheists who
>> proselytize. I very much want most of mankind to believe in something
>> other than our daily bread. I reserve non-religion for an elite who are
>> able to handle it.
>>
>
> I don't like atheists who proselytize either. An atheist who doesn't I
> would call a non-theist. I do condemn religion, however. I think that
> people who believe that the good things are coming in the next life are
> very frightening. As we know, they will kill to support their beliefs.
> This is true of some Muslim extremists, some Christian extremists, and
> some Jewish extremists. I sure that other religions that I left out have
> their share of extremists as well. Since you can't simply eliminate the
> extremists, I do condemn religion. I think it is time to move forward
> without organized religion.

I do not believe men can live without religion. It is part and parcel of
being human. It is as much an instinct as is hunger and sex. Men can be
educated out of religion, but it is an uphill struggle. Religion comes
naturally to mankind and it can be directed, but it cannot be eliminated.

The Muslim religion is a very simple religion for simple people and hardly
deserves to be called a higher religion. Christianity on the other hand is a
very sophisticated religion for civilized peoples. It is quite wrong to
compare all religions as if they are somehow equal. Some religions are far
superior to other religions.

The record for societies that have tired to live without religion is not a
good one. Various atheistic communist societies have proven far worse than
any religious societies. But even communist societies do not really escape
religion. Instead, they turn the state into a religion and create their own
gods from the founders. What were Lenin and Stalin and Mao if not gods of a
sort. I despair of secular societies even more than I do of religious
societies.

Every ideology is capable of producing extremists, even secularism. In fact,
that is what I believe has happened to liberalism. They have become
extremists in the pursuit of progressive ideas. And so they end up killing
the unborn (abortion) and committing many other abominations that go against
our natures. Religion has no monopoly on extremism.

To want to eliminate religion altogether is an extremist liberal position
and is not only impractical but slightly crazy.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 09 Jul 2005 06:48:07
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:lqKdnUJLRJQYyVLfRVn-jw@prairiewave.com...
>
> The Muslim religion is a very simple religion for simple people and hardly
> deserves to be called a higher religion. Christianity on the other hand is
> a very sophisticated religion for civilized peoples. It is quite wrong to
> compare all religions as if they are somehow equal. Some religions are far
> superior to other religions.
>

You are comparing apples and apples and pretending that the difference is
not more than just a matter of taste. I don't know this for sure but I'd
guess that you are not an expert in religion. You think one set of
supernatural beliefs is better than another? That is flat out rediculous.

> The record for societies that have tired to live without religion is not a
> good one. Various atheistic communist societies have proven far worse than
> any religious societies. But even communist societies do not really escape
> religion. Instead, they turn the state into a religion and create their
> own gods from the founders. What were Lenin and Stalin and Mao if not gods
> of a sort. I despair of secular societies even more than I do of religious
> societies.
>

Soviet and Chinese societies were not communist. They used the jargon and
name but it was still a highly class based system.

You can't impose secularism. To me freedom will always be a higher value.
But freedom means that everyone must be free from fear. I don't condemn
religion itself but rather the way people often respond to religion. They go
hand in hand, however. I would never want to eliminate religion by force.
That would make me as bad as what I condemn.

> Every ideology is capable of producing extremists, even secularism. In
> fact, that is what I believe has happened to liberalism. They have become
> extremists in the pursuit of progressive ideas. And so they end up killing
> the unborn (abortion) and committing many other abominations that go
> against our natures. Religion has no monopoly on extremism.
>

I don't think you coison of abortion to terrorism is a valid one. Those
that have abortions are making a personal choice consistant with a belief
that they are not engaging in killing. You are not permitted to make that
choice for them. There proably are liberal or secular extremists but there
are far fewer of them. It doesn't make sense for the most part. Religion has
a virtual monopoly on extremism. The fact that a handful of counter examples
might exist doesn't change that.

> To want to eliminate religion altogether is an extremist liberal position
> and is not only impractical but slightly crazy.
>

Here I am forced to completely agree. There is no doubt that I'm fighting
windmills (what would we do without books as a source for classic
metaphors). So its a crazy thing to want and it is certainly impractical.
I'll make the choices that I choose to make about how to waste my energy and
in the end we'll both end up dead. You think that there is human activity
that isn't impractical and slightly crazy? If you believe in science then
you know that this planet and everything on it will not last forever and if
you don't believe in religion then all human activity is impractical and
crazy. All I can say is I'm glad I ride my trike.

Date: 09 Jul 2005 10:28:19
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com > wrote in message
news:11cvasp2sefrb5e@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:lqKdnUJLRJQYyVLfRVn-jw@prairiewave.com...
>>
>> The Muslim religion is a very simple religion for simple people and
>> hardly deserves to be called a higher religion. Christianity on the other
>> hand is a very sophisticated religion for civilized peoples. It is quite
>> wrong to compare all religions as if they are somehow equal. Some
>> religions are far superior to other religions.
>>
>
> You are comparing apples and apples and pretending that the difference is
> not more than just a matter of taste. I don't know this for sure but I'd
> guess that you are not an expert in religion. You think one set of
> supernatural beliefs is better than another? That is flat out ridiculous.

All religions when looked at from the outside appear to be crazy. I judge
religions by what they have wrought in the real world, not by what they
imagine themselves to be (theology). The Muslims have a very poor record in
that regard.

But I regard India as the bottomless pit of religions. It has been a
cesspool of failed religions for well over a thousand years. Those of you
who think religion is the salvation of mankind need to immerse yourself in
India, the Mother of all religions.

By the way, you do not have to be an expert on religion in order to discuss
it any more than you have to be an expert on politics in order to discuss
it. Where did you ever get that idea?

>> The record for societies that have tired to live without religion is not
>> a good one. Various atheistic communist societies have proven far worse
>> than any religious societies. But even communist societies do not really
>> escape religion. Instead, they turn the state into a religion and create
>> their own gods from the founders. What were Lenin and Stalin and Mao if
>> not gods of a sort. I despair of secular societies even more than I do of
>> religious societies.
>>
>
> Soviet and Chinese societies were not communist. They used the jargon and
> name but it was still a highly class based system.

The Soviet and the Chinese were the most serious efforts ever made to create
a communist (egalitarian) society. The fact that those efforts failed does
not mean that it was not attempted in good faith. Stop making excuses for
communism and other ideologies of the Left. Millions of people died for
communism and because of communism. All leftist ideologies (including
liberalism) are forever tainted because of that failure.

> You can't impose secularism. To me freedom will always be a higher value.
> But freedom means that everyone must be free from fear. I don't condemn
> religion itself but rather the way people often respond to religion. They
> go hand in hand, however. I would never want to eliminate religion by
> force. That would make me as bad as what I condemn.

The Soviets did precisely what you said cannot be done - they imposed
secularism on a very religious society. And by and large they succeeded. I
remember as a child we Catholics were always praying for the conversion of
Russia.

Secularism can indeed be imposed upon a society. That is what is now
happening right here in the US. The liberals are trying to secularize the US
by getting rid of all references to religion in our government and in our
schools. And they are doing it via the courts, not the legislatures.

By the way, I do not worship freedom. It is a fairly recent phenomenon in
the history of mankind. Most men in most places have always lived under
tyrannies and have had very little freedom, if any. Slavery is the natural
condition of men, not freedom. Ian Buck is now living in the UK instead of
Syria because he values freedom, but his fellow Muslims do not. They are
content to remain subjects and do not have even a glimmer of what it means
to be a citizen of a nation that values freedom for the individual. They
have been rendered stupid by their Islamic religion.

>> Every ideology is capable of producing extremists, even secularism. In
>> fact, that is what I believe has happened to liberalism. They have become
>> extremists in the pursuit of progressive ideas. And so they end up
>> killing the unborn (abortion) and committing many other abominations that
>> go against our natures. Religion has no monopoly on extremism.
>>
>
> I don't think you coison of abortion to terrorism is a valid one. Those
> that have abortions are making a personal choice consistant with a belief
> that they are not engaging in killing. You are not permitted to make that
> choice for them. There proably are liberal or secular extremists but there
> are far fewer of them. It doesn't make sense for the most part. Religion
> has a virtual monopoly on extremism. The fact that a handful of counter
> examples might exist doesn't change that.

You are most awfully wrong. You cannot see your own extremism, but that is
characteristic of all extremists.

Abortion is tearing this country apart because it was imposed on us by the
courts. It must be legislated if it is ever going to be accepted. The
liberals cannot win on this issue in the legislatures, and so they resort to
the courts.

Abortion is an extremist view of liberalism. It only makes sense if you
adopt and accept the liberal ideology. From an outsiders viewpoint, it is
nothing short of murder. In a manner of speaking, you are no different than
a religious extremist such as a Muslim terrorist. You will take an innocent
life in the interest of some "higher" purpose.

>> To want to eliminate religion altogether is an extremist liberal position
>> and is not only impractical but slightly crazy.
>>
>
> Here I am forced to completely agree. There is no doubt that I'm fighting
> windmills (what would we do without books as a source for classic
> metaphors). So its a crazy thing to want and it is certainly impractical.
> I'll make the choices that I choose to make about how to waste my energy
> and in the end we'll both end up dead. You think that there is human
> activity that isn't impractical and slightly crazy? If you believe in
> science then you know that this planet and everything on it will not last
> forever and if you don't believe in religion then all human activity is
> impractical and crazy. All I can say is I'm glad I ride my trike.

AGREED!

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

PS. I really appreciate the way you are now posting. It makes it possible
for others to read what we are saying to one another without having to do
any back tracking, which no one will ever do in any event.

Date: 09 Jul 2005 19:57:21
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:6pWdnfdPFOGBcFLfRVn-oA@prairiewave.com...

> All religions when looked at from the outside appear to be crazy. I judge
> religions by what they have wrought in the real world, not by what they
> imagine themselves to be (theology). The Muslims have a very poor record
> in that regard.
<snip > (how's that Ed?)

They all have a poor record. You are just choosing which history you wish to
remember. Do crusades and inquisitions ring a bell?

>
> But I regard India as the bottomless pit of religions. It has been a
> cesspool of failed religions for well over a thousand years. Those of you
> who think religion is the salvation of mankind need to immerse yourself in
> India, the Mother of all religions.
>

Frankly Ed I have no idea what you are talking about here. As a non-theist I
don't feel that religion is the salvation of mankind. So who are you
responding to with this last paragraph?

>
> The Soviet and the Chinese were the most serious efforts ever made to
> create a communist (egalitarian) society. The fact that those efforts
> failed does not mean that it was not attempted in good faith. Stop making
> excuses for communism and other ideologies of the Left. Millions of people
> died for communism and because of communism. All leftist ideologies
> (including liberalism) are forever tainted because of that failure.
>

If you want to find the most serious efforts ever made to create a communist
society then you should probably look to Cuba or Vietnam. I didn't work
there either, however.

>
> The Soviets did precisely what you said cannot be done - they imposed
> secularism on a very religious society. And by and large they succeeded. I
> remember as a child we Catholics were always praying for the conversion of
> Russia.
>

When I said you can't impose secularism I was saying that you shouldn't
impose it. People should be free to have their religion as long as their
religion doesn't dictate the laws that I have to live under.

> By the way, I do not worship freedom. It is a fairly recent phenomenon in
> the history of mankind. Most men in most places have always lived under
> tyrannies and have had very little freedom, if any. Slavery is the natural
> condition of men, not freedom. <snip>

That doesn't make slavery right and freedom wrong. You would be a fool to
think so in my opinion.

> You are most awfully wrong. You cannot see your own extremism, but that is
> characteristic of all extremists.
>
> Abortion is tearing this country apart because it was imposed on us by the
> courts. It must be legislated if it is ever going to be accepted. The
> liberals cannot win on this issue in the legislatures, and so they resort
> to the courts.
>
> Abortion is an extremist view of liberalism. It only makes sense if you
> adopt and accept the liberal ideology. From an outsiders viewpoint, it is
> nothing short of murder. In a manner of speaking, you are no different
> than a religious extremist such as a Muslim terrorist. You will take an
> innocent life in the interest of some "higher" purpose.
>

Abortion is not "imposed" on anyone. If you believe that it is murder then
don't do it. Just because Ed Dolan and some of his friends say it is murder
doesn't make it so. Some of my friends and I say it isn't. Who's right? If
you believe you are then don't engage in the practice yourself but you don't
have the right make that decision for me.

The only concession I'll make to the Anti-Abortion side is to say that if I
believed it was murder I would fight it as fiercely as they do. So I at
least have an understanding of their position. I also know that if I
believed it was murder I wouldn't accept any other point of view because the
notion of murder is so terrible. So it is left to the courts and the
legislature and they have spoken.

Date: 31 Jul 2005 22:39:07
From: HHS
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com > wrote in message
news:11d0p4lbunmd419@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:6pWdnfdPFOGBcFLfRVn-oA@prairiewave.com...

<SNIP >

>> Abortion is tearing this country apart because it was imposed on us by
>> the courts. It must be legislated if it is ever going to be accepted. The
>> liberals cannot win on this issue in the legislatures, and so they resort
>> to the courts.
>>
>> Abortion is an extremist view of liberalism. It only makes sense if you
>> adopt and accept the liberal ideology. From an outsiders viewpoint, it is
>> nothing short of murder. In a manner of speaking, you are no different
>> than a religious extremist such as a Muslim terrorist. You will take an
>> innocent life in the interest of some "higher" purpose.
>>
>
> Abortion is not "imposed" on anyone. If you believe that it is murder then
> don't do it. Just because Ed Dolan and some of his friends say it is
> murder doesn't make it so. Some of my friends and I say it isn't. Who's
> right?

If the 49 million annually aborted fetuses had a say as to who's right do
you think they would side with your friends or with Dolan?

I'll put my money on Dolan.

http://tinyurl.com/4qqx8
for abortion statistics.

Date: 01 Aug 2005 09:27:24
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"HHS" <hhs@nospam.com > wrote in message
news:o8ydnbH0nuPRBHDfRVn-vw@comcast.com...

> If the 49 million annually aborted fetuses had a say as to who's right do
> you think they would side with your friends or with Dolan?
>
> I'll put my money on Dolan.

Not so fast. There is good evidence that most of new post Rowe v. Wade
abortions are those chosen by poor people. Wealthy people have always had
access to safe abortion. Many of the births that were prevented would have
been unwanted (actually all of them would have been unwanted). The life that
many of them would have had would have been quite unpleasant.

I've engaged the question you asked because I really wanted to challenge
your assumption. In reality (or at least in my opinion) the question is
without merit. I do not consider the fetus as something which has human
status and so I wouldn't agree that it should be asked anything. While it is
still inside the womb, I would say that you ask the woman carrying it.

Your question assumes that the fetus has the same status as a living human
being. I don't accept that assumption.

Jeff

Date: 01 Aug 2005 11:10:34
From: HHS
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

Date: 01 Aug 2005 14:04:11
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"HHS" <hhs@nospam.com > wrote in message
news:LtmdnebZ2JT31HPfRVn-jA@comcast.com...
>
>
> Life could be taxing for these children. So it would be better if we kill
> them now. They would eventually die anyway after a "quite unpleasant"
> life. Have I got that right?
>
> Of course the fetuses don't have a voice or a say in this matter. My
> question was hypothetical. Your answer is they can't respond to questions
> so they don't get to have a choice. We knew that already.
>

Read my response to Ed Dolan for more details but briefly

1. A fetus is not a child. It can not live at all without a host. It is not
a human life. Abortion of a fetus is a medical procedure and not "killing".

2. The fetus does not have a voice. You are correct about that part. They
are not people yet. The potential to become a person does not give them
human rights. While they are still called a fetus they do not have the
ability to survive on their own.

3. I said that social issues and societal impact are important. It does not
mean that you can make the credulous cause and effect logical leaps that you
made.

Keep in mind that the wealthy will always have access to abortion. The only
thing that you are debating is whether or not those who aren't wealthy
should have access to it.

Many (most?) reputable scientists do not agree with the "abortion equals
murder" assertion. Just because you use inflammatory rhetoric does not make
your position correct.

See my reply to Ed for more.

Jeff

Date: 01 Aug 2005 21:43:43
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com > wrote in message
news:11esp2jrsiqmt28@news.supernews.com...
>
> "HHS" <hhs@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:LtmdnebZ2JT31HPfRVn-jA@comcast.com...
>>
>>
>> Life could be taxing for these children. So it would be better if we
>> kill them now. They would eventually die anyway after a "quite
>> unpleasant" life. Have I got that right?
>>
>> Of course the fetuses don't have a voice or a say in this matter. My
>> question was hypothetical. Your answer is they can't respond to
>> questions so they don't get to have a choice. We knew that already.
>>
>
> Read my response to Ed Dolan for more details but briefly
>
> 1. A fetus is not a child. It can not live at all without a host. It is
> not a human life. Abortion of a fetus is a medical procedure and not
> "killing".

