Thursday, July 8, 2010

NASA's new mission: "Feel-good" outreach to Islam.

Hi friends,

My last post was full of video. Because I didn't want to overload the post w/ more, I didn't provide any BHO/NASA=Muslim "feel-good" outreach linkage.

But since my friend Expat Matt was curious & asked for it, here goes:


And Dr. Krauthammer's point of view on the matter:


"...a new height in fatuousness [foolishness/silliness]...this is the worst combination of group therapy psychobabble, imperial condescension & adolescent diplomacy...absolutely unbelievable."

Dr. Krauthammer, well said. Indeed.

~~~

48 comments:

ExPatMatt said...

Ok.

First of all, thanks for the video, I didn't know anything about this.

The Muslim world does have a historic legacy of fine contributions to science, math and engineering. So much so that it makes their current situation look even more like a return to the dark ages.

I can't think of a good reason why the US shouldn't be trying to encourage global collaboration within the fields of science and engineering. Typically, science is one of those borderless things where people do share data with colleagues from around the globe without much concern for their political or religious beliefs. This is a good thing.

If this guy can generate some enthusiasm for science in the Muslim world (I'm not convinced that there isn't enthusiasm for science in the Muslim world), then that can only lead to greater collaboration and sharing of information between people. This is a good thing.

Seriously, what is the problem with this? NASA have administrators that work closely with colleagues in Europe and the far east, it's only natural that they'd have one for the Middle East as well. This is like complaining that US sports teams are trying to play friendly matches with Muslim teams in an effort to use the power of sport to bring people together. Science has a similar ability; why not use it?

This is one part of one guy's mandate to educate and enthuse people about science - it's not a new direction for NASA as an organization.

I am annoyed at the funding cut that NASA were subject too though. Seriously guys, I want to see a man on Mars in my lifetime - get on with it!

Susannah said...

Matt~ Of course the 'Muslim world' has a historic legacy of ctr'butions to science, etc...can we say Egyptian pyramids?!? That's NOT the point. As Dr. Krauthammer said, "NASA was created to get America into space & keep us there."

And sorry, but you're wrong when you say, "it's not a new direction for NASA as an organization." Because it is. Each article I've read includes, either in the title or in the body, the precise words "new Mission."

Oh, and as for the cuts you're talking about, at least one of these articles itemizes some. They also explain that the U.S. is essentially abdicating leadership in space exploration.

So much for your dream of a Mars Mission. Playing Kindergarten teacher (a la Dr. K's reference to 'group therapy'/'imperial condescension') will NOT enable your, or NASA's, dream to come to its fruition.

And as for why you may have "missed" this in the news?? Here's why!

Cheers, back atcha~

ExPatMatt said...

Susannah,

I'm not sure that the ancient Egyptians were Muslims... :)

"That's NOT the point. As Dr. Krauthammer said, "NASA was created to get America into space & keep us there."

Yes, it was created in the 50s with that intent. As of 2006 its stated mission is to;

"pioneer the future in space exploration, scientific discovery and aeronautics research."

and they will continue to do that (as long as the funding is there - I'm pretty sure the funding was cut because a lot of people didn't see the benefits of spending all that money on Moon missions. I disagree with them, but I can certainly see their point).

Science is a a global thing nowadays though and you need to have good relations with other countries that are putting satellites up into space for very obvious reasons.

"And sorry, but you're wrong when you say, "it's not a new direction for NASA as an organization." Because it is. Each article I've read includes, either in the title or in the body, the precise words "new Mission."

Just because news articles use it as a title, doesn't mean that it actually reflects the reality, does it? I don't see any links/quotes to top NASA officials saying that they have a new direction or a new mission. Do you?

As I said initially, these news stories are taking small part of one man's job and spinning it to look like it's the entire organization's mission statement. It's ridiculous.

NASA are as much about R&D as they are about actual space flights. Research is collaborative.

As much as I'd like to see the US continue to pioneer space exploration, it's just not feasible for them to do it on their own with the way the world is at the moment. We are going to need collaboration with Russia, the EU, Japan, China and others in order to make a significant leap into space. In fact, it should be a multi-national effort and if this guy can help to encourage others to pick up the pace and get onboard, then more power to him.

Of course, Richard Branson will probably get to Mars first....

Susannah said...

Matt~ Nice lecture, thanks.

