Steve, I am happy that you posted me. I had thought our exchange about the nature of Clinton's errors had alienated you for some reason unknown to me.
In the late 60's/early70's I went to an Ivy dinner - for a gas. (I had confidence that my new position in working with the disadvantaged would serve me psychologically much better than the business (advertising) ratrace that I had just left. So, I was self-satisfied and sort of cocky.)
After more than an hour of after dinner flaunting of blue ribbons and blue blood, I asked a question. It had to do with (this was Nam time, if you will recall) whether values and human decisions were included in the mix, along with all the glories of the cultured.
I got snuffed.
There is a remote parallel between that occurrence and what is happening at this time on Feelings. I guess I will never be able to get my nose to the grindstone, or feet on the ground. (This is my weakness. I blame none of you for our conflicts Miniver Cheevy, or someone like that, was not born in the right time. Me too?)
I respect you, despite the fact that at times your attitude seems a bit autocratic and pompous. (Can you believe that I mean this as a friendly statement? It truly is one. Please recall, weeks ago, when I pleaded that you remain on this thread - as it, in many ways, is nourishing.)
There is no point I can add to my education, teaching, argument. It is completely idealistic, dreamy, unrealistic, without gas.
With admiration, George |