Wrong on every count. With an idiot like Jeff, it is all semantics. That
must be a Jewish thing. Were the Jews "murdered" in the concentration camps
or were they just "liquidated."

> 2. The fetus does not have a voice. You are correct about that part. They
> are not people yet. The potential to become a person does not give them
> human rights. While they are still called a fetus they do not have the
> ability to survive on their own.

Jeff, the total idiot, confuses "legal" rights with "natural" rights. Why
the hell didn't his mother abort him so we would not have to abide his
murderous nonsense.

> 3. I said that social issues and societal impact are important. It does
> not mean that you can make the credulous cause and effect logical leaps
> that you made.

The social impacts need to be considered BEFORE conception, not AFTER
conception. Jeff has got everything ass backwards as usual.

> Keep in mind that the wealthy will always have access to abortion. The
> only thing that you are debating is whether or not those who aren't
> wealthy should have access to it.

That is not the debate at all as much as you would like it to be. The debate
is how many unborn children are going to be murdered to make life more
convenient for criminal slobs like you.

> Many (most?) reputable scientists do not agree with the "abortion equals
> murder" assertion. Just because you use inflammatory rhetoric does not
> make your position correct.

Any person who has eyes in his head can see what abortion is all about -
science or no science. But liberals like Jeff do not want anyone to even
look at the pictures of abortions. The hypocrisy is monumental on their
part.

I charge abortionists with murder and those who support and approve of it
are also murderers. The day is not far off when what has been happening for
the past several decades will be seen for what it is and it will be reversed
with a vengeance. Liberals like Jeff will be thought monsters for thinking
the way they did. Others will forgive them their trespasses, but I, Saint
Edward the Great, will not. Some things cannot be forgiven - ever!

Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Date: 01 Aug 2005 22:24:55
From: HHS
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:wM2dnanfU4N_QHPfRVn-1A@prairiewave.com...
>
> "Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com> wrote in message
> news:11esp2jrsiqmt28@news.supernews.com...
>>
>> "HHS" <hhs@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:LtmdnebZ2JT31HPfRVn-jA@comcast.com...
>>>
>>>
>>> Life could be taxing for these children. So it would be better if we
>>> kill them now. They would eventually die anyway after a "quite
>>> unpleasant" life. Have I got that right?
>>>
>>> Of course the fetuses don't have a voice or a say in this matter. My
>>> question was hypothetical. Your answer is they can't respond to
>>> questions so they don't get to have a choice. We knew that already.
>>>
>>
>> Read my response to Ed Dolan for more details but briefly
>>
>> 1. A fetus is not a child. It can not live at all without a host. It is
>> not a human life. Abortion of a fetus is a medical procedure and not
>> "killing".
>

Like "harvesting" baby seals as you would most likely put it wouldn't you
Jeff?

> Wrong on every count. With an idiot like Jeff, it is all semantics. That
> must be a Jewish thing. Were the Jews "murdered" in the concentration
> camps or were they just "liquidated."
>

Of course no Jews were murdered in concentration camps. Just ask any Nazi.
There was however a procedure called the Final Solution that was
administered to them by their hosts at the camps. The overseers said it was
a procedure and not killing.

Date: 02 Aug 2005 11:46:56
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"HHS" <hhs@nospam.com > wrote in message
news:Dp6dnZIjRInrenPfRVn-1Q@comcast.com...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:wM2dnanfU4N_QHPfRVn-1A@prairiewave.com...
>>
>> "Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com> wrote in message
>> news:11esp2jrsiqmt28@news.supernews.com...
>>>
>>> "HHS" <hhs@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>> news:LtmdnebZ2JT31HPfRVn-jA@comcast.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Life could be taxing for these children. So it would be better if we
>>>> kill them now. They would eventually die anyway after a "quite
>>>> unpleasant" life. Have I got that right?
>>>>
>>>> Of course the fetuses don't have a voice or a say in this matter. My
>>>> question was hypothetical. Your answer is they can't respond to
>>>> questions so they don't get to have a choice. We knew that already.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Read my response to Ed Dolan for more details but briefly
>>>
>>> 1. A fetus is not a child.

Jeez! Maybe the lady is going to have a frog instead of a human child?

It can not live at all without a host.

Not relevant! This is what is known as deep liberal thought.

It is
>>> not a human life.

It is most likely going to be a frog life!

Abortion of a fetus is a medical procedure and not
>>> "killing".

Be sure not to ever let any anyone see any pictures of what is taking place.
If they do they will clearly see that the medical procedure is a killing.
Even abortion doctors do not like to discuss what it is that they do in
order too kill an unborn child. I wonder why that is?

> Like "harvesting" baby seals as you would most likely put it wouldn't you
> Jeff?
>
>
>> Wrong on every count. With an idiot like Jeff, it is all semantics. That
>> must be a Jewish thing. Were the Jews "murdered" in the concentration
>> camps or were they just "liquidated."
>>
>
> Of course no Jews were murdered in concentration camps. Just ask any
> Nazi. There was however a procedure called the Final Solution that was
> administered to them by their hosts at the camps. The overseers said it
> was a procedure and not killing.

Extremely well said HHS!

Would those who think abortion is an excellent way to get rid of unwanted
children tell me what pro-choice means. That is the greatest weasel word I
have ever come across in connection with the issue of abortion. You are
either FOR abortion or you are AGAINST it. What does "pro-choice" have to do
with it? Jeff is pro-abortion, I am anti- abortion.

Leave it to cowardly liberals to fudge the terminology when they do not want
to face up to what words mean.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 02 Aug 2005 06:17:14
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

Re: Abortion

HHS and Dolan: Lets get some thing straight.

1. You feel that abortion is that taking of an already existing human life.
You feel it is the moral equivilant of murder. I am certain that if I felt
the way you do I would feel the same amount of outrage that you do. So we
can begin with a point of agreement, specifically that murder is morally
wrong and we both are outraged by it. There are no social issues or impact
that justify murder.

Don't accuse me of things I didn't say. Because I point out the social
issues does not mean that I would condone abortion if I believed it was
murder. I wouldn't.

Just so that we have a two way point of agreement, lets also agree that if
it could somehow be demonstrated to your satisfaction that abortion was not
infact the taking of human life then it wouldn't be repugnant to you. I'm
not saying that I or anyone else can do this and I promise not to even try.
I'm just saying that we have a point of agreement at the idea that murder is
wrong.

The key difference in our opinion is not that I condone murder and you
don't. It is that I don't believe abortion is murder and you do. If you are
going to attempt to change my opinion or the opinion of people who think
like I do then it would probably be best not to lump us together with
practitioners of genocide or clubbers of baby seals, etc.

2. Given how you feel, you should continue to advocate for your position and
attempt to get the laws of this country changed. That is what I would do if
I felt the way you do.

But you must also admit that as obvious as you feel your position is, it is
not the only position on the issue. At this point it is not the majority
position although the opinion is pretty evenly divided. I wouldn't say that
either side has a clear mandate of public opinion. Don't bother to show me
your statitics and surveys because I can find ones done by people who feel
the way I do that are the mirror image.

3. Social Issues.

It is all well and good to say that people should abstain from sex to
prevent pregnancy. The problem is that they don't. You can advocate it all
you want but it is never going to be an effective birth control method. Not
because it wouldn't work but because you won't get enough people to practice
it.

It is also important to recognize that abortion will always be available to
the wealthy. It always has been. Weather you like it or not you are really
trying to legislate its availability to those who couldn't afford it
otherwise. You can't completely divorce class from the issue.

Note to Ed:

I know you don't like this style of posting. You've made that clear. If all
you are capable of is insulting me becuase you don't like my posting style
then you don't get to discuss an issue of great importance to you. Do you
really care about my posting style at a level equal to how you feel about
abortion? I would think that the abortion issue trumps here.

Date: 02 Aug 2005 11:02:20
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jeff@door7 > wrote in message
news:11euhtfiblfilf0@news.supernews.com...
> Re: Abortion
[...]
> It is all well and good to say that people should abstain from sex to
> prevent pregnancy. The problem is that they don't. You can advocate it all
> you want but it is never going to be an effective birth control method.
> Not because it wouldn't work but because you won't get enough people to
> practice it.

People should behave like human beings and not like swine. If all else
fails, they can follow my example. I am a Great Saint because I have
recognized from my teenage years that the one and only purpose of sex was to
create new life. Anyone engaged in it for any other purpose is a Great
Sinner and will surely never go to Heaven.

I even look down on my fellow Saints like Saint Augustine because he was a
Great Sinner before he became a Saint. But please note well that he is only
a Saint and not a Great Saint like me. In order to be a Great Saint, you
need to have never sinned, at least not in the sexual sphere.

However, I do not compare myself to Jesus Christ or the Virgin y. They
are into forgiveness and I never forgive anyone anything. I have a long
memory and I carry grudges for all eternity. So even though I am a Great
Saint, I am not God. But I know how God thinks and I know He does no approve
of secular liberal Jews like Jeff Grippe who thinks abortion is just fine
and dandy and a neat way to get rid of unwanted children.

But what do secular liberal Jews know of anything? All they know is their
confounded liberal ideology which leads them down every false path that
mankind has ever known. They end up friends and neighbors to the likes of
Hitler and Stalin.

All leftists are as loony as they come. Here is the progression: liberal -
socialist - communist - mass murderer. If Jeff Grippe is not careful, he
will end up like Michael Moore, a treasonous white pig who has no brain.

Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Date: 02 Aug 2005 10:27:25
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jeff@door7 > wrote in message
news:11euhtfiblfilf0@news.supernews.com...
> Re: Abortion

Just Re: Abortion? When I have waxed eloquent and imparted immortal words of
wisdom to all and sundry? Have you no shame?

> HHS and Dolan: Lets get some thing straight.
>
> 1. You feel that abortion is that taking of an already existing human
> life. You feel it is the moral equivilant of murder. I am certain that if
> I felt the way you do I would feel the same amount of outrage that you do.
> So we can begin with a point of agreement, specifically that murder is
> morally wrong and we both are outraged by it. There are no social issues
> or impact that justify murder.
>
> Don't accuse me of things I didn't say. Because I point out the social
> issues does not mean that I would condone abortion if I believed it was
> murder. I wouldn't.

The social issues, whatever they are, are not worth considering when
confronted with the reality of taking innocent human lives.

> Just so that we have a two way point of agreement, lets also agree that if
> it could somehow be demonstrated to your satisfaction that abortion was
> not infact the taking of human life then it wouldn't be repugnant to you.
> I'm not saying that I or anyone else can do this and I promise not to even
> try. I'm just saying that we have a point of agreement at the idea that
> murder is wrong.
>
> The key difference in our opinion is not that I condone murder and you
> don't. It is that I don't believe abortion is murder and you do. If you
> are going to attempt to change my opinion or the opinion of people who
> think like I do then it would probably be best not to lump us together
> with practitioners of genocide or clubbers of baby seals, etc.

You cannot persuade anyone that abortion is not the taking of innocent human
life (murder). Abortion has been with us for a long time now and it is a
more divisive issue that it has ever been. Abortion is not just another
subject to be discussed rationally. It is like the subject of slavery just
prior to the Civil War. You have chosen your side and I have chose my side.
I would be willing to have another civil war over this issue because I
believe it goes to the heart of what a humane and good society is all about.

Like all liberals, you have blinders on and you do not use words the way
they should be used. You are into euphemisms and nonsense talk. There is no
disagreement about what an unborn child is and what it is that you do to
that unborn child when you abort it. You do it because you value the
convenience of individuals more than you do any God given right to life. The
religionists are right on this issue and the liberal secularists are a
horror and an abomination. You are only a step away from the likes of Hitler
and Stalin and other mass murderers.

> 2. Given how you feel, you should continue to advocate for your position
> and attempt to get the laws of this country changed. That is what I would
> do if I felt the way you do.
>
> But you must also admit that as obvious as you feel your position is, it
> is not the only position on the issue. At this point it is not the
> majority position although the opinion is pretty evenly divided. I
> wouldn't say that either side has a clear mandate of public opinion. Don't
> bother to show me your statitics and surveys because I can find ones done
> by people who feel the way I do that are the mirror image.

We do not need liberal judges to tell us what to think about an issue such
as abortion. The damn liberal judges are making the laws, not our elected
representatives. That is going to change shortly thanks to President Bush
and no thanks to a moral cretin like former President Clinton.

Public opinion has been subject to liberal media bias on this issue from the
beginning. Opinions can be easily change from pro to con if and when the
facts are presented truthfully, something the liberal media is incapable of
doing.

> 3. Social Issues.
>
> It is all well and good to say that people should abstain from sex to
> prevent pregnancy. The problem is that they don't. You can advocate it all
> you want but it is never going to be an effective birth control method.
> Not because it wouldn't work but because you won't get enough people to
> practice it.
>
> It is also important to recognize that abortion will always be available
> to the wealthy. It always has been. Weather you like it or not you are
> really trying to legislate its availability to those who couldn't afford
> it otherwise. You can't completely divorce class from the issue.

Who cares if a few rich people want to abort (kill) their own children for
the sake of their convenience. I do not want all of society imitating such
swinish behavior. Until fairly recently, the moral middle classes have
always had a superior morality to the immoral wealthy. I would like to keep
it that way. The very rich and the very poor have always behaved like swine.
What else is new? We need to only concern ourselves with the middle classes,
which is about 90% of all of society.

> Note to Ed:
>
> I know you don't like this style of posting. You've made that clear. If
> all you are capable of is insulting me becuase you don't like my posting
> style then you don't get to discuss an issue of great importance to you.
> Do you really care about my posting style at a level equal to how you feel
> about abortion? I would think that the abortion issue trumps here.

Nothing trumps posting style! It is the one and only thing that counts in
the grand scheme of things. You ought to be thrown up against a wall and
executed forthwith. Top posters are deserving of the lowest levels of Hell.
Read your Dante if you would like to know where you are destined to go for
your posting transgressions.

Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Date: 01 Aug 2005 09:27:37
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com > wrote in message
news:11es8rgsf7kad79@news.supernews.com...
>
> "HHS" <hhs@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:o8ydnbH0nuPRBHDfRVn-vw@comcast.com...
>
>> If the 49 million annually aborted fetuses had a say as to who's right do
>> you think they would side with your friends or with Dolan?
>>
>> I'll put my money on Dolan.
>
> Not so fast. There is good evidence that most of new post Rowe v. Wade
> abortions are those chosen by poor people. Wealthy people have always had
> access to safe abortion. Many of the births that were prevented would have
> been unwanted (actually all of them would have been unwanted). The life
> that many of them would have had would have been quite unpleasant.
>
> I've engaged the question you asked because I really wanted to challenge
> your assumption. In reality (or at least in my opinion) the question is
> without merit. I do not consider the fetus as something which has human
> status and so I wouldn't agree that it should be asked anything. While it
> is still inside the womb, I would say that you ask the woman carrying it.
>
> Your question assumes that the fetus has the same status as a living human
> being. I don't accept that assumption.
>
> Jeff

That should be Roe v. Wade.

Here we have liberal thinking at it's nadir, ignorant and stupid from
beginning to end. Do you really want people like this running the country.

If you do not want any children, then keep your legs closed. Once conception
has occurred a human being is on the way. That is what a fetus is for
heaven's sake. That fetus is not some other thing. It is a human being just
as you and I are. Even if you are not religious, the science is on the side
of religion on this question.

Who gives a damn about how pleasant life may or may not be for the parents
and/or their children. Once a new life has been created (conception) certain
things follow. Any other plan of action leads to the concentration camps
where you get rid of people that you do not want around. Jeff Grippe, a New
York Jew, should know better, but he is blinded by his ignorant and stupid
liberal ideology.

Catholic politicians who vote in favor of abortion are an abomination and
should be run out of the Church. Kerry and Kennedy are beneath contempt, but
the Catholic bishops that refuse to condemn them are even worse. Cowardice
rules supreme throughout the land, that is for sure.

Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Date: 01 Aug 2005 11:05:05
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:EfSdncaigpLHrHPfRVn-uA@prairiewave.com...
>
> That should be Roe v. Wade.
>

Thank you for the correction!

> Here we have liberal thinking at it's nadir, ignorant and stupid from
> beginning to end. Do you really want people like this running the country.
>

This paragraph (above) has nothing to do with the discussion. It is merely
inflamitory criticism. It does not strengthen your case. It does make you
appear incapable of having a serious thought, however.