1st - Ancient Egypt was clearly NOT Muslim, but was the 1st ex. popping into this rather small noodle. It stands to reason that present-day Egyptians take some measure of pride & connection with their ancestors, no? Red herring. Not the point.

2nd - NASA's mission: "pioneer the future in space exploration, scientific discovery and aeronautics research." (lovely research, thanks)

Yes, science has ALWAYS been a global thing, sir, but any movement FORWARD in the human condition requires leadership - a concept so desperately lacking in today's world - ALL OVER the world.

You're missing the point, still. And your lecture is spoken like a true non-American (or left wing liberal 'progressive'), who doesn't understand the concept of American Exceptionalism.

While sci./tech may be a global info-sharing coalescence, we Americans fancy ourselves leaders, innovators, PIONEERS in that regard. If the rest of the world wants to ride the tail wind, that's fine. But we have never considered it our obligation to stop, turn around, go backward & shuffle someone along - someone whose self-imposed, narcissistic religious zealotry has bound them to centuries-past.

See, then, there are NO PIONEERS, no innovators. Then, no one has VISION & passion to "go where no man has gone before." We all just end up "feeling good" about where we used to be.

Matt, we disagree. I believe in American Exceptionalism, & will not apologize for it. Quite unfortunately, I have a president who does not and HAS . And it is hurting my country. THAT's the problem.

Maybe you get that, maybe not. If not, we'll have to agree to disagree.

ExPatMatt said...

Not intended to be a lecture, my friend, just some thoughts as they came to me.

My first comment was a joke, not a red herring, surely you can tell when I'm kidding around by now?

The rest of our disagreement, as you astutely noted, seems to be that you want to see the US leading the way and blazing trails into the great black yonder - a damn fine aspiration, if I may say so - whereas I don't really mind which nation is 'winning' as long as there's progress being made and the technological benefits are available to all who contributed. (pretty much sums up the capitalist/socialist divide, eh?!)

What I'm saying is that this guys mandate of outreach is only a small part of one man's job at NASA. NASA itself is still NASA and it will continue to do what it has always done; lead the way in science research (funding notwithstanding).

I would take issue with your claim that there are no pioneers anymore. A quick snoop around the New Scientist website will give you all kinds of links to amazing new discoveries and research being innovated all over the place; not least the work being done at CERN which is awe-inspiring.

Cheers,

Susannah said...

Matt~ I knew you were kidding; 'red herring' popped into my head, was not intended as an afront to your comment - sorry.
The rest of it felt pretty 'lecture-ish,' though.

"that you want to see the US leading the way and blazing trails"
Certainly. It's what we've always done - not in every regard, of course - but certainly NASA. When we've had Presidents who know who they are - leaders of OUR nation, not who consider themselves "a citizen of the world." *Sheesh*

Pioneers abound, I'm sure. With this, though, I fear NASA will be on her way out of the leadership role. And who will lead? Hmmm?

My statement was an "If/Then" rhetorical notion. If NASA "stops, turns around...blah, blah" then there are no pioneers.

As for the Capitalist/Socialist divide? Ah, you can bet which side I'm on; & I know it's not perfect. We're humans, after all. Socialism does nothing but rise everyone to mediocrity, if that; stifles all good things that come from incentivizing ingenuity, etc., etc.
But that's a discussion for another day.

I've read about CERN in some fiction. Maybe Michael Crichton?Dan Brown (Angels & Demons)?

All the best~

tha malcontent said...

If this don't make these bleeding heart Liberal's change their minds about their supporting Obama and his GANG, then I think they don't have any chance of waking up to reality. It's time to start a movement to get rid of this Cancer . Start by acknowledging that electing this Marxist dictator in the White House was a big mistake, and lets get rid of him.
And Shabazz. I suggest you bring something more than a nightstick the next time that you attempt to intimidate a voter at the polling booths. Because your going to need more than your evil eye and a nightstick.

Jim said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Susannah said...

Mal~
Thanks for coming by~
As your post said, I think we may finally be waking up as a nation...We'll see.

Jim~ Offensive, nasty comment directed @ me, trying to 'put words in my mouth.' And UGLY ones at that. Not gonna have it.

Susannah said...

Or isn't that what the Left typically does when they get on the wrong side of an argument...start saying offensive things, attacking their opponent personally?

Yeah, I thought so.

DUTA said...

WAake up America1 You've got a muslim president with access to the button of the nuclear power. Nothing matters anymore ( not even Nasa - Shmasa).

