Its interesting to a-g-a-i-n note: the obvious. It has a-g-a-i-n become difficult to not notice the vehemence with which certain folks POINT and BLAME (--and wag and hiss) .... A-T .... others. And, as some may remember, Im amused at the number of times that folks vehemently point AT others --as a way to make sure that the attentions is focused .... elsewhere. So, as soon as I hear the blame being repeated and repeated and repeated ---and every time I hear anyone discuss a particular subject, I THEN --A-G-A-I-N??-- I hear the exact same phrase and the exact same blame being repeated and repeated and repeated --a-g-a-i-n --? --AND!--- when this circle is repeated endlessly --AND!!-- across most of the available media ...? I grow CURIOUS ... as to: W-h-y Why SUCH need -? Why ---such v-e-h-e-m-e-n-c-e-- in directing attention ... elsewhere. I DO understand that, on the face of it, its the BLAME which theyre pursuing and promoting. But the MORE they do it-? The more I wonder why they are so determined to direct my attentions ... AT ALL. Is there something ... being hidden -? WHY so much VOLUME? --is there, perhaps, something that might lead to an unwelcomed -?- unflattering -?- unsavory moment of inconvenience? ... IF you lessened the volume and the frequency enough so as to allow other voices to BE ... heard? ARE questions ... allowed? Un-PRE-approved ... questions?? And why jump to speak over/drown out ANY voice that even b-e-g-i-n-s to question ---or to ?interrupt? the ?mission? at hand. Silly humans. Strange -- but silly. We have one political party that excels at this point-and-BLAME game (popular with pecking gossips and the panties-in-a-wad crowd ;-) !), and Id repeatedly pointed out the humor of seeing them all race to cameras to .... wag! (--en masse) in the run-up to presidential elections etc. But AS they pointed and wagged AT others, their d-e-g-r-e-e of vehemence was nearly always a clue to look at their OWN background/history for something ... far too similar... to what they were busy wagging at -and- harrumping about. The attempt to point their SPOTLIGHT -?- was a wee bit too... loud ? showy ? flashy? ---- OBVIOUS. Think back 15 years or so: Next Gingrich in front of every available microphone, giving endless interviews in print, on the radio ...etc... attacking AT Bill Clinton/monica lewisnki Now QUICKLY, answer me this: Was Calista UNDER his desk, or, was she OVER his desk at that time ...? And how long would it be until he asked his wife to welcome Calista INTO their marriage? And was that BEFORE or AFTER he was brought up on those pesky little ethics charges, and then needed to resign his Speakership, and his office, and leave the halls of the Congress of the United States? Yes. Bad BAD Mr Clinton... The likelihood of one individual being right increases in direct proportion to the intensity with which others are trying to prove him wrong. --Mr Jordan, Heaven Can Wait Rather obviously, my point isnt about right>
Posted on: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 17:59:13 +0000