> If you do not want any children, then keep your legs closed. Once
> conception has occurred a human being is on the way. That is what a fetus
> is for heaven's sake. That fetus is not some other thing. It is a human
> being just as you and I are. Even if you are not religious, the science is
> on the side of religion on this question.
>

Once again you seem to think that there is only one correct scientific
opinion. Clearly there is more than one. The fetus is indeed "some other
thing" as you call it. That is why it has a different name. We don't call it
a person. It doesn't do the things that people do. It is so immature that it
can not survive without its host. The science is ambiguous. I know you like
to believe that there is one and only one right way to see things (and this
idea of yours extends to most issues and not just abortion). Actually,
however, there is more than one way to see things and as I've said before,
Ed Dolan doesn't get to decide whose right. All of the opinions can be said
to be valid from one point of view and invalid from another. There isn't a
single, correct point of view no matter how much you would like there to be.

> Who gives a damn about how pleasant life may or may not be for the parents
> and/or their children. Once a new life has been created (conception)
> certain things follow. Any other plan of action leads to the concentration
> camps where you get rid of people that you do not want around. Jeff
> Grippe, a New York Jew, should know better, but he is blinded by his
> ignorant and stupid liberal ideology.
>

If you fail to consider the social aspects of the issue then you have much
too narrow a focus. You may feel that abortion is an abomination but you
must remember that it will always be available to the wealthy regardless of
what laws are passed.

To ignore the consequences of the unwanted children that are created as a
result of unwanted conceptions is foolish.

To generalize this to concentration camps is an attempt to equate two things
which are not equal at all.

I'm sure that you actually believe the things you say and I know you feel
strongly about them. It doesn't make them correct, however.

Also, please leave my religious and ethnic background out of your arguments.
They have nothing to do with them. It is the same thing as saying that "The
well educated and well read Ed Dolan should know better than to make logical
connections which are utter nonsense."

Jeff

Date: 01 Aug 2005 21:14:10
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com > wrote in message
news:11eseil7jq9k0fa@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:EfSdncaigpLHrHPfRVn-uA@prairiewave.com...
>>
>> That should be Roe v. Wade.
>>
>
> Thank you for the correction!
>
>> Here we have liberal thinking at it's nadir, ignorant and stupid from
>> beginning to end. Do you really want people like this running the
>> country.
>>
>
> This paragraph (above) has nothing to do with the discussion. It is merely
> inflamitory criticism. It does not strengthen your case. It does make you
> appear incapable of having a serious thought, however.

It is a lead-in to what I think of you and your criminal thinking. Too bad
someone didn't abort you!

>> If you do not want any children, then keep your legs closed. Once
>> conception has occurred a human being is on the way. That is what a
>> fetus is for heaven's sake. That fetus is not some other thing. It is a
>> human being just as you and I are. Even if you are not religious, the
>> science is on the side of religion on this question.
>>
>
> Once again you seem to think that there is only one correct scientific
> opinion. Clearly there is more than one. The fetus is indeed "some other
> thing" as you call it. That is why it has a different name. We don't call
> it a person. It doesn't do the things that people do. It is so immature
> that it can not survive without its host. The science is ambiguous. I know
> you like to believe that there is one and only one right way to see things
> (and this idea of yours extends to most issues and not just abortion).
> Actually, however, there is more than one way to see things and as I've
> said before, Ed Dolan doesn't get to decide whose right. All of the
> opinions can be said to be valid from one point of view and invalid from
> another. There isn't a single, correct point of view no matter how much
> you would like there to be.

You are a murderer at heart. Too bad there is no way to put a good light on
it, is there? If you do not want any children, then keep your pecker in your
pants. Just because you are a Jew doesn't mean that you need be a licentious
immoral lout. How many abortions have you been involved in I wonder?

>> Who gives a damn about how pleasant life may or may not be for the
>> parents and/or their children. Once a new life has been created
>> (conception) certain things follow. Any other plan of action leads to the
>> concentration camps where you get rid of people that you do not want
>> around. Jeff Grippe, a New York Jew, should know better, but he is
>> blinded by his ignorant and stupid liberal ideology.
>>
>
> If you fail to consider the social aspects of the issue then you have much
> too narrow a focus. You may feel that abortion is an abomination but you
> must remember that it will always be available to the wealthy regardless
> of what laws are passed.

Those who commit abortion are essentially murderers. I do not care if they
are rich or poor. The social aspects need to be considered before you embark
on creating new life. As usual, like all liberals, you get everything
backwards.

> To ignore the consequences of the unwanted children that are created as a
> result of unwanted conceptions is foolish.

The consequences need to be consider before you engage in creating new life.
What is so damn difficult about this? If you do not want a conception, then
keep your pecker in your pants, you confounded idiot!

> To generalize this to concentration camps is an attempt to equate two
> things which are not equal at all.

Murder is murder whether it is commited against the unborn or the old or the
Jews. There are very many people who would like to see the world rid of Jews
the same as you would like to see the world rid of "unwanted" children -
whatever that is. Murder is murder.

> I'm sure that you actually believe the things you say and I know you feel
> strongly about them. It doesn't make them correct, however.
>
> Also, please leave my religious and ethnic background out of your
> arguments. They have nothing to do with them. It is the same thing as
> saying that "The well educated and well read Ed Dolan should know better
> than to make logical connections which are utter nonsense."

I think your Jewishness has plenty to do with how you think on the subject
of abortion. You are a Jew who has lost his religion and you are adrift in
the world sounding like a blooming idiot. Liberalism is no substitute for
religion. You would do well to reconnect to your Judaism until you regain
your senses.

A Jew without Judaism is an absurdity. The essence of Judaism, in case you
are even ignorant of that, is the Jewish religion. Does the Jewish religion,
any branch of it, condone abortion?

Abortion is not just another subject. Now you see why it is so necessary
that the people speak on this issue via their legislators and that it not be
left to liberal judges to pronounce on the subject. Abortion can tear a
society apart. Whenever an abortion doctor is murdered, I think good
riddance.

Who the hell are these liberals who think abortion is a good thing. Damn
their rotten souls all the way to Hell and back!

Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Date: 10 Jul 2005 13:16:51
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com > wrote in message
news:11d0p4lbunmd419@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:6pWdnfdPFOGBcFLfRVn-oA@prairiewave.com...
>
>> All religions when looked at from the outside appear to be crazy. I judge
>> religions by what they have wrought in the real world, not by what they
>> imagine themselves to be (theology). The Muslims have a very poor record
>> in that regard.
> <snip> (how's that Ed?)
>
> They all have a poor record. You are just choosing which history you wish
> to remember. Do crusades and inquisitions ring a bell?

But I am judging the Islamic religion by what is CURRENTLY taking place in
the world, not hundreds of years ago. Surely that is fair. You are into
making excuses for other's bad behavior big time. The historical record is
irrelevant at this time and place.

>> But I regard India as the bottomless pit of religions. It has been a
>> cesspool of failed religions for well over a thousand years. Those of you
>> who think religion is the salvation of mankind need to immerse yourself
>> in India, the Mother of all religions.
>>
>
> Frankly Ed I have no idea what you are talking about here. As a non-theist
> I don't feel that religion is the salvation of mankind. So who are you
> responding to with this last paragraph?

Remember, I am writing to and for the group, not just you. I am using you as
pretext for saying things that otherwise would never get said.

>> The Soviet and the Chinese were the most serious efforts ever made to
>> create a communist (egalitarian) society. The fact that those efforts
>> failed does not mean that it was not attempted in good faith. Stop making
>> excuses for communism and other ideologies of the Left. Millions of
>> people died for communism and because of communism. All leftist
>> ideologies (including liberalism) are forever tainted because of that
>> failure.
>>
>
> If you want to find the most serious efforts ever made to create a
> communist society then you should probably look to Cuba or Vietnam. I
> didn't work there either, however.

When you resort to mass murder to bring about a desired result, you are
being about as serious as you can get. Russia and China along with Cambodia
hold the records. Vietnam and Cuba do not even come close.

>> The Soviets did precisely what you said cannot be done - they imposed
>> secularism on a very religious society. And by and large they succeeded.
>> I remember as a child we Catholics were always praying for the conversion
>> of Russia.
>>
>
> When I said you can't impose secularism I was saying that you shouldn't
> impose it. People should be free to have their religion as long as their
> religion doesn't dictate the laws that I have to live under.
>
>> By the way, I do not worship freedom. It is a fairly recent phenomenon in
>> the history of mankind. Most men in most places have always lived under
>> tyrannies and have had very little freedom, if any. Slavery is the
>> natural condition of men, not freedom. <snip>
>
> That doesn't make slavery right and freedom wrong. You would be a fool to
> think so in my opinion.

Most men in most societies have lived under conditions approaching slavery.
Only a small ruling elite ever had any freedom. That changed several hundred
years ago in the West, but it is by no means assured. The historical record
is against freedom for the individual. The early examples of democracy
(Athens) were built and made possible on a slave base.

>> You are most awfully wrong. You cannot see your own extremism, but that
>> is characteristic of all extremists.
>>
>> Abortion is tearing this country apart because it was imposed on us by
>> the courts. It must be legislated if it is ever going to be accepted. The
>> liberals cannot win on this issue in the legislatures, and so they resort
>> to the courts.
>>
>> Abortion is an extremist view of liberalism. It only makes sense if you
>> adopt and accept the liberal ideology. From an outsiders viewpoint, it is
>> nothing short of murder. In a manner of speaking, you are no different
>> than a religious extremist such as a Muslim terrorist. You will take an
>> innocent life in the interest of some "higher" purpose.
>>
>
> Abortion is not "imposed" on anyone. If you believe that it is murder then
> don't do it. Just because Ed Dolan and some of his friends say it is
> murder doesn't make it so. Some of my friends and I say it isn't. Who's
> right? If you believe you are then don't engage in the practice yourself
> but you don't have the right make that decision for me.

The American people are against abortion. Some courts, including the Supreme
Court, have ruled in it's favor. Therefore, abortion has been "imposed" on
us against our will by the courts. The ruling badly needs to be overturned.
What the heck do you think the fight over appointments to the Supreme Court
are all about if not that.

The science is against you on the abortion question, but you will not credit
it because you want a desired result. You are an extremist on the question
of abortion because of your liberal ideology.

A moral person desires what is right and good for all of society, not just
for himself. Whenever an abortion doctor manages to get himself murdered, I
think good riddance!

> The only concession I'll make to the Anti-Abortion side is to say that if
> I believed it was murder I would fight it as fiercely as they do. So I at
> least have an understanding of their position. I also know that if I
> believed it was murder I wouldn't accept any other point of view because
> the notion of murder is so terrible. So it is left to the courts and the
> legislature and they have spoken.

The courts cannot have the last say on this question of life or death. It is
up to the legislatures (ultimately Congress) which are the voice of the
people.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 10 Jul 2005 23:09:12
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:fLCdnc_HycKJ-0zfRVn-jQ@prairiewave.com...
>
> But I am judging the Islamic religion by what is CURRENTLY taking place in
> the world, not hundreds of years ago. Surely that is fair. You are into
> making excuses for other's bad behavior big time. The historical record is
> irrelevant at this time and place.
>

Ed, I know you love a good arguement and you are skilled at it. Don't rely
on history when making one arguement and then say historical record is
irrelevant. Either history matters or it doesn't. Don't pick and choose just
to support your opinion d'jour.

Extremism leads to bad results whether it is the Jewish extremist who killed
Rabin, the Muslim extremists who killed Americans and British, or Christian
extremists who have committed attrocities in the past.

Remember that this all began because I said that I do condemn religion.
Don't try to tell me that "this one is behaving badly today so it is bad but
others aren't behaving badly today so they are ok". That arguement doesn't
hold any water.

To restate my basic point. I don't care what people want to believe about
the nature of the universe and the nature of life as long as their beliefs
don't impact on my personal freedom. I'm not against the beliefs as such but
rather the behaviors that people seem to adopt as a result of those beliefs.
Unfortunately these two thing can not be separated so I condemn the whole
package. You want counter-examples, fine I've got one.

I don't condemn the Amish. They believe what they believe and they don't
force it down anyones throat. There may be an Amish terrorist but I doubt
it. It's kind of hard to build WMD's without technology.

Other than a few very small groups, however, all major religions and yes
most non-religions have extremists who do harm. PETA kills animals and blows
up labs in defense of animals for example. Extremists such as you for
example are dangerous because they can't tolerate other opinions.

>>> But I regard India as the bottomless pit of religions. It has been a
>>> cesspool of failed religions for well over a thousand years. Those of
>>> you who think religion is the salvation of mankind need to immerse
>>> yourself in India, the Mother of all religions.
>>>
>>
>> Frankly Ed I have no idea what you are talking about here. As a
>> non-theist I don't feel that religion is the salvation of mankind. So who
>> are you responding to with this last paragraph?
>
> Remember, I am writing to and for the group, not just you. I am using you
> as pretext for saying things that otherwise would never get said.
>

I don't care who you think you are writing for. This doesn't make any sense.

>
> When you resort to mass murder to bring about a desired result, you are
> being about as serious as you can get. Russia and China along with
> Cambodia hold the records. Vietnam and Cuba do not even come close.
>

Obviously I agree.

>
> Most men in most societies have lived under conditions approaching
> slavery. Only a small ruling elite ever had any freedom. That changed
> several hundred years ago in the West, but it is by no means assured. The
> historical record is against freedom for the individual. The early
> examples of democracy (Athens) were built and made possible on a slave
> base.
>

So now history is your friend again it seems. None of what you've said makes
it right. If you don't believe in freedom then feel free to give up yours.
You've done an awful lot of screaming about wars on terror, fighting for
freedom, etc. Now you're going to cast it all aside and say that it isn't
important because men haven't been historically free? If you don't believe
that freedom is a good thing them move to a Muslim country and live under
their rules. You won't have freedom which you say you don't value. You will
have conservatism which you say you do value. Sounds like the right move to
me.

>
> The science is against you on the abortion question, but you will not
> credit it because you want a desired result. You are an extremist on the
> question of abortion because of your liberal ideology.
>

No Ed. Only some peoples version of the science is against me. There are
other versions that aren't. I'm sure that you think one version is right and
the other is wrong. Guess what, so does the other side. But they are wrong,
you say. Well that is what they say about your side. It isn't a simple
question.

> A moral person desires what is right and good for all of society, not just
> for himself. Whenever an abortion doctor manages to get himself murdered,
> I think good riddance!
>

Doctors don't "manage to get themselves murdered". They are killed by
extremists. Your statement above simply shows you for the hypocrite that you
are.

Tell me something Ed. You claim to have been a liberal at some point in the
past. What exactly is it that you have come to understand that has pointed
you 180 degrees in the other direction. It clearly isn't religion. What is
the basis for the things you say here?

Date: 11 Jul 2005 01:23:07
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com > wrote in message
news:11d3oo9g1bkfv4d@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:fLCdnc_HycKJ-0zfRVn-jQ@prairiewave.com...
>>
>> But I am judging the Islamic religion by what is CURRENTLY taking place
>> in the world, not hundreds of years ago. Surely that is fair. You are
>> into making excuses for other's bad behavior big time. The historical
>> record is irrelevant at this time and place.
>>
>
> Ed, I know you love a good arguement and you are skilled at it. Don't rely
> on history when making one arguement and then say historical record is
> irrelevant. Either history matters or it doesn't. Don't pick and choose
> just to support your opinion d'jour.

We need to judge Islam by what is taking place in the world today and not be
making excuses for them based what took place in former times in other
religions. History is only important as a reference point and for some
perspective, unless you think Islam is permanently stuck in a medieval mode.
That is exactly what I think and that is the only way I would use the
historical record. I would not blather on about the Crusades and other
irrelevant subjects.

> Extremism leads to bad results whether it is the Jewish extremist who
> killed Rabin, the Muslim extremists who killed Americans and British, or
> Christian extremists who have committed attrocities in the past.

I am not concerned about the acts of individuals, but only about the acts of
organized groups motivated by an ideology (Islamic Terrorism).

> Remember that this all began because I said that I do condemn religion.
> Don't try to tell me that "this one is behaving badly today so it is bad
> but others aren't behaving badly today so they are ok". That arguement
> doesn't hold any water.

We need to concentrate on the present. To bring the past into the discussion
is nothing but a way of excusing the present bad behavior of the Islamic
terrorists.

> To restate my basic point. I don't care what people want to believe about
> the nature of the universe and the nature of life as long as their beliefs
> don't impact on my personal freedom. I'm not against the beliefs as such
> but rather the behaviors that people seem to adopt as a result of those
> beliefs. Unfortunately these two thing can not be separated so I condemn
> the whole package. You want counter-examples, fine I've got one.
>
> I don't condemn the Amish. They believe what they believe and they don't
> force it down anyones throat. There may be an Amish terrorist but I doubt
> it. It's kind of hard to build WMD's without technology.