Jim said...

Or isn't that what the Left typically does when they get on the wrong side of an argument...start saying offensive things, attacking their opponent personally?

Or isn't that what the right typically does when they get on the wrong side of an argument...ACCUSING their opponents of saying offensive things and attacking their opponent personally?

Because I did not say anything offensive unless "s@#t" (my term) is somehow more offensive than "c@#p" (your term) which you "directed" at me when you had no answer for the explicit evidence I produced to refute your agrument.

I merely paraphrased "American Exceptionalism" into bumper sticker language, neither attacking you nor using language anymore offensive than your own.

It's your blog. You are allowed to be holier than thou.

ExPatMatt said...

Susannah,

All fair enough.

The work being done at CERN is fantastic in its own right but, more importantly, is the phenomenal level of collaboration in bringing it to fruition.

The particle accelerator has a circumference of around 26km and can fire protons around that ring over 11,000 times a second at 99.99% the speed of light. It's amazing and it took input from EU countries, Japan, India and the US for it to work.

I call that a win.


The malcontent,

"If this don't make these bleeding heart Liberal's change their minds about their supporting Obama and his GANG, then I think they don't have any chance of waking up to reality."

What SPECIFICALLY about 'this' do you think should make 'bleeding heart Liberal's change their minds'? I'm honestly interested to hear your thoughts on this.

DUTA,

Obama's not a Muslim and I'm still waiting to hear back about your comment regarding his African origins.

Cheers,

Susannah said...

DUTA! Welcome back! (Did you see my flower pics a few posts down?)

Ahem. Yes, my dear; you've spoken an apparent truth. While Mr. Obama says he is not a Muslim, his actions, affinities & apparent proclivities belie his trust. He ditched the National Day of Prayer, dismissing one of the finest, strongest Christian leaders in our nation (Franklin Graham). All the while, siding w/ Muslim jihadists who wish death to Israel. Yeah, fine example of the leader of a prodominantly Christian nation - whp calls himself a Christian too...

Things that make you go..."hmmmm." And yes, we're waking...slowly but surely. Thanks for the encouragement.

Jim~ blah, blah, blah...nyah, nyah whatever...

Your "bumper sticker" speak was sophomoric, adolescent, foul-image bathroom humor. It's nasty. Further, it doesn't work. Your implication has nothing whatever to do w/ American Exceptionalism.

Keep it up, though. You're doing a good job w/ the nyah, nyah, nyah stuff today..

And yes, Jim-dear, it is my blog. (Funny, I've only deleted 1-2 comments in the entire life of MY blog...I think both of them have been yours...)

Susannah said...

Matt~ Your description of CERN is SO familiar to me...I think Dan Brown used it in Angels & Demons. Have you read it? Fascinating.

I can't answer for Mal, but I'll repeat: "I believe in American Exceptionalism, & will not apologize for it. Quite unfortunately, I have a president who does not [believe in it] and HAS [apologized]. And it is hurting my country. THAT's the problem."

"Obama's not a Muslim..."
You're sure of this? Because I'm certainly not. He can say what he wants, he was raised in Muslim schools, had Muslim father(s). This man is no friend of Israel or freedom-loving Christians. Call me crazy...if you want...

Jim said...

That would be piling on. :-)

Chicago Ray said...

Nasa's new logo to reflect the Sweet little Muslime outreach here

tha malcontent said...

Now why on earth would the President of the United States want to sent the head of NASA, to be interviewed by Al Jazeera? Do we now want to sent the first Muzzie to the moon? If we do, then I suggest that we leave him there! And possibly take Obama with him!

Susannah said...

C'Ray~ So glad to see you here! I stopped over & took a look @ your 'logo'; what a scream! I also found some excellent links to all kinds of interesting stuff from your blog. Keep up the good work! And come back by here any time!

Mal~ EXCELLENT question! Why, oh why is that?? Why would the head of NASA ever have a need to give an interview to Al Jazeera? Curious indeed...

ExPatMatt said...

Why wouldn't he give an interview to Al Jazeera? They're one of the biggest news organizations in that part of the world and if the reason he was there was to reach out and encourage people in the Muslim world to renew their legacy of scientific achievements, then it makes perfect sense for him to do this interview and reach as many people as possible.

Still not seeing the problem with this.

Tha Malcontent,

Any chance of a response?


