Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by FeloniousMonk

  1. I like her so far. Waiting to see if she remains an early favorite.
  2. Well hello there Slim... Monk here.


    I don't come to Mortys much these days but was happy to see you here. I post (a little) over on Jokers under the handle ZaddockFuller... Stop by and join in sometime. 


    I hope all is well with you & yours.


    Your ol' BB friend


    1. Slimcruz


      Hullo, Monk.  Nice to hear from you and best wishes to you and yours, as well.  No complaints of merit from this quarter.  I seldom come to Morty's and when I do, I find myself hopelessly out of touch when it comes to navigating the site  So many changes.  Oh for the simpler times.  Ciao.  Slim

    2. FeloniousMonk


      As Natalie says... 'You're a good egg'... and it appears that these forums just aren't built for good eggs.... Enjoy your summer.



  3. Are any of us really all that certain that he is not an admirer of MLK? Might he have named the llama Martin Luther out of respect for a man so many of us looked up to for even-keeled guidance in the tumultuous world of 1960's America? My cousin was named John after JFK. A neighbor named their son Robert after RFK. One of my girlfriends named her dog 'Henry' after Henry David Thoreau. Why should anyone take swipes at him when it is not reasonable to think that any of us would know what his actual motivations were? Why should any of us take the negative view so easily and consistently? Aren't some practicing the very bias we are all so appalled by? Shouldn't ignorance of the truths about a person give us pause before speaking negatively about them? Isn't making uneducated decisions about another person at the core of all of the 'isms?' Monk
  4. I won't go any further with this after this post but your response makes it clear that you did not understand my post. My response was limited to your statement 'there is no proof that people have a chemical imbalance.' From a scientific point of view, whether the system is influenced by natural internal mechanisms or purely external stimuli is relatively unimportant, the important thing to watch is whether the system is effected. Changes in any of these processes is proof that a "chemical imbalance' exists. The effects of the chemical output of the pancreas definitely effect all systems through our blood stream... This is in part of what makes diabetes such a dangerous disease. The brain is fueled by the same blood chemistry as the rest of the body. Diabetes has clear and definite effects upon brain function. Controlling those changes is where we are in the infancy of pharma treatments. Where we may agree is the issue of over medicating and the more basic problem of using pharma solutions to non-pharma problems. Is Amanda a product of both nature and nurture... sure... is she effected by the addition of chemistry to her system... sure. What you & I don't know is what her behavior would be if she were left unmolested by pharmaceuticals. She could behave better, worse or the same... you & I just don't have the information we would need to figure that out. Is all of her disliked behavior a result of meds... personally I would doubt it, but I just don't know so I just won't post definitive statements about it... Monk
  5. Leaving big pharma arguments to others... The notion that 'there is no proof that people have a chemical imbalance' is pretty far off the mark. Actually, it's a little flat earth... Here are two of the more commonly known chemical imbalances.... The myriad of endocrine imbalances are at their essence and in the truest sense, chemical imbalances... some of which result in a person in either a hyper or hypo agitated state.... one example would be the stress hormone excess/deficiency diseases such as Addison's which results in just such an imbalance. Diabetes(type 1) is another example of a chemical imbalance caused by an improperly functioning pancreas. We know the blood sugar mood swings well... As Taharqa noted, drug dependency-drug response such as hyperactivity/agitation/euphoria and drug withdrawal are also example of brain chemistry imbalances. In the recent years we've been able to map and metric a vast array of brain chemistry imbalances. Because of the complex nature of this chemical soup that drives our most basic behaviours, we are limited in our understanding at this point... We know much of what exists but we are just at the beginning of the understanding of the drivers and basic interactions of these processes. Monk
  6. 'I am going to have to root like a truffle-hunting pig'... damn, I love your posts... Monk
  7. Have you ever noticed how when confronted with her own nastiness, Amanda's first inclination is to make a whiny complaint about the other HGs and then she follows the whining up with yet another nasty jab at someone she dislikes? I guess it takes all kinds... Monk
  8. I agree. Elissa has her flaws. As for me, I haven't been able to warm to her, which is due in large part because of her peculiarities. Some peculiar people are endearing and fun to associate with, but Elissa is not one of those people for me. I support her (and Judd) by default given the absence of a cast worthy of supporting this season. She has her flaws, but she isn't a despicable wretch like so many of the HGs this year. Monk
  9. Oh geez, if that's the case, my masculinity index just took a dip... I admit... I do know chartreuse... But but... I know it 'cause I've been traveling the world for years to flyfish for saltwater game fish and we use chartreuse deer hair to make many of the most effective flies... Really... I pump iron too... big heavy iron... and I use rusty nails as toothpicks... and I drink my whiskey out of dirty glasses... Monk