A really bad example. The Amish are powerless. They amount to nothing. The
Islamic terrorists have money and power behind them. They are capable of
destroying forever your vaunted personal freedom. Yet, you will not war
against them. Too many like you and the West will be done in.

> Other than a few very small groups, however, all major religions and yes
> most non-religions have extremists who do harm. PETA kills animals and
> blows up labs in defense of animals for example. Extremists such as you
> for example are dangerous because they can't tolerate other opinions.

The problem with tolerating other opinions which we know to be wrong is that
those other opinions may sooner or later be put into practice at which point
it may be too late to do anything about them. If we know opinions are wrong,
we should persecute them and not allow them to flourish. You cannot depend
on the ket place of ideas to always come to the right decision.

>>>> But I regard India as the bottomless pit of religions. It has been a
>>>> cesspool of failed religions for well over a thousand years. Those of
>>>> you who think religion is the salvation of mankind need to immerse
>>>> yourself in India, the Mother of all religions.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Frankly Ed I have no idea what you are talking about here. As a
>>> non-theist I don't feel that religion is the salvation of mankind. So
>>> who are you responding to with this last paragraph?
>>
>> Remember, I am writing to and for the group, not just you. I am using you
>> as pretext for saying things that otherwise would never get said.
>>
>
> I don't care who you think you are writing for. This doesn't make any
> sense.

You apparently will never understand the purpose of newsgroups.

My statement about India had to do with the importance of religion and how
it can impair rather than aid a society. It logically followed from what I
had said previously.

>> When you resort to mass murder to bring about a desired result, you are
>> being about as serious as you can get. Russia and China along with
>> Cambodia hold the records. Vietnam and Cuba do not even come close.
>>
>
> Obviously I agree.
>
>>
>> Most men in most societies have lived under conditions approaching
>> slavery. Only a small ruling elite ever had any freedom. That changed
>> several hundred years ago in the West, but it is by no means assured. The
>> historical record is against freedom for the individual. The early
>> examples of democracy (Athens) were built and made possible on a slave
>> base.
>>
>
> So now history is your friend again it seems. None of what you've said
> makes it right. If you don't believe in freedom then feel free to give up
> yours. You've done an awful lot of screaming about wars on terror,
> fighting for freedom, etc. Now you're going to cast it all aside and say
> that it isn't important because men haven't been historically free? If you
> don't believe that freedom is a good thing them move to a Muslim country
> and live under their rules. You won't have freedom which you say you don't
> value. You will have conservatism which you say you do value. Sounds like
> the right move to me.

Jeff is an example of a man who does not possess a liberal arts education.
He cannot follow an argument or a chain of reasoning. He does not understand
the uses of history. I might as well be talking to the wall.

>> The science is against you on the abortion question, but you will not
>> credit it because you want a desired result. You are an extremist on the
>> question of abortion because of your liberal ideology.
>>
>
>
> No Ed. Only some peoples version of the science is against me. There are
> other versions that aren't. I'm sure that you think one version is right
> and the other is wrong. Guess what, so does the other side. But they are
> wrong, you say. Well that is what they say about your side. It isn't a
> simple question.

There are no versions of science. There is only science.

Those who are in favor of abortion cannot even stand to look at photos of
what is taking place during an abortion. They are condemned out of their own
mouths. Those who favor abortion are murderers and ought to be drawn and
quartered for their miserable concern about their own freaking bodies. The
science is against you. Life begins at conception. Theology and science
agree with one another for once.

>> A moral person desires what is right and good for all of society, not
>> just for himself. Whenever an abortion doctor manages to get himself
>> murdered, I think good riddance!
>>
>
> Doctors don't "manage to get themselves murdered". They are killed by
> extremists. Your statement above simply shows you for the hypocrite that
> you are.

Whenever an abortion doctor manages to get himself murdered,
>> I think good riddance!

> Tell me something Ed. You claim to have been a liberal at some point in
> the past. What exactly is it that you have come to understand that has
> pointed you 180 degrees in the other direction. It clearly isn't religion.
> What is the basis for the things you say here?

My understanding of human nature has made me a conservative. When you are
young you are hopeful about human nature, yours and everyone else's. As you
age, you realize that human nature is what it is and it is never going to
change.

Human nature needs to be constrained. We are essentially nothing but killer
apes. We go about the world wanting to kill anyone who is different than
ourselves. Human nature needs to be constrained. That is why I am a
conservative.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 11 Jul 2005 06:36:16
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:962dnWJi4ZLRjU_fRVn-tQ@prairiewave.com...
>
> We need to judge Islam by what is taking place in the world today and not
> be making excuses for them based what took place in former times in other
> religions. History is only important as a reference point and for some
> perspective, unless you think Islam is permanently stuck in a medieval
> mode. That is exactly what I think and that is the only way I would use
> the historical record. I would not blather on about the Crusades and other
> irrelevant subjects.
>

Ed. Stop attributing things to me that I didn't say especially when what I
actually said is the exact opposite. You said above "...and not be making
excuses for them based what took place in former times..."

I never did make excuses for them Ed. If you are going to fight the battle
of words then fight fair.

To restate my position again so that you may understand it this time: I
condemned all organized religion. All of them can and have led to extremist
behaviors. Tim McVeigh is not ancient history. The various right-wing
militias that have formed who are mostly white christians are not ancient
history.

Do not accuse me of defending something I didn't defend. Don't respond to
arguements I didn't make.

> I am not concerned about the acts of individuals, but only about the acts
> of organized groups motivated by an ideology (Islamic Terrorism).
>

That is a convenient excust Ed. Whenever you feel like it you can label
something an individual acts and fail to condemn. Conversely if you decide
you want to condemn then you can lump it with some other acts and call it an
organized group motivated by an ideology.

All acts are at some level invidual and all people are motivated at some
level by group ideology. It is inescapable. If you continue to drop things
into one box or the other to suit your purposes then you make nice sounding
arguements that are complete and utter nonsense.

The way you sort your facts and argue a point you can prove anything you
want to.

> We need to concentrate on the present. To bring the past into the
> discussion is nothing but a way of excusing the present bad behavior of
> the Islamic terrorists.
>

Here you go again pretending I said something I didn't. I never excused
anything. Not even a little bit.

> A really bad example. The Amish are powerless. They amount to nothing. The
> Islamic terrorists have money and power behind them. They are capable of
> destroying forever your vaunted personal freedom. Yet, you will not war
> against them. Too many like you and the West will be done in.

Now your adding another criteria. I didn't know wealth and power were the
issue. If it is then you best be condemning the Chinese who own far more of
this country than any of us dare to dream. They don't have an ideology that
meshes well with ours either and they have far more money than the Islamic
people.

Ah but the Chinese and the Islamic Middle Eastern people both depend on our
money to survive so while the extremists may commit unspeakable acts there
are a larger number of moderates whose cushy lifestyle would be interrupted
if the system really colapsed.

>
> The problem with tolerating other opinions which we know to be wrong is
> that those other opinions may sooner or later be put into practice at
> which point it may be too late to do anything about them. If we know
> opinions are wrong, we should persecute them and not allow them to
> flourish. You cannot depend on the ket place of ideas to always come to
> the right decision.
>

This is another of the core differences in our thinking. You believe that
there is a single set of right ideas. You are going to have a hard time
convincing everyone that your ideas are the right ones (although they are
very right wing). Everyone thinks that they have the monopoly on correct
thinking. Until you whittle the population down to one person you will never
get consensus about what is right. Other ideas and opinions will always
flourish. You can label them wrong if you want to and you can try to stamp
them out but you are doomed to fail and will probably die trying. It won't
be a nobel death because you were fighting windmill of a size that I never
even dared to attempt.

> The science is against you. Life begins at conception. Theology and
> science agree with one another for once.
>

No Ed, life does not beging at conception. The undisputed scientific idea is
that life is a continuous process that began a long time ago and continues.
The two cells that join at conception are both living cells. They form
something which under the correct circumstances might become a new person
but female bodies abort the majority of conceptions on their own. Conception
is not a magic starting point as you claim.

Your arguement boils down (scientifically) to "this particular group of cell
might become a human being and so it must not be destroyed".

But once again we run into those other opinions again. So I say to you
again, If you believe it is wrong then don't do it. Don't prohibit me from
doing it if I do not happen to agree with you.

If we get the "When is it alive" question out of the way (answer: it was
alive before, during, and after conception) then we can ask the real
scientific question that might have some bearing on the moral and ethical
question.

When is it a human life that should be protected? That is a much harder
question to answer and there are all sorts of opinions all of which claim
scientific validity. It makes it easy for you to believe that there is a
single scientific answer but there isn't.

> My understanding of human nature has made me a conservative. When you are
> young you are hopeful about human nature, yours and everyone else's. As
> you age, you realize that human nature is what it is and it is never going
> to change.
>
> Human nature needs to be constrained. We are essentially nothing but
> killer apes. We go about the world wanting to kill anyone who is different
> than ourselves. Human nature needs to be constrained. That is why I am a
> conservative.
>

You can't constrain human nature Ed. What a ridiculous concept. If you
understood human nature at all you would understand that.

Date: 12 Jul 2005 02:05:38
From: Mike Rice
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 16:48:26 -0400, "Jeff Grippe"
<jgrippe@hilldun.com > wrote:
:
<snip >
>>
>
>I do not accept your assertion that abortion is murder. It certainly can not
>be equated with the behavior of extremists who kill in the name of an
>ideology. People who have abortions are not making political statements.
>

What I don't understand is how someone who seems so strongly against
the 'murder' of an embryonic fetus can in the same post pray for
atomic anihilation of hundreds of thousands of people.

'Agree or die' ???

<snip?
>
>What bad behavior did I excuse? You are attributing ideas to me that I
>didn't say. Stop doing that! If you want to have an honest discussion then
>discuss honestly. If you don't then you aren't worth talking to.
>

I thought you realized that during the previous thread.

Mike

Date: 12 Jul 2005 14:41:12
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Mike Rice" <jodymike@gte.net > wrote in message
news:ja96d1d6n42c3h6jdq9sjevtsr0bikehb5@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 16:48:26 -0400, "Jeff Grippe"
> <jgrippe@hilldun.com> wrote:
> :
> <snip>
>>>
>>
>>I do not accept your assertion that abortion is murder. It certainly can
>>not
>>be equated with the behavior of extremists who kill in the name of an
>>ideology. People who have abortions are not making political statements.
>>
>
> What I don't understand is how someone who seems so strongly against
> the 'murder' of an embryonic fetus can in the same post pray for
> atomic anihilation of hundreds of thousands of people.

Mike, I do not believe a few hundred thousand dead French would make much
difference. No, I believe it will take several MILLION dead French to wake
them up to the threat that the Islamic terrorists pose to Western
Civilization.

The killing of a child, born or unborn, is taking the life of an innocent
and is a mortal sin. Everyone in the world knows this except liberals like
Mike Rice and Jeff Grippe. The killing of several million French would be
their just deserts for their treachery and perfidy to Western Civilization.
Where are these Islamic terrorists when they are wanted and needed.

By the way, does any one here on this board ever notice how those who are in
favor of killing children are also in favor of NOT killing criminals who
have committed heinous murders. Why is that? Maybe Mike Rice could address
this question instead of waxing profound about the g.d. French.

Saint Edward - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota

Date: 12 Jul 2005 02:15:27
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Mike Rice" <jodymike@gte.net > wrote in message
news:ja96d1d6n42c3h6jdq9sjevtsr0bikehb5@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 16:48:26 -0400, "Jeff Grippe"
> <jgrippe@hilldun.com> wrote:

>
> What I don't understand is how someone who seems so strongly against
> the 'murder' of an embryonic fetus can in the same post pray for
> atomic anihilation of hundreds of thousands of people.
>
> 'Agree or die' ???

That may be the whole reason I keep talking to him. His arguements don't
really stand up to any reasonable test despite his protestations to the
contrary. If he is going to keep spewing venom, however, the least I can do
is keep calling him on the nonsense.

>>
>>What bad behavior did I excuse? You are attributing ideas to me that I
>>didn't say. Stop doing that! If you want to have an honest discussion then
>>discuss honestly. If you don't then you aren't worth talking to.
>>
>
> I thought you realized that during the previous thread.
>

What I realize is that he doesn't play fair. It is important to keep calling
him on it, however. I don't actually believe that I'm going to influence him
but I fully intend to keep shoving his deceit in his face. If he has a point
of view then I welcome it to the table. I think that all sides must always
be heard. When he slips into rant and blind lashing out then I'll call him
on it.

In my view, however, it is important not to suppress his view but rather to
tease out any real ideas that may be there. Ultimately there may be no
common ground but I have to keep looking.

Jeff

Date: 12 Jul 2005 14:53:02
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com > wrote in message
news:11d6o1giqkuom78@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Mike Rice" <jodymike@gte.net> wrote in message
> news:ja96d1d6n42c3h6jdq9sjevtsr0bikehb5@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 16:48:26 -0400, "Jeff Grippe"
>> <jgrippe@hilldun.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> What I don't understand is how someone who seems so strongly against
>> the 'murder' of an embryonic fetus can in the same post pray for
>> atomic anihilation of hundreds of thousands of people.
>>
>> 'Agree or die' ???
>
> That may be the whole reason I keep talking to him. His arguements don't
> really stand up to any reasonable test despite his protestations to the
> contrary. If he is going to keep spewing venom, however, the least I can
> do is keep calling him on the nonsense.
>
>>>
>>>What bad behavior did I excuse? You are attributing ideas to me that I
>>>didn't say. Stop doing that! If you want to have an honest discussion
>>>then
>>>discuss honestly. If you don't then you aren't worth talking to.
>>>
>>
>> I thought you realized that during the previous thread.
>>
>
> What I realize is that he doesn't play fair. It is important to keep
> calling him on it, however. I don't actually believe that I'm going to
> influence him but I fully intend to keep shoving his deceit in his face.
> If he has a point of view then I welcome it to the table. I think that all
> sides must always be heard. When he slips into rant and blind lashing out
> then I'll call him on it.

Here is Jeff Grippe, the liberal good guy, talking out of both sides of his
face. He wants to insult me but at the same time not look too bad doing it.
I am more consistent in my views regarding him. I knew him to be liberal
from the beginning and I have treated him accordingly. Liberals are all
poured from the same mold and totally predictable. I think it is called
being a knee jerk liberal.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 11 Jul 2005 14:42:02
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com > wrote in message
news:11d4iug8ua9il2c@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:962dnWJi4ZLRjU_fRVn-tQ@prairiewave.com...
>>
>> We need to judge Islam by what is taking place in the world today and not
>> be making excuses for them based what took place in former times in other
>> religions. History is only important as a reference point and for some
>> perspective, unless you think Islam is permanently stuck in a medieval
>> mode. That is exactly what I think and that is the only way I would use
>> the historical record. I would not blather on about the Crusades and
>> other irrelevant subjects.
>>
>
> Ed. Stop attributing things to me that I didn't say especially when what I
> actually said is the exact opposite. You said above "...and not be making
> excuses for them based what took place in former times..."
>
> I never did make excuses for them Ed. If you are going to fight the battle
> of words then fight fair.

But you are not in favor of the War in Iraq. Were you also not in favor of
the War in Afghanistan? How do you propose to deal with Islamic terrorists?
Maybe like how Clinton dealt with them? Are we at war or do we just have a
criminal matter on our hands?

> To restate my position again so that you may understand it this time: I
> condemned all organized religion. All of them can and have led to
> extremist behaviors. Tim McVeigh is not ancient history. The various
> right-wing militias that have formed who are mostly white christians are
> not ancient history.

McVeigh was essentially a lone wolf. He had no backing whatsoever. The right
wing militias are relatively harmless. They have been infiltrated by the FBI
and cannot do anything much.

Your bias against extremist religionists applies with equal force against
secular extremists, such as communists who will kill millions in the name of
their secular ideology and also of liberals who will kill millions
(abortion) in the name of their secular ideology. You and I are both
non-religious, but I do not have your prejudice against it. I know religion
does far more good in the world than it does evil. Mankind cannot live
without religion and only a fool thinks otherwise.

> Do not accuse me of defending something I didn't defend. Don't respond to
> arguements I didn't make.

I like to broaden the discussion, not narrow it.