The malcontent,

"If this don't make these bleeding heart Liberal's change their minds about their supporting Obama and his GANG, then I think they don't have any chance of waking up to reality."

What SPECIFICALLY about 'this' do you think should make 'bleeding heart Liberal's change their minds'? I'm honestly interested to hear your thoughts on this.

Cheers,

Susannah said...

Matt~ You've got a girlfriend/wife, to whom you've committed your heart/soul & who has promised to do the same.

She's stepping out on you. You've seen signs of it: strange phone #'s on her phone, hangups & secretive glances. She wants you to know - eventually - but thinks if she slips it out there through her friend Veronica, that maybe - just maybe - you won't notice...& when you do, it'll be too late to undo the damage.

Veronica stands up @ the big Fourth of July party, takes the mic. & tells everybody about Steve (the new squeeze). You're hearing it for the first time, & everybody knows it.

THAT's how you find out you've been jilted, your wife's loyalty is worthless, you were right all along about the infidelity...

"But why wouldn't I tell Veronica?" she whines. "I've been courting her friendship for months. It was my change to get close..."

Sure. Ok. You're not gonna be pi$$&^ off at the disloyalty, the secretive, back-handed, passive-aggressive communication?? But 99% of the rest of the world's male population would.

tha malcontent said...

ExPatMatt said...
Still not seeing the problem with this. Mal.
Why wouldn't he give an interview to Al Jazeera? They're one of the biggest news organizations in that part of the world

Houston, we have a problem!
Interesting. You see nothing at all wrong with this? You assume that anyone who sees something wrong with this as "stupid republicans"? What could possibly be gained in SPACE by "reaching out" to Muslims?

If that being the case, why not give an interview with Fox News?
I would want him to do an interview like that with an American journalist.
If you recall, Obama chose to give his first interview, after being elected President of the United states, on an Arabic T.V. station.

ExPatMatt said...

tha malcontent,

When you put quotation marks around something; "like this" it normally signifies that you are quoting someone.

Putting "stupid republicans" in quotation marks, as you did in your reply to me, could be seen to imply that I either said this or inferred it when I did neither.

I would respectfully ask that you try to avoid such potential misunderstandings in the future; I don't like having words put into my mouth.

Thanks.

(and you still haven't answered my question which I have posted twice now)

Hayden said...

What the heck does NASA have to do with Moslems feeling good about themselves? This makes me sick.

tha malcontent said...

Ya know, I've been kicking around a few Ideas.. does this mean we'll need to redesign spacesuits to accommodate turbans?
I'm just trying to be somewhat politically correct for the sake of our unhinged leftards.

Quasar said...

Hypothetical question: a large segment of the global community... let's say buddhists... have lapsed into extremism. They have forgone progress in favor of strict, restrictive religous policies. The saffron wearing monks are at war with the heretical non-saffron wearing monks. The buddhists that adhere to tolerance of all religous views are hunting down and killing those who don't tolerate people who think anime ninjitsu bears any resemblance to real ninjitsu.

Any progress towards civilisation is stifled at every opportunity by the buddhist extremists in power. They institute draconian religous laws and enforce them with violence. They demonise other civilisations, making their citizens think that the western devils want nothing more than to kill them and eradicate what little hope they have left?

They don't like America, either.

How do you instigate change, to improve their lot?

Do you declare war and kill their leaders, topple their government, and then leave the still-brainwashed populous, now even more convinced of how evil you are, push another extremist to the top?

Do you lock them out of your country and pretend the whole situation isn't an affront to basic human decency, and hope it'll go away if you ignore it?

Or do you show them, by working with those of them who are willing to do so, by allowing them to contribute to global concerns, giving them a national pride that isn't born of fear and hatred, and above all allowing them to see that your civilisation is not what their leaders keep telling them it is, that there is a better way to live?

Susannah said...

Hayden~ Welcome. While Matt & Mal get their differences sorted, I'll say thanks for stopping by. Oh, & I've had the same question as you.

Hey Quasar~ Welcome.

How about directing your scenario & questions to "Veronica?"

Quasar said...

Thanks for the welcome Susannah.

My normal technique when confronted with analogies I disagree with is to correct them, to show what it would take to turn them into an true analogy of whatever was being analogised. The problem I have in this circumstance is that I simply don't understand the veronica analogy. It makes no sense.

