Commenter Archive

Comments by Scott Miller

On “On Loughnerism

@ fuster:
I suppose that's true. I hope Colin doesn't mind, but I copied it and sent it to some of my friends. So at least some other folks will read it.

"

I don't know anything about the print-media, or how Internet news services work, but I wish more people could read this piece, so if you can possibly get it "out there," I suggest you do. It's important.

On “There must be 50 ways to leave your blogger…

@ fuster:
I will definitely pass suggestion along. Thanks.
CK MacLeod wrote:

Was this performance recorded

Parts were, yes. Haven't seen the results yet, but if worked, I will definitely YouTube and post. Thanks for asking.

"

@ fuster:
He's really a tabla player and plays them at least 3/5ths of the time, and taping doesn't work with tablas. Then at the end of the faster, more rock and roll songs he switches to cajon. So if he just played cajon, he'd tape.

"

@ CK MacLeod:
It was. People went crazy when at one point Lisa switched from the Sanskrit of a Shiva chant to "Respect Yourself!" as the band ignited. The big difference this time was that I replaced myself with an amazing bass player. That allowed Bob to play hard electric guitar and that pumped everyone else, including the tabla player who ended up bashing the cajon so hard and furiously as Lisa went into Respect Yourself that he broke a blood vessel in his finger and it swelled up horribly. Amazing. The owner of the studio came up to me afterwards, shaking his head..."I'm speechless. I had no idea. I have never seen anything like that.

On “Barbarism and its Discontents

@ bob:
Right. That's the reason why CK was wrong in the sense that there was an "excuse" for a paragraph like it.

"

Uh-oh. Now I've done it. I agree with you that White does have some Barbarian tendencies. That's why he can explain the B Heart so well. But it's not just a question of him saying fuck reason and believe in redemption. You overstate that radically in my opinion. I think he's a reason oriented guy who is trying to speak to the value of spirit. What he quotes Beethoven saying to the scientists is what applies: You want to dismiss what the musician knows because it's pretty, but the real fact is that the musician knows what you don't. Now, White is not the perfect spokesperson for spirit. Realized beings are the best spokespeople for spirit. But he does a good (albeit imperfect) job on the spirit side and I would think that people who value reason over "redemption" might be willing to go along with the imperfect reasonableness of White as he tries to open up to what he doesn't know, but still recognizes as a viable (and maybe singular) alternative.
I'll have to think about the "White's self-entrapment" part before commenting on that.

"

Come to think of it, I am going to make one point, CK. It's an old point and one that you've swatted away before without much consideration, so I can count on you doing that again and thereby not distracting yourself. Please, don't let this distract you. Just read it and blow it off.
My point has to do with "splitting." That's what I have pointed out before. To keep stuck--to be "unmoved"--you find fault on one side of the issue or another, knowing unconsciously that the two things are split, opposing, and not resolvable. Bush was brilliant at splitting. When someone questioned him on a moral level, he would talk practicalities and when someone questioned him on a practical level, he spoke of morality. "The war costs too much." Bush: We are liberating people. "Democracy doesn't happen in context of chaos, we need to help them rebuild..." Bush: We don't have the manpower. I've notice you do something similar, only in a much more difficult to notice and difficult to figure out type of way. Unfortunately, all I can do (with my limited mental resources) is guide you toward a recognition. You'll probably think that's not fair, but from my perspective, this is for your benefit, so it's okay to leave it to you to figure things out. The clue is that you criticize White for having a weak solution. Let's say that's the moral side. So you find fault with him on that level. You credit him in respect to practicality, even rightly explaining to me that it would have been a mistake for him to be funnier. You're right. But if he didn't do well in a practical way, you'd find fault with him there. And here's the kicker. Even if he did do well on both levels, (which I think he did), you would still use splitting to make sure you weren't moved. Why? "Inertia" is my guess.

On “The next war in the Middle East coming soon to your home theater

Interesting that Obama is credited with "the quality of persistence." Buddhists recognize persistence as one of the six Paramitas. I hope the author is right about Obama having that quality, because it will take great persistence to get Israel back on the road to peace.

On “Tucker Carlson sez Michael Vick shoulda been “executed”

No. Right now is the first time I have logged in. I'll submit it this way (logged in) as a test.