>> I am not concerned about the acts of individuals, but only about the acts
>> of organized groups motivated by an ideology (Islamic Terrorism).
>>
>
> That is a convenient excust Ed. Whenever you feel like it you can label
> something an individual acts and fail to condemn. Conversely if you decide
> you want to condemn then you can lump it with some other acts and call it
> an organized group motivated by an ideology.
>
> All acts are at some level invidual and all people are motivated at some
> level by group ideology. It is inescapable. If you continue to drop things
> into one box or the other to suit your purposes then you make nice
> sounding arguements that are complete and utter nonsense.
>
> The way you sort your facts and argue a point you can prove anything you
> want to.

You are unable to make critical discriminations. What an individual does
most often falls under the category of crime. What an organized group does
under the influence of an ideology most often falls under the category of
war. It is the difference between night and day. Society needs to be
concerned about both of course, but organized groups who war against society
must be eliminated with extreme prejudice. McVeigh is nothing; Islamic
terrorists are everything.

>> We need to concentrate on the present. To bring the past into the
>> discussion is nothing but a way of excusing the present bad behavior of
>> the Islamic terrorists.
>>
>
> Here you go again pretending I said something I didn't. I never excused
> anything. Not even a little bit.
>
>> A really bad example. The Amish are powerless. They amount to nothing.
>> The Islamic terrorists have money and power behind them. They are capable
>> of destroying forever your vaunted personal freedom. Yet, you will not
>> war against them. Too many like you and the West will be done in.
>
> Now your adding another criteria. I didn't know wealth and power were the
> issue. If it is then you best be condemning the Chinese who own far more
> of this country than any of us dare to dream. They don't have an ideology
> that meshes well with ours either and they have far more money than the
> Islamic people.
>
> Ah but the Chinese and the Islamic Middle Eastern people both depend on
> our money to survive so while the extremists may commit unspeakable acts
> there are a larger number of moderates whose cushy lifestyle would be
> interrupted if the system really colapsed.

Yep, you are making excuses for bad behavior once again. This is why
liberals are no longer fit to rule. They can't tell the difference between
bombings that kill innocent people and the vaunted globalization which we
are all suppose to be for. I will admit I like to shop at Wal-t. Almost
everything in Wal-t comes from China.

>> The problem with tolerating other opinions which we know to be wrong is
>> that those other opinions may sooner or later be put into practice at
>> which point it may be too late to do anything about them. If we know
>> opinions are wrong, we should persecute them and not allow them to
>> flourish. You cannot depend on the ket place of ideas to always come
>> to the right decision.
>>
>
> This is another of the core differences in our thinking. You believe that
> there is a single set of right ideas. You are going to have a hard time
> convincing everyone that your ideas are the right ones (although they are
> very right wing). Everyone thinks that they have the monopoly on correct
> thinking. Until you whittle the population down to one person you will
> never get consensus about what is right. Other ideas and opinions will
> always flourish. You can label them wrong if you want to and you can try
> to stamp them out but you are doomed to fail and will probably die trying.
> It won't be a nobel death because you were fighting windmill of a size
> that I never even dared to attempt.

The main ideas I KNOW are wrong are those ideas which once put into practice
effectively shuts down all other competing ideas. That is what Hitler did in
Germany and that is what the communists do wherever they go. Once they
achieve power, they shut down democracy. The Islamic clerics are like that
too and are no better than any other totalitarians.

Ian Buck, the Druze Syrian of the UK, would no doubt like to see this happen
world wide. It is part and parcel of the Islamic religion to want to stuff
it down everyone else's throats under pain of death if necessary. If you
oppose this world view of theirs, you will be murdered like VanGogh was in
Holland. They envision a world where clerics rule and everyone is a Muslim.

I hate liberals almost as much as I hate Muslims because they will not
oppose this kind of thuggery. They will not fight. They will not go to war.
That is why I pray that France will suffer a nuclear strike at the hands of
the Islamic terrorists. That will not only wake up liberals like you, but
also have the salutary effect of waking up the g.d. French. The only thing
that will arouse them from their slumbers is if their comforts are
disrupted. God help anyone who prevents a Frenchman from taking his August
vacation.

>> The science is against you. Life begins at conception. Theology and
>> science agree with one another for once.
>>
>
> No Ed, life does not beging at conception. The undisputed scientific idea
> is that life is a continuous process that began a long time ago and
> continues. The two cells that join at conception are both living cells.
> They form something which under the correct circumstances might become a
> new person but female bodies abort the majority of conceptions on their
> own. Conception is not a magic starting point as you claim.

Single cells (whether of sperm or egg) that have not united are not human
beings. Cells that have united are (conception). The only thing that
prevents those cells from becoming as you and I is the act of murder.
Conception IS the magic starting point. This is why a person who is sane and
moral does not take sex lightly. It is serious business and has nothing to
do with fun and games. Women instinctively know this and that is what makes
them infinitely better than us men. Immoral women have without exception
been corrupted by immoral men one way or another.
[...]

>> My understanding of human nature has made me a conservative. When you are
>> young you are hopeful about human nature, yours and everyone else's. As
>> you age, you realize that human nature is what it is and it is never
>> going to change.
>>
>> Human nature needs to be constrained. We are essentially nothing but
>> killer apes. We go about the world wanting to kill anyone who is
>> different than ourselves. Human nature needs to be constrained. That is
>> why I am a conservative.
>>
>
> You can't constrain human nature Ed. What a ridiculous concept. If you
> understood human nature at all you would understand that.

I rest my case that Jeff Grippe is an unreconstructed liberal. He has never
taken a course in sociology or anthropology. He simply has no idea of how
societies are put together.

Constraints operate on all of us every second of every day all of our lives.
Most are self imposed by one means or another, but others are imposed on us
much against our will by the societies of which we are members. Human nature
not constrained is a horror and none of us would ever want to live such a
life. Remember, the life of the savage is nasty, brutal, poor and ... short.

What would be more interesting than why I am a conservative would be the
question of why Jeff is a liberal. Liberalism has mostly failed where ever
it has been attempted and does not make men better morally. In fact, it
seems to have the opposite effect. It makes men act worse than they would
otherwise. Surely the ultimate test of an ideology is what it does to the
soul of a man.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 11 Jul 2005 16:48:26
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:yK2dnTSBBscRVk_fRVn-3w@prairiewave.com...
>
> But you are not in favor of the War in Iraq. Were you also not in favor of
> the War in Afghanistan? How do you propose to deal with Islamic
> terrorists? Maybe like how Clinton dealt with them? Are we at war or do we
> just have a criminal matter on our hands?
>

As I have said before I am not in favor of war period and yet I acknowledge
that there are some that must be fought. Just because it must be done does
not make it something that I am in favor of.

As to the war in Iraq, you are correct that I am against it. We attacked a
soverign nation under false pretenses. We were supposedly making a
pre-emptive strike against someone that might do us harm because we believed
that they had the capacity to do so. This was not a war on terrorism.

We were attacked by Saudi Islamic extremists but we can't attack the Saudis.
The Bush family is close personal friends with the royal family and they
supply quite a bit of oil to us. But they also fund the terrorists as well.
Where do you think the terrorists got all their money? From Iraq? Get real.
Between a costly war with Iran and years of UN sanctions Iraq is not flush
with funing for terrorist activities. What they did have was being horded by
Saddam's family not being spent on terrorism. Saddam was not a radical
muslim. If anything the Iraq war has brought out the radical Muslims and
given them a focal point for future agression.

Afghanistan is a trickier question. Some retaliation was probably called for
there. I don't like it but I can support it. As I said before the real
problem is Saudi Arabia. Then maybe Iran and certainly North Korea. But a
war with Iraq is a joke. It is not a war on terror. There was no terror
there.

>
> McVeigh was essentially a lone wolf. He had no backing whatsoever. The
> right wing militias are relatively harmless. They have been infiltrated by
> the FBI and cannot do anything much.
>

Well it would appear that a lone wolf can be quite destructive. But
regardless of how much they have been infiltrated they still represent and
extremist point of view that is willing to kill. They are not harmless.

> Your bias against extremist religionists applies with equal force against
> secular extremists, such as communists who will kill millions in the name
> of their secular ideology and also of liberals who will kill millions
> (abortion) in the name of their secular ideology. You and I are both
> non-religious, but I do not have your prejudice against it. I know
> religion does far more good in the world than it does evil. Mankind cannot
> live without religion and only a fool thinks otherwise.
>

I do not accept your assertion that abortion is murder. It certainly can not
be equated with the behavior of extremists who kill in the name of an
ideology. People who have abortions are not making political statements.

Religion does not do more good than evil. It cripples free will. It provides
an ultimate basis upon which one group can hate others and the presumed
stakes (everlasting life) are very high. I'm not sure that mankind cannot
live without religion. As science ches forward there are fewer and fewer
true believers, I think. Humans created religion and humans can create
something else. Religion is not a static thing. Recall that prior to modern
times there were polytheistic religions. What happened to them? I don't see
very many new temples being built for Apollo or Zeus. You thank that Christ
and Mohammed will last forever as dominant forces? History would suggest
not. The changes will not be rapid, however.

>> Do not accuse me of defending something I didn't defend. Don't respond to
>> arguements I didn't make.
>
> I like to broaden the discussion, not narrow it.
>

When you put words and ideas into my mouth, that is not "broadening the
discussion". That is making it seem like I said something that I didn't say.
It is a very effective technique which is no doubt why you used it.
Presidential candidates may stand for it but I won't. Don't attribute things
to me that I didn't say and then argue against them as if I said them.

>
> You are unable to make critical discriminations. What an individual does
> most often falls under the category of crime. What an organized group does
> under the influence of an ideology most often falls under the category of
> war. It is the difference between night and day. Society needs to be
> concerned about both of course, but organized groups who war against
> society must be eliminated with extreme prejudice. McVeigh is nothing;
> Islamic terrorists are everything.
>

You are making discriminations when it suits your arguement and discarding
them when it does not.

Tell me something Ed, In your educated opinion what should the western world
do to fight Islamic terrorism? I will simply state the problem as "We know
that there are Islamic terrorists who will do us harm when they can."
Exactly what do you think would be an effective way of dealing with this
problem?

> Yep, you are making excuses for bad behavior once again. This is why
> liberals are no longer fit to rule. They can't tell the difference between
> bombings that kill innocent people and the vaunted globalization which we
> are all suppose to be for. I will admit I like to shop at Wal-t. Almost
> everything in Wal-t comes from China.
>

What bad behavior did I excuse? You are attributing ideas to me that I
didn't say. Stop doing that! If you want to have an honest discussion then
discuss honestly. If you don't then you aren't worth talking to.

> Single cells (whether of sperm or egg) that have not united are not human
> beings. Cells that have united are (conception). The only thing that
> prevents those cells from becoming as you and I is the act of murder.
> Conception IS the magic starting point. This is why a person who is sane
> and moral does not take sex lightly. It is serious business and has
> nothing to do with fun and games. Women instinctively know this and that
> is what makes them infinitely better than us men. Immoral women have
> without exception been corrupted by immoral men one way or another.

Where do you come up with these ideas, Ed. Every process that can be
distinguished as a process can be called a starting point. Since that are
many conceptions (the majority it turns out) that are spontaneously aborted
and don't become human then clearly it can not be seen as "the magic
starting point". It isn't. You say the science is with you and I'll tell you
again that there are competing versions of the science that all claim
credibility. What makes your version correct? The fact that you believe it
to be so? Sorry but that still isn't good enough.

> I rest my case that Jeff Grippe is an unreconstructed liberal.

I didn't know that I was on trial.

> Surely the ultimate test of an ideology is what it does to the soul of a
> man.

You believe in a soul Ed? That is starting to sound mighty religious. But
seriously Ed your words are so loaded I can't even begin to address your
points because you presuppose so much. Even the one sentence that I quoted
is loaded.

"Ultimate test"? What are we testing for? How are we to measure the results.
Do you have a soulometer?

When you run out of real ideas you simply go into personal attack mode. You
start using gross generalizations that are meaningless to the discussion at
hand. You attribute things to me that I haven't said or endorsed. You cease
to grapple with ideas at hand and instead just start labeling and attacking
with vague references to history, culture, human nature, etc.

If you are going to defend your ideas then defend your ideas and I'll
listen. Don't just go into "blind liberal attack mode" and expect anyone
that doesn't already agree with you to take you seriously.

Date: 12 Jul 2005 14:22:05
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com > wrote in message
news:11d5mqb8etk50e@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:yK2dnTSBBscRVk_fRVn-3w@prairiewave.com...
>>
>> But you are not in favor of the War in Iraq. Were you also not in favor
>> of the War in Afghanistan? How do you propose to deal with Islamic
>> terrorists? Maybe like how Clinton dealt with them? Are we at war or do
>> we just have a criminal matter on our hands?
>>
>
> As I have said before I am not in favor of war period and yet I
> acknowledge that there are some that must be fought. Just because it must
> be done does not make it something that I am in favor of.
>
> As to the war in Iraq, you are correct that I am against it. We attacked a
> soverign nation under false pretenses. We were supposedly making a
> pre-emptive strike against someone that might do us harm because we
> believed that they had the capacity to do so. This was not a war on
> terrorism.

Iraq under Sadaam was a threat to the entire security of that region which
is vital to the West because of the oil resource. Iraq under Sadaam was also
in league with the terrorists and was essentially a terrorist state itself.
You are clearly bonkers to think otherwise.

> We were attacked by Saudi Islamic extremists but we can't attack the
> Saudis. The Bush family is close personal friends with the royal family
> and they supply quite a bit of oil to us. But they also fund the
> terrorists as well. Where do you think the terrorists got all their money?
> From Iraq? Get real. Between a costly war with Iran and years of UN
> sanctions Iraq is not flush with funing for terrorist activities. What
> they did have was being horded by Saddam's family not being spent on
> terrorism. Saddam was not a radical muslim. If anything the Iraq war has
> brought out the radical Muslims and given them a focal point for future
> aggression.

Iraq was up to no good and was involved deeply in terrorist activities in
the Middle East. However, we do need to begin to focus on Saudi Arabia. Bush
has got the right idea about democratizing the entire Middle East. Therein
will lie the solution to the problem of Islamic extremism and the ultimate
security of the West.

> Afghanistan is a trickier question. Some retaliation was probably called
> for there. I don't like it but I can support it. As I said before the real
> problem is Saudi Arabia. Then maybe Iran and certainly North Korea. But a
> war with Iraq is a joke. It is not a war on terror. There was no terror
> there.

You are just plain wrong about the situation that prevailed with respect to
Iraq. But you were lukewarm about the war in Afghanistan too. This is why I
do not want liberals in charge of anything anymore (except for welfare
issues). Liberals will not defend the US. They are weak on defense and the
whole country knows it. That is why Kerry lost the election.
[...]

> I do not accept your assertion that abortion is murder. It certainly can
> not be equated with the behavior of extremists who kill in the name of an
> ideology. People who have abortions are not making political statements.

Women who have abortions and the men who support it are most definitely
making a political statement. It is liberalism gone crazy - you know, all
that nonsense about everyone being free to do whatever they want with their
own body. It doesn't get any crazier than that!

> Religion does not do more good than evil. It cripples free will. It
> provides an ultimate basis upon which one group can hate others and the
> presumed stakes (everlasting life) are very high. I'm not sure that
> mankind cannot live without religion. As science ches forward there are
> fewer and fewer true believers, I think. Humans created religion and
> humans can create something else. Religion is not a static thing. Recall
> that prior to modern times there were polytheistic religions. What
> happened to them? I don't see very many new temples being built for Apollo
> or Zeus. You thank that Christ and Mohammed will last forever as dominant
> forces? History would suggest not. The changes will not be rapid, however.

Religion is instinctive to mankind. He cannot live without it. There will
always be varieties of it. The trick is to ameliorate the worst excesses of
religion, but I assure you secularism is no better. In fact, secularism
always turns into some kind of religion itself. You can't win, so you might
as well accept the reality of religion.

>>> Do not accuse me of defending something I didn't defend. Don't respond
>>> to arguements I didn't make.
>>
>> I like to broaden the discussion, not narrow it.
>>
>
> When you put words and ideas into my mouth, that is not "broadening the
> discussion". That is making it seem like I said something that I didn't
> say. It is a very effective technique which is no doubt why you used it.
> Presidential candidates may stand for it but I won't. Don't attribute
> things to me that I didn't say and then argue against them as if I said
> them.

I like to broaden the conversation regardless of what you are saying. That
is because I am writing to a universe of unknown readers, not just you. I am
not putting words in your mouth, but I am taking on your liberal ideology
which I assume that you posses in full measure based on your statements to
the group so far. If you are not liberal, then disavow that repugnant
philosophy. If you are liberal, then own up to it and take your knocks.
[...]