Okay, the wife reflects Obama, the cheating represents the (blatently rediculous) idea that he's a muslim (seriously, I give credence to the idea that he might be a deist or agnostic rather than a christian, but a muslim?) and that the cheated husband is the American people. But who is Veronica meant to represent? Is Steve the international islamic community? And what does the wife defending telling Veronica about it have anything to do with anything? What does it represent? It's in bold, so I assume it's important.

If I was to ask Veronica about international politics... I assume she'd call me her bestest nerdy pal, throw up, and then collapse from alcohol poisoning. I base this assumption on how completely off her face she would have to be to tell everyone about her friends affair in a public forum.

Susannah said...

Quasar~ You're welcome.

Please see Matt/nicholas' comment which begins, "Why wouldn't he give an interview to Al Jazeera?"

That'll clear things up a bit. And if it doesn't, then maybe you're not as SMRT.com as you think you are.

Matt/nicholas~ Please go check your email. Houston, I think we have a problem.

Quasar said...

Ah, right. Now I see the analogy.

I admit, I find it somewhat interesting that you consider extending a scientific olive-branch the moral equivilent to adultery, though. And here I thought the adultery referenced him being islamic. Silly me.

But why would Al-Jazeera be interested in my hypothetical buddhist uprising?

Susannah said...

Congratulations, Quasar! You do have the capacity for nuance after all ~ & possibly a hint of a sense of humor too?

Susannah said...

Oh, & gentlemen ~ Next time you wish to post a link on your secured site , so you can besmirch, snicker & pontificate to your self-satisfied, intellectual, pinched-heart's desire, at least have the courage to alert the blogger whose blog you're maligning.

Oh, & maybe have the b@))z to open your site up for commentary.

Or, is it a neat little echo chamber you're going for?

Susannah said...

Of course:

Your SECURED SITE.

http://www.wearesmrt.com/bb/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=4799

ExPatMatt said...

Susannah,

The wearesmrt.com site isn't secured in any way at all. Everyone's welcome and, I think, I've invited you to post there once before.

Someone posted a link/comment about someone who was discussing the topic of this thread on another forum/blog and I joined in by including a link to your blog as we were discussing it here.

I apologize for the breach of blogger etiquette. In the future I will alert you (and anyone else) to any cross-posting. I have nothing to hide. [btw, nicholas nautilus was the name of a pet of mine when I was a kid.]

If you'd like to join in the discussion over there, you're more than welcome, we have a fair few Christians over there along with us heathens who disagree with each other all the time - no echo chamber! :)

By the way, after my request that 'tha Malcontent' not put words into my mouth, rather than responding he calls me an 'unhinged leftard'. I admit, it just appears that he was directing it at me and I could be wrong - but it doesn't seem particularly civil when I was just asking him to stop putting words in my mouth. Something that you've taken issue with - quite vehemently - on this very thread.

Is this what passes as civil discourse around here?

Tha Malcontent,

Any chance of you actually responding to me?

Cheers,

Whateverman said...

EPM is correct. The SMRT site isn't "secured" per se. Membership is required to keep anonymous accounts from spamming the forums into oblivion.

And, as I posted in that forum thread IRT Obamageddon, you're more than welcome to join (just requires a name and an email address, no personal info) and show us the error of our ways.

I'm so used to not being allowed to comment at blogs that I rarely ever inform them of cross posting. We're a pretty small community, regardless, and it never crossed my mind that they'd care about what we have to say. In the future, I'll be sure to let you know if we mention stuff posted here.

Cheers.

tha malcontent said...

It doesn't make any difference now Susannah. It seem that it was ALL a big mistake.
The White House is NOW contradicting the NASA administrator's claim that Obama assigned him to reach out to Muslims.
Even if it took over a week for them to deny it. And we don't want to question the White House's denial even if it took a week to reply to it. If Bolden really misspoke why didn't the Whitehouse correct it on the same day?
And another one got thrown under the bus!
I'll put it this way, Bolden was a Marine Corps General, 0bama was a community organizer, who would I believe? I think you can answer that one!

Susannah said...

Matt~ I've been ridiculed, lambasted, ambushed @ 'deist/theist/atheist' blogs before (& haven't been back since - not pleasant). But at least I went there myself & could see the trap I was walking into...

WEM~ "you're more than welcome to join...and show us the error of our ways."
No. Thanks all the same.