On “East-West Past-Future Materialist-Spiritualist Fusion

CK MacLeod wrote:

Great video, by the way – the simple, cinematic concept that in combination with the music creates, evokes, and sustain a subjective “moment” instead of seeing how many cuts, how much unrelated narrative, how many tricks, or how many shots of the artist and fans it can fit into a couple of minutes.

Right on.

On “God…

@ CK MacLeod:
Thanks for the poem. Finally.

"

It took me a bit, Nietzsche, but that is dead on. That absolutely should be copyrighted. People be usin it as a t-shirt. I don't know how you can own the rights to something like that, but you need to try.

On “speculation on the leftward tilt of popular culture

@ CK MacLeod:
Sad, but it took me awhile to realize how funny your "Hah!" is in that context.

"

CK MacLeod wrote:

I’m wondering if Nietzsche made some comment that could be construed that way.

Of course he did. Every Nietzschian comment can be construed that way.

On “Exceptionally Exceptional

@ CK MacLeod:
I just have to tell you how funny you are.

"

miguel cervantes wrote:

years, was

Why do you have a comma there?

"

fuster wrote:

secret defeatist panties.

I think everyone should quote this part over and over no matter what else they're commenting on.

"

fuster wrote:

secret defeatist panties.

That was my favorite part.

"

"They want their hegemony and to decry it"
Love that. And while I'm with Cornell West in thinking that Obama "doesn't care about poor people," can you imagine what it must be like to be Obama? You have the TP saying you're a socialist, and people like me thinking you're a conflict averse, Manchurian Candidate, reassuring the establishment. If he was an NBA ref he'd be justified in thinking he must be doing a good job because both sides hate him. That's what refs like to think in a similar situation. But this is different. Remember when Michelle Obama said what she said about being proud of America for the first time? People went nuts about that one. I was like, "400 years of terrorism and you think an intelligent, educated African-American woman should have been proud of America at all, ever?" Come on. Black America is where the exceptionally exceptional part of our society exists. 400 years of terrorism and they have never gone to counter-terrorism. If any group of people ever had a right to be counter-terrorists its black America and it's never happened. (The Black Panthers wanted to work within the community and while they did go by the "by any means necessary" credo, they would have been a positive force within black communities if allowed to be that.) And why? Why no counter-terrorism? The capacity to love. Courage. The capacity to put the pain into all kinds of creative channels and keep going without becoming counter-terrorists. So if you're looking for what is exceptional about America, look at Black America.

On “Super up to the microsecond interactive election coverage (live remote inside my head)

Great poetry. Even better than Miguel's. That should challenge him.

On “Up to the moment highly interactive superhightech election coverage…

I flirted heavily with the same idea for the same reasons and then my wife was going to the polls and I went too. You'll probably get some flack for writing what you wrote, so I just wanted there to be at least one supportive comment here, even though it's written by someone who did end up voting. If you don't, I understand.

On “Public Lessons: Pedophilia, Bullying, and the Case of Alex Knepper

@ Alex Knepper:
Fair enough. Acting in kind, I'll level the playing field even more by admitting that I have no real knowledge of how you relate to younger people. So if you think you've treated people younger than yourself with respect and generosity --if you think you've kept in mind their relative lack of experience when it was important to do so--then there's no point in me suggesting otherwise. That's your business.

"

Alex Knepper wrote:

@Scott Miller — Don’t be a twit. Pigeonholing me as a “conservative”

Ignoring the name-calling because you're young, I'll just point out that I used the term "so-called conservative." I could explain how the "so-called" was meant to connect you with all the things you have now explained about yourself from your perspective, but (putting it in words you'll understand) there is an expectation that you should be able to read in a way that is comprehending and connected with what you had already written. You didn't play fair. You said you wouldn't be writing anymore here. Now you are. Welcome. I hope you continue to play fair. Obviously, you appreciate how fair CK plays. You give yourself so much credit, perhaps you should do the same for others. Beyond that, I'm going to cut you some slack because of your age. Maybe you should learn to act similarly in relation to people younger than yourself.

On “Everybody Did Get Stoned

@ miguel cervantes:
Oh, sorry, I thought Miguel was talking about crackin'

Related

From the Featured Archives

Categories

Extraordinary Comments

CK's WP Plugins