> Tell me something Ed, In your educated opinion what should the western
> world do to fight Islamic terrorism? I will simply state the problem as
> "We know that there are Islamic terrorists who will do us harm when they
> can." Exactly what do you think would be an effective way of dealing with
> this problem?

We are presently doing what needs to be done which is to hunt them down and
kill them. That is the only short range solution. The long range solution of
course is to see to the democratization of the Middle East. Maybe if the
Middle East were democratic and free, even Ian Buck, the Syrian Druze, would
return to the land of his forefathers and reside in Damascus where he
belongs. Then he could worship his Islamic god 5 times a day in peace and
not be bothered by us Christians.
[...]

>> Single cells (whether of sperm or egg) that have not united are not human
>> beings. Cells that have united are (conception). The only thing that
>> prevents those cells from becoming as you and I is the act of murder.
>> Conception IS the magic starting point. This is why a person who is sane
>> and moral does not take sex lightly. It is serious business and has
>> nothing to do with fun and games. Women instinctively know this and that
>> is what makes them infinitely better than us men. Immoral women have
>> without exception been corrupted by immoral men one way or another.
>
> Where do you come up with these ideas, Ed. Every process that can be
> distinguished as a process can be called a starting point. Since that are
> many conceptions (the majority it turns out) that are spontaneously
> aborted and don't become human then clearly it can not be seen as "the
> magic starting point". It isn't. You say the science is with you and I'll
> tell you again that there are competing versions of the science that all
> claim credibility. What makes your version correct? The fact that you
> believe it to be so? Sorry but that still isn't good enough.

I have already told you there are no "versions" of science. There is only
science. But we all know that in the short run science cannot compete with
ideology. That has been proven over and over in the history of mankind. You
are blinded by your liberal ideology.
[...]

> When you run out of real ideas you simply go into personal attack mode.
> You start using gross generalizations that are meaningless to the
> discussion at hand. You attribute things to me that I haven't said or
> endorsed. You cease to grapple with ideas at hand and instead just start
> labeling and attacking with vague references to history, culture, human
> nature, etc.

There are more ideas packed into a single sentence of mine than there is in
your entire rambling message. Please note that I am deleting much of your
message because you are wandering from the universe of ideas and indulging
in personal pique. If you are not up to intellectual discussion, then you
should not attempt it.

You cannot get my generalizations and allusions because your educational
background is deficient. But why should I limit myself to the common
denominator when I am capable of so much more. I like to think others may be
getting what I am saying even if you aren't. What I had to say about Mother
India being the cesspool of all religions for instance was an original
thought and pregnant with all kinds of meaning for further discussion. But
it went right over your head. It is your loss, not mine.

The so called personal attacks constitute a summing up of what I think of
what is being said. We conservatives like to put a VALUE on what is said,
not just blather on and on as if everything that is being said is somehow
equal. Everyone does the personal attack bit, including you, but some of us
do it better than others.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 12 Jul 2005 16:44:39
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

This is getting nowhere Ed.

You misquote and label it as "superior education and intellect".

Attempts at bridging the gulf between our ideas has failed horribly.

You clearly have your mind made up about all issue and reality has no impact
on your views. Since this discussion is not necessary and since you insist
on behaving the way you do, it is best to leave politics and religion as
others have suggested.

Jeff

Date: 12 Jul 2005 16:46:52
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com > wrote in message
news:11d8av81f6fb364@news.supernews.com...
> This is getting nowhere Ed.
>
> You misquote and label it as "superior education and intellect".
>
> Attempts at bridging the gulf between our ideas has failed horribly.
>
> You clearly have your mind made up about all issue and reality has no
> impact on your views. Since this discussion is not necessary and since you
> insist on behaving the way you do, it is best to leave politics and
> religion as others have suggested.
>
> Jeff

You will never understand the difference between e-mail and Usenet. They are
as different as night and day.

Your reality is not my reality. You are living in a liberal dream world. The
West presently affords some of us this luxury. But it is an illusion and it
will all come crashing down on your head if you live long enough. The world
is full of ravening wolves and they mean to have lambs like you for their
dinner.

The only thing that prevents the premature demise of the West are
conservatives like Bush and myself who will go to war to defend the US and
preserve Western Civilization. That is because we think the US is worth
defending and that Western Civilization is worth preserving. We do not
think the Arab civilization (such as it is) and the Muslim religion (such as
it is) is worth a tinker's damn. The sooner both are gone from the world
scene, the better.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 10 Jul 2005 01:36:37
From: Mike Rice
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

Whoever we are
Wherever we�re from
We shoulda noticed by now
Our behavior is dumb
And if our chances
Expect to improve
It�s gonna take a lot more
Than tryin� to remove
The other race
Or the other whatever
From the face
Of the planet altogether

They call it the earth
Which is a dumb kinda name
But they named it right
�cause we behave the same...
We are dumb all over
Dumb all over,
Yes we are
Dumb all over,
Near �n far
Dumb all over,
Black �n white
People, we is not wrapped tight

Nurds on the left
Nurds on the right
Religous fanatics
On the air every night
Sayin� the bible
Tells the story
Makes the details
Sound real gory
�bout what to do
If the geeks over there
Don�t believe in the book
We got over here

You can�t run a race
Without no feet
�n pretty soon
There won�t be no street
For dummies to jog on
Or doggies to dog on
Religous fanatics
Can make it be all gone
(I mean it won�t blow up
�n disappear
It�ll just look ugly
For a thousand years...)

You can�t run a country
By a book of religion
Not by a heap
Or a lump or a smidgeon
Of foolish rules
Of ancient date
Designed to make
You all feel great
While you fold, spindle
And mutilate
Those unbelievers
From a neighboring state

To arms! to arms!
Hooray! that�s great
Two legs ain�t bad
Unless there�s a crate
They ship the parts
To mama in
For souvenirs: two ears (get down!)
Not his, not hers, (but what the hey? )
The good book says:
(it gotta be that way!)
But their book says:
Revenge the crusades...
With whips �n chains
�n hand grenades...
Two arms? two arms?
Have another and another
Our God says:
There ain�t no other!
Our God says
It�s all okay!
Our God says
This is the way!

It says in the book:
Burn �n destroy...
�n repent, �n redeem
�n revenge, �n deploy
�n rumble thee forth
To the land of the unbelieving scum on the other side
�cause they don�t go for what�s in the book
�n that makes �em bad
So verily we must choppeth them up
And stompeth them down
Or rent a nice french bomb
To poof them out of existance
While leaving their real estate just where we need it
To use again
For temples in which to praise our god
(cause he can really take care of business!)

And when his humble tv servant
With humble white hair
And humble glasses
And a nice brown suit
And maybe a blond wife who takes phone calls
Tells us our God says
It�s okay to do this stuff
Then we gotta do it,
�cause if we don�t do it,
We ain�t gwine up to hebbin!
(depending on which book you�re using at the
Time...can�t use theirs... it don�t work
...it�s all lies...gotta use mine...)
Ain�t that right?
That�s what they say
Every night...
Every day...
Hey, we can�t really be dumb
If we�re just following god�s orders
Hey, let�s get serious...
God knows what he�s doin�
He wrote this book here
An� the book says:
He made us all to be just like him,
So...
If we�re dumb...
Then God is dumb...
(an� maybe even a little ugly on the side)

-'Dumb All Over', F Zappa

And if these words you do not heed
Your pocketbook just kinda might recede
When some man comes along
And claims a Godly need
He'll clean you out right to your teeth

That's right, remember there's a big difference between
Kneeling down and
Bending over

-Intro 'Heavenly Bank Accout', F Zappa

On Sat, 9 Jul 2005 19:57:21 -0400, "Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com >
wrote:

>
>"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
>news:6pWdnfdPFOGBcFLfRVn-oA@prairiewave.com...
>
>> All religions when looked at from the outside appear to be crazy. I judge
>> religions by what they have wrought in the real world, not by what they
>> imagine themselves to be (theology). The Muslims have a very poor record
>> in that regard.
><snip> (how's that Ed?)
>
>They all have a poor record. You are just choosing which history you wish to
>remember. Do crusades and inquisitions ring a bell?
>
>>
>> But I regard India as the bottomless pit of religions. It has been a
>> cesspool of failed religions for well over a thousand years. Those of you
>> who think religion is the salvation of mankind need to immerse yourself in
>> India, the Mother of all religions.
>>
>
>Frankly Ed I have no idea what you are talking about here. As a non-theist I
>don't feel that religion is the salvation of mankind. So who are you
>responding to with this last paragraph?
>
>>
>> The Soviet and the Chinese were the most serious efforts ever made to
>> create a communist (egalitarian) society. The fact that those efforts
>> failed does not mean that it was not attempted in good faith. Stop making
>> excuses for communism and other ideologies of the Left. Millions of people
>> died for communism and because of communism. All leftist ideologies
>> (including liberalism) are forever tainted because of that failure.
>>
>
>If you want to find the most serious efforts ever made to create a communist
>society then you should probably look to Cuba or Vietnam. I didn't work
>there either, however.
>
>>
>> The Soviets did precisely what you said cannot be done - they imposed
>> secularism on a very religious society. And by and large they succeeded. I
>> remember as a child we Catholics were always praying for the conversion of
>> Russia.
>>
>
>When I said you can't impose secularism I was saying that you shouldn't
>impose it. People should be free to have their religion as long as their
>religion doesn't dictate the laws that I have to live under.
>
>> By the way, I do not worship freedom. It is a fairly recent phenomenon in
>> the history of mankind. Most men in most places have always lived under
>> tyrannies and have had very little freedom, if any. Slavery is the natural
>> condition of men, not freedom. <snip>
>
>That doesn't make slavery right and freedom wrong. You would be a fool to
>think so in my opinion.
>
>> You are most awfully wrong. You cannot see your own extremism, but that is
>> characteristic of all extremists.
>>
>> Abortion is tearing this country apart because it was imposed on us by the
>> courts. It must be legislated if it is ever going to be accepted. The
>> liberals cannot win on this issue in the legislatures, and so they resort
>> to the courts.
>>
>> Abortion is an extremist view of liberalism. It only makes sense if you
>> adopt and accept the liberal ideology. From an outsiders viewpoint, it is
>> nothing short of murder. In a manner of speaking, you are no different
>> than a religious extremist such as a Muslim terrorist. You will take an
>> innocent life in the interest of some "higher" purpose.
>>
>
>Abortion is not "imposed" on anyone. If you believe that it is murder then
>don't do it. Just because Ed Dolan and some of his friends say it is murder
>doesn't make it so. Some of my friends and I say it isn't. Who's right? If
>you believe you are then don't engage in the practice yourself but you don't
>have the right make that decision for me.
>
>The only concession I'll make to the Anti-Abortion side is to say that if I
>believed it was murder I would fight it as fiercely as they do. So I at
>least have an understanding of their position. I also know that if I
>believed it was murder I wouldn't accept any other point of view because the
>notion of murder is so terrible. So it is left to the courts and the
>legislature and they have spoken.
>
>
Oops! incorrect (*wrong*) posting style.

I take it you guys have hi-jacked another thread. How far off-topic
can it go, how long can it last?

Yawn.

Though the self-titled knew enough not to confuse this forum with
e-mail.

Guess not

Mike

Date: 10 Jul 2005 13:39:56
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Mike Rice" <jodymike@gte.net > wrote in message
news:m2t0d11qiggd4h22rmb0tlpb3eubei0g6b@4ax.com...
[...]
> -Intro 'Heavenly Bank Accout', F Zappa

Way too long Mike. But who cares what some freak by the name of Zappa has to
say anyway. This is ARBR, a forum by and for intellectuals, not a songster's
playbox.
[...]

> I take it you guys have hi-jacked another thread. How far off-topic
> can it go, how long can it last?

This thread died and went to hell long ago. lt is what it is, a sort of side
bar for those who tire of reading about presta vs. schraeder valves and
other such absorbing topics of conversation,. Those topics are still here
for you however. Enjoy them if you can.

> Yawn.

My God, is Mike Rice thinking about being the replacement for Tom Sherman?

> Though the self-titled knew enough not to confuse this forum with
> e-mail.
>
> Guess not

If I were merely engaged in e-mail I would write entirely differently, but I
am engaged in a newsgroup forum which I never forget for a single moment.
Therefore, I try to say something that I think may be of interest to the
widest possible audience. Jeff Grippe and some others often think I am just
responding to what they have to say, but that is almost never the case. I
respond to what I think a universe of readers might be interested in
hearing. I am not always correct in my estimations, but still I do hit pay
dirt every now and then.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 10 Jul 2005 22:08:05
From: Mike Rice
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 13:39:56 -0500, "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net >
wrote:

>
>"Mike Rice" <jodymike@gte.net> wrote in message
>news:m2t0d11qiggd4h22rmb0tlpb3eubei0g6b@4ax.com...
>[...]
>> -Intro 'Heavenly Bank Accout', F Zappa
>
>Way too long Mike. But who cares what some freak by the name of Zappa has to
>say anyway. This is ARBR, a forum by and for intellectuals, not a songster's
>playbox.
>[...]

Looks more like Dolan's soapbox.

Quoting the entire lyric was overkill. My post would have been more
effective with a couple judicious verses.

A congressional sub-comittee cared about FZ's opinions to invite and
listen to his opinions. Frank was very much an intellectual.
>
>> I take it you guys have hi-jacked another thread. How far off-topic
>> can it go, how long can it last?
>
>This thread died and went to hell long ago. lt is what it is, a sort of side
>bar for those who tire of reading about presta vs. schraeder valves and
>other such absorbing topics of conversation,. Those topics are still here
>for you however. Enjoy them if you can.
>
> > Yawn.
>
>My God, is Mike Rice thinking about being the replacement for Tom Sherman?

Tom Sherman is irreplaceable, the only one who ever understood you and
all.
>
>> Thought the self-titled knew enough not to confuse this forum with
>> e-mail.
>>
>> Guess not
>
>If I were merely engaged in e-mail I would write entirely differently, but I
>am engaged in a newsgroup forum which I never forget for a single moment.
>Therefore, I try to say something that I think may be of interest to the
>widest possible audience. Jeff Grippe and some others often think I am just
>responding to what they have to say, but that is almost never the case. I
>respond to what I think a universe of readers might be interested in
>hearing. I am not always correct in my estimations, but still I do hit pay
>dirt every now and then.
>
>Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>
>
Are you saying that in private E-mail you wouldn't come across like a
bigoted racist jerk?

How considerate.

Mike

Date: 11 Jul 2005 00:25:01
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Mike Rice" <jodymike@gte.net > wrote in message
news:0q63d1h739ndtc02s01u7a9lhi6mr85tkh@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 13:39:56 -0500, "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Mike Rice" <jodymike@gte.net> wrote in message
>>news:m2t0d11qiggd4h22rmb0tlpb3eubei0g6b@4ax.com...
>>[...]
>>> -Intro 'Heavenly Bank Accout', F Zappa
>>
>>Way too long Mike. But who cares what some freak by the name of Zappa has
>>to
>>say anyway. This is ARBR, a forum by and for intellectuals, not a
>>songster's
>>playbox.
>>[...]
>
> Looks more like Dolan's soapbox.
>
> Quoting the entire lyric was overkill. My post would have been more
> effective with a couple judicious verses.
>
> A congressional sub-comittee cared about FZ's opinions to invite and
> listen to his opinions. Frank was very much an intellectual.

I am sure that Congress only wanted his opinion on a very limited subject at
best. I do respect the sheer ability of musicians, but I have never been
able to understand how someone so talented can prefer such abominable music.
Apparently, taste has to be cultivated and has little or nothing to do with
talent.

By the way, an intellectual musician will always prefer classical music. Did
Zappa prefer classical music?

>>> I take it you guys have hi-jacked another thread. How far off-topic
>>> can it go, how long can it last?
>>
>>This thread died and went to hell long ago. lt is what it is, a sort of
>>side
>>bar for those who tire of reading about presta vs. schraeder valves and
>>other such absorbing topics of conversation,. Those topics are still here
>>for you however. Enjoy them if you can.
>>
>> > Yawn.
>>
>>My God, is Mike Rice thinking about being the replacement for Tom Sherman?
>
> Tom Sherman is irreplaceable, the only one who ever understood you and
> all.

Yes, but he did not always play fair. I had to take him to task many times
for his lapses. I am not convinced that he ever truly understood me, but he
came as close as anyone.