Mal~ I'm so relieved it was all a big misunderstanding!! And so must be the differential between the sympathy B. Hussein Obama shows jihadists vs. Teapartiers (his own countrymen). That must all be a big misunderstanding too.

Yes. Now I get it.

Quasar said...

I would just like to apologise for misrepresenting your analogy by accident, Susannah, as well as the breach in ettiquite. As I stated over at our secured, members-only, need-a-retina-scan,fingerprint-ID-and-to-photocopy-your-buttcheeks-before-it'll-even-let-you-input-a-password public open-to-all forum, I generally post to passive articles and blogs, and quite often cross-post to SMRT to get comments. For what it's worth, this is less an attempt to get others to malign the article in question, and more me trying to garner comments about my responce to the article.

And just to be clear, SMRT is a skeptic forum, not an atheist forum, and even then non-skeptical viewpoints are welcome because it's one rule is no censorship. Mind you, some of the members can be quite savage [you know who you are].

Now that my intellectual-elitist ego has been subdued, and I've finished looting it's corpse (+50XP), allow me to once again take aim at a certain analogy. I said before that my preferred method of dealing with analogies is to re-write them to more resemble reality, so here goes:

...

Your wife/husband/significant-other (we'll go with wife) has been going to see a friend of hers more often and spending more time with them.

Since you don't trust her, you accuse her of cheating, but she says she hasn't. She claims that Steve is a drug-addict, and when she had been leaving him alone he had been getting worse and worse, developing irrational hatred and paranoia, self-destructive tendencies, psychotic episodes, and a weird aversion to pig-products.

Since your wife loves bacon (and lets face it, who doesn't love bacon?) and feels sorry for him, she's started reaching out to him, trying to show him that a life without the drugs can be much better than a temporary high.

Up comes the forth of july, and her friend Veronica, drunk as a skunk (assuming said skunk is actually drunk and not just faking it to fit in with everyone else), stands up to the open mike. After an impromptu drunk karaoke session singing a bon jovi song, she tells everyone that it's such a great thing her bestest friend in the whole world is doing for Steve.

You, because of the combination of "shot through the heart," not having your hearing aid turned on, Veronica's slurring and your already extant suspicion, interpret this to mean that your wife is cheating on you with Steve. You confront her in righteous indignation. She slaps you and calls you a big, lovable idiot.

Suddenly, Steve stands up and confesses his undying love for Veronica who runs up to him and throws her arms around him (and the contents of her stomach all over him) just as you recieve a phone call from the hospital. Your long lost identical twin sister has been hit by a car and is in a coma! Realising what an idiot you've been, you rush off to her bedside and...

...

... okay, at some point this turned into a soap opera. Ignore the last paragraph, and you've got yourself an analogy. And I think Veronica seriously needs to go to rehab.

Wait, it's not even possible for a man to have an identical twin sister...

Susannah said...

Q~ 1) Now there's that sense of humor again.
2) My 'analogy' - I prefer to anecdote - is mine. Yours is yours. Mine makes perfect sense, & I'll thank you not to re-write it to suit your superior sensibilities...Arrogance, eh?
3) Your "Wife" is a desperate Co-dependent w/ an apparently insatiable need to rescue the world to her own detriment. The Husband should dump her & find an emotionally mature woman.
4) I'm thinking you aren't married, or you'd know that Wife's behavior is grossly inappropriate. She should find Steve a case manager, and go take care of her own marriage.
5) You definitely don't have children, Q, as you apparently have waaaay too much time on your hands!

Nice try, though. I dig your sense of humor --- And even when you're trying to lecture me with it, somehow I come away snickering at you! ;) You're clearly very young.

Matt~ Forgive my foul mood earlier. I meant what I said, but I'm over the 'hard feelings.' Bygones are bygones (or is it that Q's silliness has lightened things up a bit?).

Please feel free to visit again any time. You add a texture here that I find interesting, & I'm sure others do too. Just afford me this courtesy: inform me if/when you're going to link to a post of mine again. Thanks.

Susannah said...

Oh, & Q why not just tell your SMRT.com friends to come read our discussion here, instead of cutting/pasting your own best work for them, leaving out my responses?

Heck of a lot more honest that way. They'd appreciate it - all concerned w/ intellectual/scientific honesty like they are. Wouldn't want them to start behaving like "Fundies," now would we?

Whateverman said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Whateverman said...