  10. I don't think jury members comparing notes will work out for Andy... They won't discover big game moves. Andy didn't take out Jeremy or Helen or Aaryn or even Amanda... As far as important games moves is concerned, he gets a big fat zero. They won't discover strategic moves he orchestrated. That would be absolutely nobody on this season.. All he did was to play along to get along while standing behind Helen/Elissa and Amanda/McCrea. They won't discover a 'secret' leader pulling all the strings... Again, nobody really came close to being the invisible hand controlling the game. Zingbot was right, Andy was just a 'ghost' in this game. They won't discover a competition beast. That would be Aaryn. If anything Andy is the definitional antonym of a beast. What the will discover is an ordinary snitch scurrying between camps... He's just this season's Ronnie... nothing more, nothing less. Monk
  11. Edieann, Every year there is at least one HG that is something of a litmus test for good character. This year it is Elissa. The more nasty HGs with poor character like Andy, Amanda, McCrea, Aaryn, Spencer, Jeremy, etc found themselves having something of a visceral dislike for Elissa. Truth is that their perceptive lenses have been distorted to the point that they find her to be dumb, superficial, shallow, uninteresting and phony.. In some ridiculously juvenile orgasm of meanness & immaturity, they then attack her on her physical being... Her voice is whiny... her lips are too puffy, and the most middle-schoolish of them all... she has a 'duckface.' These are not people to support or even to worry about what they think. Those that have that dislike for her in that 'in-the-gut' sort of way are people that have shown themselves to be self-centered, pompous, mean-spirited, negative to their core, and in some cases,,, just plain despicable. On the other hand, HGs like Judd, Howard, Candice, Helen, etc, may or may not have warmed to her but the did NOT have that same visceral dislike... These are folks that on the outside might be worth some trust and maybe even a friendship. In other words, you've got good instincts and should be happy not to be aligned with the nasty, negative & weasel crowd. This is not to say that the more one likes Elissa the better one's character is, but the opposite appears to have some validity. Personally, I haven't been able to warm to any of the HGs this year, but I do recognize that the choices we make & the people we support in life speaks volumes about who we are. Monk
  12. Obviously, I don't know if Grace O'Malley is your real name or a name you chose because it holds some personal importance to you, but either way, it's a beautiful name. And I agree with you about McCrea/Amanda and the torture of GM & Elissa... I also hope GM doesn't 'clock' her one... Monk
  13. If GM does as she says she'll do and puts up Mr. & Mrs. McNasty, watching Mrs McNasty ping pong between imploding and exploding for those five days should be very satisfying. Monk
  14. Hmmmm... Cry in his beer... I dunno... I think he may be more of a smoker than a drinker. It's not out of the question that he'll need to partake of the wacky weed to calm his nerves once Amanda becomes his very own stalker. You know those buttons of hers. Monk
  15. I'm with you. This season has nothing going for it other than Elissa and Judd & neither of them would be HGs that I would support in a normal season. This season is the pits... in far too many ways it reminds me of season 9... another season I just couldn't stomach. Monk I like anchovies...
  16. Just curious... are you "good people?" Monk
  17. I prefer to think of it as the simple possibility of detente... a new beginning with a evil gone good better BB buddy. I've long hoped to welcome you from the dark side to the less dark side... no need to over do things... Monk
  18. I knew you weren't such a bad sort out to pompously & invariably take the most negative & contrary approach to all things BB. You're just misunderstood.... you have a special talent for sarcasm. Gosh, Golly, right back atcha... See, we're BB friends now... Monk P.S. Sorry turk...
  19. Ah, yes, then come the rationalizations... You're right... I agree with your sarcasm... the toxic HG's would indeed make exactly those rationalizations. Good catch, Wicked... You were being sarcastic.. weren't you? Monk
  20. Or, an eminently more likely explanation would be that she puts mean-spirited jerks on her 'bad' list and the civilized mature adults on her 'good' list. Logically speaking, it would then follow that Elissa looks to draw closer to herself those that are civil, rational and mature... and distance herself from toxic folks. It's just human nature... we even do it on message forums throughout the web, by way of 'ignore' buttons. Ever wonder who might be at the top of the 'ignore button' heap on the various forums across the web? Monk
  21. She had a choice of two good moves(McManda / GM & Aaryn) and some nonsensical moves(Spencer, GM, Judd) and one so-so move(Andy)... Both duos have to be broken up... IMHO, the more dangerous duo is McManda and therefore the better choice to pair up on the block... BUT, Aaryn & GM are also a voting block that needed dismantling... the argument in favor of putting Aaryn up is that she has proven to be a beast in comps and she has proven she will set her sights on Elissa... So, two good choices but one is a better choice than the other in my opinion... She should have put McManda up... Neither choice was 'incredibly stupid.' Incredibly stupid would have to been to put up Judd & Spencer.... Monk
  22. I do wish that I had not responded. Monk

Living Room

Living Room

Please enter your display name

  • Create New...