>>> Thought the self-titled knew enough not to confuse this forum with
>>> e-mail.
>>>
>>> Guess not
>>
>>If I were merely engaged in e-mail I would write entirely differently, but
>>I
>>am engaged in a newsgroup forum which I never forget for a single moment.
>>Therefore, I try to say something that I think may be of interest to the
>>widest possible audience. Jeff Grippe and some others often think I am
>>just
>>responding to what they have to say, but that is almost never the case. I
>>respond to what I think a universe of readers might be interested in
>>hearing. I am not always correct in my estimations, but still I do hit pay
>>dirt every now and then.
>>
>>Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>>
>>
> Are you saying that in private E-mail you wouldn't come across like a
> bigoted racist jerk?

You need to point out where you think I am bigoted. Name calling itself
never suffices. I am able and willing to defend every position I ever take
on any subject - and at great length if that is what is required.

But Mike is a typical liberal twerp. He is not used to being disagreed with.
He is only into conventional thinking and is always PC (politically correct)
on everything under the sun. He thinks some slob by the name of Zappa was an
intellectual. Excuse me while a laugh all the way to the smallest room in my
house at which point I think I am going to throw up at the mere thought of
it. Liberals are just so much fun because they are so absurd.

Anyone but me notice the recourse to the terms racist and bigot. That is how
a PC liberal announces to the world that he is brain dead.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 05 Jul 2005 18:59:20
From: Mark Leuck
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net > wrote in message
news:3361$42cb1d40$d8441fc3$19108@FUSE.NET...
> Edward Dolan wrote:
>
> > I submit to one and all that Mr. Larry Varney is one very strange
person.
>
> And I submit that you are truly pathetic, in the most literal sense,
> and your comments further explain your behavior on this newsgroup.

Took you this long to figure that out? :)

Date: 05 Jul 2005 22:18:20
From: Larry Varney
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

k Leuck wrote:
> "Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net> wrote in message
> news:3361$42cb1d40$d8441fc3$19108@FUSE.NET...
>
>>Edward Dolan wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I submit to one and all that Mr. Larry Varney is one very strange
>
> person.
>
>> And I submit that you are truly pathetic, in the most literal sense,
>>and your comments further explain your behavior on this newsgroup.
>
>
> Took you this long to figure that out? :)
>
>

Not really - but I have tried not to get sucked into his childish,
vicious game of insults and personal attacks. I had hoped that he had
changed since I last visited this newsgroup, but he hasn't. I got
suckered into playing his game, "jerk" that I am, but hopefully it will
be the last time.

Date: 06 Jul 2005 05:35:55
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net > wrote in message
news:88570$42cb3f6d$d8442f6f$27834@FUSE.NET...
> k Leuck wrote:
>> "Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net> wrote in message
>> news:3361$42cb1d40$d8441fc3$19108@FUSE.NET...
>>
>>>Edward Dolan wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I submit to one and all that Mr. Larry Varney is one very strange
>>
>> person.
>>
>>> And I submit that you are truly pathetic, in the most literal sense,
>>>and your comments further explain your behavior on this newsgroup.
>>
>>
>> Took you this long to figure that out? :)
>>
>>
>
> Not really - but I have tried not to get sucked into his childish,
> vicious game of insults and personal attacks. I had hoped that he had
> changed since I last visited this newsgroup, but he hasn't. I got
> suckered into playing his game, "jerk" that I am, but hopefully it will be
> the last time.

Mr. Varney thinks he is a normal person and that his behavior on a group
bike tour is praiseworthy when of course I know otherwise. But I do envy him
in a way. I think he has a good time doing bike tours (for an old man) and
that is not always the case with me. I have standards which make life more
difficult. Oh, to be a happy simpleton like Varney!

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 06 Jul 2005 06:00:11
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net > wrote in message
news:88570$42cb3f6d$d8442f6f$27834@FUSE.NET...
> k Leuck wrote:
>
> Not really - but I have tried not to get sucked into his childish,
> vicious game of insults and personal attacks. I had hoped that he had
> changed since I last visited this newsgroup, but he hasn't. I got
> suckered into playing his game, "jerk" that I am, but hopefully it will be
> the last time.

It is actually quite difficult. He is expert at pushing peoples buttons and
he enjoys doing it. I was surprised that he went on the attack again after
being so consillatory. For someone who claims to wish to avoid confrontation
he does seem to get confrontational awfully fast.

As for me, I accept whatever labels he chooses to slap on me. I think that
most people will judge me by what I post here and judge him by what he
posts. I never had an objective of making him think well of me. I frankly
don't care. I had wanted him to be more civil but that doesn't appear to be
in the cards either.

Frankly I'm certain that the controversy that he generates is more amusing
to him than either "on topic" conversation or "serious" conversation.
Everything that he said could have been said without the insults but (I
suppose) that he would find that boring or dishonest or some other word that
I can't quite come up with.

Jeff

Date: 06 Jul 2005 06:22:07
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com > wrote in message
news:11cnauq807bg1ef@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net> wrote in message
> news:88570$42cb3f6d$d8442f6f$27834@FUSE.NET...
>> k Leuck wrote:
>>
>> Not really - but I have tried not to get sucked into his childish,
>> vicious game of insults and personal attacks. I had hoped that he had
>> changed since I last visited this newsgroup, but he hasn't. I got
>> suckered into playing his game, "jerk" that I am, but hopefully it will
>> be the last time.
>
> It is actually quite difficult. He is expert at pushing peoples buttons
> and he enjoys doing it. I was surprised that he went on the attack again
> after being so consillatory. For someone who claims to wish to avoid
> confrontation he does seem to get confrontational awfully fast.

"consillatory" should be conciliatory.

I have never wanted to avoid confrontation. That is the essence of what I am
all about. Hopefully, some good can come of it.

> As for me, I accept whatever labels he chooses to slap on me. I think that
> most people will judge me by what I post here and judge him by what he
> posts. I never had an objective of making him think well of me. I frankly
> don't care. I had wanted him to be more civil but that doesn't appear to
> be in the cards either.

I am not into wanting to think well of anyone or of having others think well
of me. Au contraire! I only want to stimulate thought and to have
interesting discussions.

Civility is in the mind of the beholder.

> Frankly I'm certain that the controversy that he generates is more amusing
> to him than either "on topic" conversation or "serious" conversation.
> Everything that he said could have been said without the insults but (I
> suppose) that he would find that boring or dishonest or some other word
> that I can't quite come up with.

It is my inimitable style which make others want to read me. Form (style) is
equally as important as substance. When someone comes up to me on a bike
tour and asks right off the bat what do I do, I have him pegged immediately
as a jerk. And by jerk, I do mean jerk! I have other names for such types if
you are interested.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 06 Jul 2005 20:09:19
From: Jeff Grippe
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net > wrote in message
news:_-SdnUpI9JJ5I1bfRVn-vA@prairiewave.com...

> I am not into wanting to think well of anyone or of having others think
> well of me. Au contraire! I only want to stimulate thought and to have
> interesting discussions.
>
> Civility is in the mind of the beholder.
>

Get your story straight Ed. You can't (well obviously you can but you
shouldn't) post one message containing a list of topics that you feel are
off limits for discussion, call anyone who doesn't agree an idiot (this
person who you so labeled you earlier heaped glowing praise upon), and then
write the above message.

I think it is time to have you dosages checked Ed. There seems to be a
disconnect between on version of Ed Dolan and another. There is also the Ed
Dolan who was a voracious reader but now claims reading is dead. There's Ed
who was a liberal but is now a conservative. One consistent message (other
than everyone else is an idiot) would be nice.

But I already know that you aren't interested in being nice. So we are back
to Ed Dolan's favorite topic, Ed Dolan. Well at least I'm familiar with the
territory.

Jeff

Date: 07 Jul 2005 07:00:55
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Jeff Grippe" <jgrippe@hilldun.com > wrote in message
news:11cosmtqhhvd89e@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
> news:_-SdnUpI9JJ5I1bfRVn-vA@prairiewave.com...
>
>> I am not into wanting to think well of anyone or of having others think
>> well of me. Au contraire! I only want to stimulate thought and to have
>> interesting discussions.
>>
>> Civility is in the mind of the beholder.
>>
>
> Get your story straight Ed. You can't (well obviously you can but you
> shouldn't) post one message containing a list of topics that you feel are
> off limits for discussion, call anyone who doesn't agree an idiot (this
> person who you so labeled you earlier heaped glowing praise upon), and
> then write the above message.

Every message with me is sui generis (look it up). That means anyone can
start over with me and I with them based on what is being said in the
current message. I will judge and respond to what is currently being said,
not what was said last message or last week. However, I do have a long
memory and I do reserve my options for special occasions.

When I call someone an idiot, it is an act of compassion. The world is full
of idiots. I envy them because most of them are happy idiots. The very best
thing about being an idiot is that you don't know for sure that you are one.

However, idiots do not take offense at being called idiots. That is because
at heart they suspect that is what they are. I merely confirm their
suspicions. They should be thanking me for enlightening them on their true
status - if they weren't such idiots.

> I think it is time to have you dosages checked Ed. There seems to be a
> disconnect between on version of Ed Dolan and another. There is also the
> Ed Dolan who was a voracious reader but now claims reading is dead.
> There's Ed who was a liberal but is now a conservative. One consistent
> message (other than everyone else is an idiot) would be nice.

I am a complex person and I refuse to simplify myself so that others can
label and peg me.

> But I already know that you aren't interested in being nice. So we are
> back to Ed Dolan's favorite topic, Ed Dolan. Well at least I'm familiar
> with the territory.

I bring my personality to the table in any discussion just like you do and
everyone else does. I can't help it if my personality overwhelms all the
others. That is why I am Ed Dolan the Great.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 06 Jul 2005 02:53:56
From: Mike Rice
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 22:18:20 -0400, Larry Varney <lvarney@fuse.net >
wrote:

>k Leuck wrote:
>> "Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net> wrote in message
>> news:3361$42cb1d40$d8441fc3$19108@FUSE.NET...
>>
>>>Edward Dolan wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I submit to one and all that Mr. Larry Varney is one very strange
>>
>> person.
>>
>>> And I submit that you are truly pathetic, in the most literal sense,
>>>and your comments further explain your behavior on this newsgroup.
>>
>>
>> Took you this long to figure that out? :)
>>
>>
>
> Not really - but I have tried not to get sucked into his childish,
>vicious game of insults and personal attacks. I had hoped that he had
>changed since I last visited this newsgroup, but he hasn't. I got
>suckered into playing his game, "jerk" that I am, but hopefully it will
>be the last time.

I knew this side of Ed the Grating would return. That silver lining
don't fool me. I've seen a black rainbow.

Now to take this further off topic, although I am looking forward to
your review of the Action Bent Tadpole, I'm planning on a solo trip
from Lafayette Indiana to Mammoth Cave, then west to Muhlenberg county
and back to Lafayette the the two weeks surrounding Labor Day. I'm
wondering if you might have any advice on the Kentucky routing?

MIke

Date: 06 Jul 2005 17:10:24
From: Larry Varney
Subject: Kentucky Routes

Mike Rice wrote:
<snip >
> Now to take this further off topic, although I am looking forward to
> your review of the Action Bent Tadpole, I'm planning on a solo trip
> from Lafayette Indiana to Mammoth Cave, then west to Muhlenberg county
> and back to Lafayette the the two weeks surrounding Labor Day. I'm
> wondering if you might have any advice on the Kentucky routing?
>
> MIke
>

About the only area of Kentucky that I'm at all familiar with, when
it comes to bike stuff, is in the central portion. But this website:
http://web.cn.edu/olivejr/touring/bicycle.html just might be able to help.

Date: 07 Jul 2005 01:23:44
From: Mike Rice
Subject: Re: Kentucky Routes

On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 17:10:24 -0400, Larry Varney <lvarney@fuse.net >
wrote:

>Mike Rice wrote:
><snip> I'm planning on a solo trip
>> from Lafayette Indiana to Mammoth Cave, then west to Muhlenberg county
>> and back to Lafayette the the two weeks surrounding Labor Day. I'm
>> wondering if you might have any advice on the Kentucky routing?
>>
>>Mike
>>
>
> About the only area of Kentucky that I'm at all familiar with, when
>it comes to bike stuff, is in the central portion. But this website:
>http://web.cn.edu/olivejr/touring/bicycle.html just might be able to help.

Yes I have this site bookked and will most likely follow the
advised route from the north, entering Kentucky from Cannelton (?)
Indiana. This will allow me to travel through a nice section of the
Hoosier National Forest en route southbound.

Coincidentally heading approximately 70 miles west on KY 70 upon
leaving Mamoth Cave area brings me to the paternal homestead. If the
trip to the cave goes as hoped I'll have time for this side bar.

Did I see you on a trike at the 03 Hilly?

Mike

Date: 07 Jul 2005 07:10:33
From: Larry Varney
Subject: Re: Kentucky Routes

Mike Rice wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Jul 2005 17:10:24 -0400, Larry Varney <lvarney@fuse.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Mike Rice wrote:
>><snip> I'm planning on a solo trip
>>
>>>from Lafayette Indiana to Mammoth Cave, then west to Muhlenberg county
>>>and back to Lafayette the the two weeks surrounding Labor Day. I'm
>>>wondering if you might have any advice on the Kentucky routing?
>>>
>>>Mike
>>>
>>
>> About the only area of Kentucky that I'm at all familiar with, when
>>it comes to bike stuff, is in the central portion. But this website:
>>http://web.cn.edu/olivejr/touring/bicycle.html just might be able to help.
>
>
> Yes I have this site bookked and will most likely follow the
> advised route from the north, entering Kentucky from Cannelton (?)
> Indiana. This will allow me to travel through a nice section of the
> Hoosier National Forest en route southbound.
>
> Coincidentally heading approximately 70 miles west on KY 70 upon
> leaving Mamoth Cave area brings me to the paternal homestead. If the
> trip to the cave goes as hoped I'll have time for this side bar.
>
> Did I see you on a trike at the 03 Hilly?
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
>
Probably. I have ridden every recumbent I've owned over the last
couple of decades on the Hilly Hundred, and for the last few years I've
brought a trike. When the going gets steep and/or I want to take
pictures while riding, three wheels are the only way to go!

Date: 07 Jul 2005 03:36:16
From: Mike Rice
Subject: Re: Kentucky Routes

On Thu, 07 Jul 2005 01:23:44 GMT, Mike Rice <jodymike@gte.net > wrote:

<snip >
>> this website:
>>http://web.cn.edu/olivejr/touring/bicycle.html just might be able to help.
>
>Yes I have this site bookked and will most likely follow the
>advised route from the north

the northern section of the mamoth cave tour on this site

>entering Kentucky from Cannelton (?)
>Indiana. This will allow me to travel through a nice section of the
>Hoosier National Forest en route southbound.
>

Date: 06 Jul 2005 05:55:22
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Mike Rice" <jodymike@gte.net > wrote in message
news:1jhmc15vqlio9b8sk5c958ongsqk98j0ep@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 05 Jul 2005 22:18:20 -0400, Larry Varney <lvarney@fuse.net>
> wrote:
>
>>k Leuck wrote:
>>> "Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net> wrote in message
>>> news:3361$42cb1d40$d8441fc3$19108@FUSE.NET...
>>>
>>>>Edward Dolan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I submit to one and all that Mr. Larry Varney is one very strange
>>>
>>> person.
>>>
>>>> And I submit that you are truly pathetic, in the most literal sense,
>>>>and your comments further explain your behavior on this newsgroup.
>>>
>>>
>>> Took you this long to figure that out? :)
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Not really - but I have tried not to get sucked into his childish,
>>vicious game of insults and personal attacks. I had hoped that he had
>>changed since I last visited this newsgroup, but he hasn't. I got
>>suckered into playing his game, "jerk" that I am, but hopefully it will
>>be the last time.
>
> I knew this side of Ed the Grating would return. That silver lining
> don't fool me. I've seen a black rainbow.
[...]

One of the delights of taking on a character like Larry Varney is that he
thinks he is such a sensible person. I give him a different perspective on
himself by way of contrast. His reactions are very funny but also very
predictable.

We all need to step our of our everyday normality and try to see things from
a different point of view. I provide that different point of view here on
ARBR at no charge. It is a freebie which I bestow on the group out of the
kindness of my heart. That is why many refer to me locally as Saint Edward.