Another reason we cross-post at SMRT, Susannah, is that our comments are often censored at other blogs. Although there are obviously exceptions to this, the censored material is often polite and respectful; there's no other apparent reason for blocking the post other than the blog owner not wanting to see people questioning his/her opinions.

In cases like this, keeping a copy of what we've written over at SMRT documents the conversation and it gives the rest of us the chance to review and admire or criticize it.

You can choose to view SMRT as a "trap". Although I've agreed with a few of your posts in the past, no doubt I take exception to the majority, and your presence at SMRT would be challenged by people less polite than I am. However, I strive to be polite and respectful and sincere; there'd be no "trap" beyond disagreement between adults.

In any case, I'm here reading this thread. What's next?

EDIT: deleted the orig and reposted for clarity. Changed text has been bolded.

Susannah said...

WEM~ Ok, knock it off, already! You guys don't have to keep defending the machinations of your blog. Run it however you'd like. Just, when you use someone else's work, inform them. THAT was the 'trap' to which I was referring.

Aside from blogging, I'm a writer. I guess I get a little testy about people snatching my work & having it used for their own chuckles - intended or not.

You're welcome to comment here any time you'd like, as are your other members. I don't delete unless something's over the top offensive. And I certainly don't mind a challenge. Just ask Matt or Jim, or my new friend Q.

(Only be patient please; there's only one of me, & I have 3 kids, a dog & a husband. Response time isn't as quick as @ the group-think blogs.)

Quasar said...

"2) My 'analogy' - I prefer to anecdote - is mine. Yours is yours. Mine makes perfect sense, & I'll thank you not to re-write it to suit your superior sensibilities...Arrogance, eh?"

I certainly didn't mean any offence. I simply find this method to be the easiest way to point out what I personally find wrong with analogies: the differences become obvious. In this case, your characterisation of attempting to help "Steve" as a form of betrayal.

And I agree: anecdote is a much nicer sounding word than analogy, but it carries the implication that what is being described is non-fictional, hence my use of the latter. Also, "analogy" makes clear that it's a metaphor for something else. Maybe I should have used metaphor?

"3) Your "Wife" is a desperate Co-dependent w/ an apparently insatiable need to rescue the world to her own detriment. The Husband should dump her & find an emotionally mature woman."

I'm confused. Are you really telling me that if a close friend develops a drug addiction, spending time trying to help them indicates emotional immaturity and merits being dumped by your husband?

What about women who volunteer their time at the homeless shelter, or go out to try and clean up oil spills? Are they also immature?

Sorry if I'm sounding antagonistic, it's just that I've never encountered the idea that idealism and trying to help people is bad before. Yes, it can be naive, and yes it can backfire. But idealists always have the best intentions, and that means a lot to me. You can teach people not to be naive (life does it all the time), but you can't teach them to be good people.

"4) I'm thinking you aren't married, or you'd know that Wife's behavior is grossly inappropriate. She should find Steve a case manager, and go take care of her own marriage."

You're right, I'm not married. But "grossly inappropriate"? I'd be proud to be married to someone who cares so much for her friends.

And from my perspective, it's not the wife who has the problem. It's the husband who is so utterly certain the wife is cheating on him

5) You definitely don't have children, Q, as you apparently have waaaay too much time on your hands!

Guilty as charged! You're really good at this. But I spend all day on the computer at work, so free time's got nothing to do with it.

";) You're clearly very young."

Okay, you're cheating somehow. Do you have psychic powers? Admit it, you have psychic powers.

Quasar said...

"Oh, & Q why not just tell your SMRT.com friends to come read our discussion here, instead of cutting/pasting your own best work for them, leaving out my responses?"

Um... you hadn't actually responded. You'd mentioned several times that you knew about the forums, but before the comment I responded to above you hadn't written anything about what I'd said.

But I'll stop cross-posting, and let them know to visit. I really didn't mean to be offensive.

"Aside from blogging, I'm a writer. I guess I get a little testy about people snatching my work & having it used for their own chuckles - intended or not."

Oooh, really? I'm a bit of an amateur writer myself, because it's the quickest way to get what's in my head down on a hard-copy. I'm no book author, but I've got plenty of stories for other genre's. I do have a tendency to treat a lot of the things I write as a writing exercise, but that's simply because it's too much fun not to. And I'll jump at any chance to fire up the creative muscles and make things up off the top of my head.

...

PS: "It was a dark and stormy night. Actually it wasn't, but "It was a greyish and sort-of-cloudy night" doesn't quite have the same ring to it..."

...

PPS: Whaddya know, it is possible to get "semi-indentical twins" who are different genders, by getting the same genes from the mother but different from the father. They're extremely rare though.

...

PPS: Man, I really do have way too much time on my hands, don't I? I exceeded the 4000-something character limit.

Susannah said...

Q~ "if a close friend develops a drug addiction, spending time trying to help them indicates emotional immaturity"
Ever heard of Co-dependency? Enmeshment?

Re: "Steve's" drug addiction, Wife should REFER him to a mental health professional - give him the phone #'s or help him make the call at MOST, NOT get enmeshed with him herself. The co-dependent "helper" - no matter how caring, naive, idealistic, well-intended, will ALWAYS lose to the disease, & get drug down themselves. Always.

Steve is bad news. A wife who enmeshes herself w/ him is being foolish, & is displaying her own neediness. Her behavior is, indeed, grossly inappropriate for a married woman (you didn't know this...my biggest clue you're not married). It will destroy her marriage, diminish her life, & will ultimately NOT help Steve.

Q, these are facts in the emotional/psychological dynamics of co-dependency.

"What about women who volunteer their time at the homeless shelter, or go out to try and clean up oil spills? Are they also immature?"
Or build a Habitat House? or go on building missions? or serve on crisis hotlines? or work w/ disadvantaged Hispanic children in public schools?
No. They're not immature. (Btw, I've done ALL of the above.)
The difference in your 'antagonistic' question & my 'anecdote' is that organizations who support these activities provide structure for volunteers. Structure is designed to protect the volunteer & recipient from the dangers that Wife will inevitably face w/ Steve. Thus, rules about keeping proper boundaries.

"I spend all day on the computer at work, so free time's got nothing to do with it."
Does your boss know you're spending so much time on blogs, & not working on her/his projects? Don't you think your boss would be miffed if your involvement w/ us here were to interfere w/ your employer-ee relationship? ;)

No, not psychic. Though that would be fun for about 15 minutes, then it could be dangerous...

Susannah said...

Q~ "I do have a tendency to treat a lot of the things I write as a writing exercise."

Me too. Everything, actually.

Have you ever done the wedding cake prompt exercise?
'You see an object in the middle of the road. As you approach, you realize it's a wedding cake. Who's is it? How did it get there? What shape is it in?' etc., etc

There's a book that compiles several different authors' response to the prompt. Kinda fun!

Bedtime. Nite all! Thanks for the lively discussion!

Quasar said...

"Ever heard of Co-dependency? Enmeshment?

Re: "Steve's" drug addiction, Wife should REFER him to a mental health professional - give him the phone #'s or help him make the call at MOST, NOT get enmeshed with him herself. The co-dependent "helper" - no matter how caring, naive, idealistic, well-intended, will ALWAYS lose to the disease, & get drug down themselves. Always."

This is actually a good point. Although I disagree with "always", you are certainly right that contacting a professional is a much better option in this situation than trying to help them yourself.

I'm vaguely familiar with the concepts behind Co-dependency and Enmeshment, though not to any great extent.

But, remembering for a moment what Steve and Mrs [needs-a-name] represent, what sort of help can you bring in when you're trying to help a culture that's killing itself? There are no mental health professionals for cultures. The only other option is to leave the middle-east to it's own devices, slowly allowing it to become more and more insane and psychotic until it kills itself and probably tries to take the rest of us with it.

Well okay, that and nuking 'em off the face of the planet, which isn't considered polite these days.

I do see your point about co-dependency, though. It would be bad, very bad, for America to become co-dependant with the middle-east (well, more than they already are. Oil has a lot of pulling power). It is worthy of note that every country relies on it's neighbours to some extent, the USA included. That's why the American Financial Crisis got the "Global" adjective: we're all co-dependant to some extent. It's less like Enmeshment and more like a close-knit group of friends: anything that happens to one affects the others without necessarily happening to them.

By the way, excellent work with donating time. I'm the first to applaud that sort of thing. My own accomplishments are less: I put aside money for charity each year, and I have been known to volunteer time at the local wildlife sanctury, eco-nut that I am. :)

I try not to spend too much time posting at work, and mostly do it before work and during lunch break. Not had too much on recently, hense the increase in quantity.

And I'd not heard of the wedding cake prompt. Interesting idea, though it doesn't make anything pop into my head like some things do. Guess I'm not a cake person.