It is easy (and boring) to say the predictable. It is not so easy to say the
unpredictable (and exciting), even at the risk of offending some overly
sensitive souls. We can always depend on Varney to do the former and you can
always depend on Ed Dolan the Great to do the latter.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 03 Jul 2005 03:32:09
From: Mike Rice
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

On Sat, 2 Jul 2005 20:38:35 -0400, "Jeff Grippe" <jeff@door7 > wrote:

>
>"Edward Dolan" <edolan@iw.net> wrote in message
>news:z_udnUjadZ1L4FvfRVn-uQ@prairiewave.com...
>>
>>
>> Larry Varney is one of the ARBR old timers who used to be a regular poster
>> to ARBR. Frankly I miss him. I feel a bit guilty as I treated him rather
>> badly when he was last here, but I have resolved to be a better man and
>> not go berserk all the time just because I don't see eye to eye with my
>> adversary.
>>
>
>I like this Ed Dolan. The truth be told, however, I liked the other one too.
>Just for you Ed, a message post the way you like it. Keep those wheels
>turning!
>
>Jeff
>

I'm also glad to see Ed the self titled appearing to mellow somewhat.
I have no fear but that the crust is no very far beneath the surface,
alert & ready to instruct and or insult ad naseum any percieved idiots
(or *wrong* posters).

Truly Ed, this group is a more enjoyable spot when your rants seem
reasoned & dignified. Thanks for playing nice.

Getting to the topic, sorry I haven't personally ridden an Actionbent
(or any, for that matter) trike.

Mike

Date: 03 Jul 2005 06:37:24
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Mike Rice" <jodymike@gte.net > wrote in message
news:olmec19iad1qeu0m95m7sgjdla1j8c3nve@4ax.com...
[...]
> I'm also glad to see Ed the self titled appearing to mellow somewhat.
> I have no fear but that the crust is no very far beneath the surface,
> alert & ready to instruct and or insult ad naseum any percieved idiots
> (or *wrong* posters).
>
> Truly Ed, this group is a more enjoyable spot when your rants seem
> reasoned & dignified. Thanks for playing nice.

Mike, this group is not what it used to be. Most of the old timers have left
and we need a few old timers around to give some perspective on the group.
That is why I hope Larry Varney will stick around a bit although I know he
is busy on BROL.

I am more a gadfly than anything else and I cannot be an anchor for the
group. Tom Sherman did a very excellent job of fulfilling that function, but
I fear he has now left us for good.

I had nothing to do with destroying this group. I merely got rid of the
nauseous liberal posting and some of the deadwood. It was a criminal vandal
troll who destroyed the group with the acquiescence of the old timers who
did nothing to prevent the outrage.

I don't blame others for leaving the group. I left myself for several months
because I was so disgusted with the prevailing cowardice. A newsgroup must
be defended when it comes under attack. The regular members, including the
old timers, did nothing and let the group be destroyed.

I am hanging around for a while longer to see if the group can ever recover.
I am not overly optimistic, but if a few of the old timers come back I think
the group could revive.

My mission is to defend this group against those who would destroy it, but I
depend on others to rally around the flag when the occasion calls for it,
not to take to the tall grass and perform a disappearing act.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 02 Jul 2005 09:14:08
From: Larry Varney
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net> wrote in message
> news:88180$42c5f9b9$d844239e$1618@FUSE.NET...
> [...]
>
>> I am currently reviewing the Action Bent tadpole for BentRider Online.
>>I haven't quite finished yet - I do like to be thorough with these
>>reviews; I rode the WizWheelz Edge on a weekend tour (Horsey Hundred) then
>>followed it up with the week-long GITAP - but at this point I can say that
>>I have been favorably impressed with the AB trike.
>> Brake steer? It doesn't have any. The seat angle isn't as adjustable as
>>I would like - but then, many trikes don't have an adjustable recline at
>>all.
>> Anyway, look for me to complete this review in another week or two. I
>>expected to cut this little trike some slack simply because it's so
>>relatively inexpensive, but it looks like it can stand on its own three
>>wheels with no condescending help at all!
>
>
> Larry Varney is one of the ARBR old timers who used to be a regular poster
> to ARBR. Frankly I miss him. I feel a bit guilty as I treated him rather
> badly when he was last here, but I have resolved to be a better man and not
> go berserk all the time just because I don't see eye to eye with my
> adversary.
>
> Larry is a good reviewer of bikes and trikes and most important he is a fair
> reviewer. I hope he will grace us here with his presence once again as he
> always had interesting points of view on everything. Furthermore, he knows
> how to write and how to post, no small matters considering some of the other
> characters this group is presently afflicted with.
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>
>
>

What's next, a pat on the back from Johnny NoCom? <grin > But
seriously, I do try to be fair in my reviews, and recognize when
something isn't necessarily bad, just not what I like. Or, if I like it,
it doesn't mean that everyone will. I have friends who cannot bear a
recline of more than 50 degrees, while I don't feel the need for a neck
rest until it passes 30. And then there's underseat vs. overseat
steering - I've got my preference, but that doesn't mean the opposite is
necessarily bad - just wrong! (Only kidding...) Objectivity is
difficult, but recognizing subjectivity is sometimes the best we can
hope for.
A partial excuse for my absence from this list is that I've been away
on business and other things. Bike Florida and the Florida Bicycle
Safari earlier this year, and lately I've been off to Georgetown (KY)
for the Horsey Hundred, Illinois for GITAP, and Wisconsin for Bike
Northwoods. Next month will be the BentRider Online Rally in the Finger
Lakes region of New York, of course, and September will be the Old
Kentucky Home Tour and the September TRIRI (IN). There are other rides
as well (Hope Ride and Hilly Hundred in Indiana, Horrible Hundred in
Florida), but when I start thinking about those latter ones, I get
depressed - they mean the warm weather is disappearing from my part of
the country once more.
Incidentally, if any of you are in the ket for a great trike, I
have a friend who's wanting to sell his red 2004 Catrike Road - not many
of that color were made. I rode it on the Bike Northwoods tour, and can
vouch for it completely. He's asking $1650; located in southwest Ohio.

Date: 21 Jul 2005 21:27:37
From: Bill
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

Larry Varney <lvarney@fuse.net > wrote in news:42C69320.5040406@fuse.net:

> Edward Dolan wrote:
>> "Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net> wrote in message
>> news:88180$42c5f9b9$d844239e$1618@FUSE.NET...
>> [...]
>>
>>> I am currently reviewing the Action Bent tadpole for BentRider
>>> Online.

What about the rear dropouts? I read somewhere that (judging only by a
picture) there was soem concern on the design in that area regarding
strength. Can you comment?

Bill Raley
West Lafayette IN.
Go Purdue

Date: 03 Jul 2005 05:50:56
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net > wrote in message
news:42C69320.5040406@fuse.net...
[...]
> A partial excuse for my absence from this list is that I've been away on
> business and other things. Bike Florida and the Florida Bicycle Safari
> earlier this year, and lately I've been off to Georgetown (KY) for the
> Horsey Hundred, Illinois for GITAP, and Wisconsin for Bike Northwoods.
> Next month will be the BentRider Online Rally in the Finger Lakes region
> of New York, of course, and September will be the Old Kentucky Home Tour
> and the September TRIRI (IN). There are other rides as well (Hope Ride and
> Hilly Hundred in Indiana, Horrible Hundred in Florida), but when I start
> thinking about those latter ones, I get depressed - they mean the warm
> weather is disappearing from my part of the country once more.
[...]

Speaking of depression ...

We need to know if Larry Varney is an iron man or what? How is it possible
to do so many bike tours, one right after the other. I did that once one
summer and I just barely survived. I know that Varney is no spring chicken.
He has a great white beard and appears to be quite old.

Is Varney on any medications? Every day as I arise (I try to get up before
noon) my heart sinks at all the medications I must take in order to go on
living. I have given up on week long bike tours. They were a lot of fun at
one time, but a lot of work too.

I have now grown tired and lazy and am content to cruise around town every
day for an hour or so. That is as good as life gets for me. When I get
depressed about it, I visit the local nursing homes and see what the future
has in store for me. If it weren't for my blood pressure I would take up
drinking (I like wine), but that has the effect of sending my blood pressure
soaring to high heaven. Failing all else, I post to ARBR which seems to
relieve some of the depression, at least momentarily.

What I like best about ARBR is that most of us are older guys and are wise
enough to know our final destination - food for worms, as Zorba the Greek
would put it.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 03 Jul 2005 16:28:52
From: Larry Varney
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net> wrote in message
> news:42C69320.5040406@fuse.net...
> [...]
>
>> A partial excuse for my absence from this list is that I've been away on
>>business and other things. Bike Florida and the Florida Bicycle Safari
>>earlier this year, and lately I've been off to Georgetown (KY) for the
>>Horsey Hundred, Illinois for GITAP, and Wisconsin for Bike Northwoods.
>>Next month will be the BentRider Online Rally in the Finger Lakes region
>>of New York, of course, and September will be the Old Kentucky Home Tour
>>and the September TRIRI (IN). There are other rides as well (Hope Ride and
>>Hilly Hundred in Indiana, Horrible Hundred in Florida), but when I start
>>thinking about those latter ones, I get depressed - they mean the warm
>>weather is disappearing from my part of the country once more.
>
> [...]
>
> Speaking of depression ...
>
> We need to know if Larry Varney is an iron man or what? How is it possible
> to do so many bike tours, one right after the other. I did that once one
> summer and I just barely survived. I know that Varney is no spring chicken.
> He has a great white beard and appears to be quite old.
>
> Is Varney on any medications? Every day as I arise (I try to get up before
> noon) my heart sinks at all the medications I must take in order to go on
> living. I have given up on week long bike tours. They were a lot of fun at
> one time, but a lot of work too.
>
> I have now grown tired and lazy and am content to cruise around town every
> day for an hour or so. That is as good as life gets for me. When I get
> depressed about it, I visit the local nursing homes and see what the future
> has in store for me. If it weren't for my blood pressure I would take up
> drinking (I like wine), but that has the effect of sending my blood pressure
> soaring to high heaven. Failing all else, I post to ARBR which seems to
> relieve some of the depression, at least momentarily.
>
> What I like best about ARBR is that most of us are older guys and are wise
> enough to know our final destination - food for worms, as Zorba the Greek
> would put it.
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>
>

Me, an iron man? Nah, that was some guy named Joe, from a long time
ago, with an Italian-sounding last name.
What I do is ride within my capabilities, with just the occasional
attack of "performance" riding. I'm a tourist, and I ride at a pace that
lets me see what's around me, that lets me feel just fine with the idea
of stopping and taking pictures (nearly a thousand on the two tours,
GITAP and Bike Northwoods), and I'm never concerned about being the
first one to reach the day's destination.
GITAP (Grand Illinois Trail And Parks) and Bike Northwoods (lots of
Minnesotans crossed into Wiscconsin for this tour) are not difficcult.
What hills are encountered are seldom tough enough to even consider
walking, though some with flatland cogsets did just that. For the last
three years I have ridden GITAP and then backed it up with a second week
of touring; first two years were the June TRIRI (Touring Ride In Rural
Indiana), but this year I decided to go with Bike Northwoods, a new tour
for me. Since I'm riding the September TRIRI, I didn't feel like I was
deserting any old friends!
And if money (and vacation time) were not a problem, I'd like to ride
these two tours, and then follow it with GRABAAWR, but my job (and wife)
would probably object!

Date: 04 Jul 2005 04:27:16
From: Edward Dolan
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

"Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net > wrote in message
news:c2806$42c84a86$d844275f$3338@FUSE.NET...
[...]
> Me, an iron man? Nah, that was some guy named Joe, from a long time ago,
> with an Italian-sounding last name.
> What I do is ride within my capabilities, with just the occasional
> attack of "performance" riding. I'm a tourist, and I ride at a pace that
> lets me see what's around me, that lets me feel just fine with the idea of
> stopping and taking pictures (nearly a thousand on the two tours, GITAP
> and Bike Northwoods), and I'm never concerned about being the first one to
> reach the day's destination.

You and I ride the same way Larry. In fact, I am usually the last one in at
camp at the end of the day. That is because I can't get up early. Most of
the time I do not get under way until 9 AM and so I get to the end
destination well after 7 PM most days. The advantage of my way is that I
ride alone 90% of the time. The disadvantage is that all the rest stops are
shut down by the time I arrive and so I have to carry my own supplies. Of
course, I could just get up early like everyone else, but then that would
not be ME.

> GITAP (Grand Illinois Trail And Parks) and Bike Northwoods (lots of
> Minnesotans crossed into Wiscconsin for this tour) are not difficcult.
> What hills are encountered are seldom tough enough to even consider
> walking, though some with flatland cogsets did just that. For the last
> three years I have ridden GITAP and then backed it up with a second week
> of touring; first two years were the June TRIRI (Touring Ride In Rural
> Indiana), but this year I decided to go with Bike Northwoods, a new tour
> for me. Since I'm riding the September TRIRI, I didn't feel like I was
> deserting any old friends!

Did you see the estimable and the redoubtable Mr. Tom Sherman on the
Illinois ride? I wonder if he is OK as he has not been around at all lately.

> And if money (and vacation time) were not a problem, I'd like to ride
> these two tours, and then follow it with GRABAAWR, but my job (and wife)
> would probably object!

GRABAAWR is my favorite ride and I have done it many times. That ride will
average 70 miles a day which gets to be a bit much, but that Wisconsin
scenery can't be beat.

Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota

Date: 04 Jul 2005 13:46:56
From: Larry Varney
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

Edward Dolan wrote:
> "Larry Varney" <lvarney@fuse.net> wrote in message
> news:c2806$42c84a86$d844275f$3338@FUSE.NET...
> [...]
>
>> Me, an iron man? Nah, that was some guy named Joe, from a long time ago,
>>with an Italian-sounding last name.
>> What I do is ride within my capabilities, with just the occasional
>>attack of "performance" riding. I'm a tourist, and I ride at a pace that
>>lets me see what's around me, that lets me feel just fine with the idea of
>>stopping and taking pictures (nearly a thousand on the two tours, GITAP
>>and Bike Northwoods), and I'm never concerned about being the first one to
>>reach the day's destination.
>
>
> You and I ride the same way Larry. In fact, I am usually the last one in at
> camp at the end of the day. That is because I can't get up early. Most of
> the time I do not get under way until 9 AM and so I get to the end
> destination well after 7 PM most days. The advantage of my way is that I
> ride alone 90% of the time. The disadvantage is that all the rest stops are
> shut down by the time I arrive and so I have to carry my own supplies. Of
> course, I could just get up early like everyone else, but then that would
> not be ME.
>
>
>> GITAP (Grand Illinois Trail And Parks) and Bike Northwoods (lots of
>>Minnesotans crossed into Wiscconsin for this tour) are not difficcult.
>>What hills are encountered are seldom tough enough to even consider
>>walking, though some with flatland cogsets did just that. For the last
>>three years I have ridden GITAP and then backed it up with a second week
>>of touring; first two years were the June TRIRI (Touring Ride In Rural
>>Indiana), but this year I decided to go with Bike Northwoods, a new tour
>>for me. Since I'm riding the September TRIRI, I didn't feel like I was
>>deserting any old friends!
>
>
> Did you see the estimable and the redoubtable Mr. Tom Sherman on the
> Illinois ride? I wonder if he is OK as he has not been around at all lately.
>
>
>> And if money (and vacation time) were not a problem, I'd like to ride
>>these two tours, and then follow it with GRABAAWR, but my job (and wife)
>>would probably object!
>
>
> GRABAAWR is my favorite ride and I have done it many times. That ride will
> average 70 miles a day which gets to be a bit much, but that Wisconsin
> scenery can't be beat.
>
> Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota
>
>
>
>

I'm not as much as an early-riser as some of the people on these
tours - you can hear the sounds of tents being packed up, and it's still
dark! But I'm usually up and away by 7. And I've found that my average
speed, when stops for food and pictures are included, is around 10 mph,
so even on the longer days I'm in camp early enough to take a shower
before dinner.
I have ridden GRABAAWR just once, and I may do it again sometime. But
there's just so many rides to do, and some that I just can't bear to
think of skipping - GITAP is one of those, and Bike Northwoods just
might turn into one - that I'm not sure if I'll be able to fit GRABAAWR
into my schedule again or not.
As for riding alone, that's usually the way I ride. I like the
freedom of stopping when I want, taking as many pictures as I want, etc.
I don't mind riding in the proximity of other people (no pace lines,
though), but not as a "unit". I don't want others to wait for me, nor do
I want to miss a good shot because I didn't want to slow anyone down.
I have yet to meet Tom Sherman.

Date: 30 Jun 2005 16:59:41
From: Mark Leuck
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

Date: 01 Jul 2005 10:41:59
From: Greg Nuspel
Subject: Re: Action Bent Tadpole Trike: Has anybody ridden one?

One concern is that the linkage looks all straight so it is not an
Ackerman steering setup.

k Leuck wrote:

>>
>>...I don't know... the steering mechanism looks kinda lame.
>
>
> How so?
>
>

--
Greg Nuspel

The use of solar energy has not been opened up because the oil industry
does not own the sun. ~Ralph Nader, quoted in Linda Botts, ed., Loose
Talk, 1980