tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32768818.post8331432484079559563..comments2024-03-24T18:18:35.272-05:00Comments on BALLSEYE'S BOOMERS: A Parable...Glenn Bhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16677859688487279914noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32768818.post-50873227763272959492007-09-22T20:35:00.000-05:002007-09-22T20:35:00.000-05:00Oh by the way, a conqueror for the sake of conques...Oh by the way, a conqueror for the sake of conquest would be a wolf, no need to call him a shepherd who turns into a conqueror. You went way over the top in your complexity on this one, twisting the base meaning of what I was saying with your addition of an element of humanity not analogous to the canine in my parable. Is it a simple parable, yes it is. Does it cover of what you spoke, yes it does, in simpler and more direct terms. Please don't try to twist the pint that was made with the addition of anti government speak.Glenn Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16677859688487279914noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32768818.post-81023064870077017952007-09-22T20:32:00.000-05:002007-09-22T20:32:00.000-05:00I understand your point, but I purposefully left o...I understand your point, but I purposefully left out the shepherd because I was using an anaology of canines to humans, so a human did not fit. Suffice it to say the sheperd in this case would be played by the alpha sheep dog, just as the poacher would be played by the alpha wolf, and the whining, whimpering, sniveling cowardly human by the most scared of the sheep who loead the flock in a stampede.<BR/><BR/>I appreciate the comment tough, very interesting.<BR/><BR/>All the best,<BR/>GBGlenn Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16677859688487279914noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32768818.post-8582453656926096452007-09-22T17:05:00.000-05:002007-09-22T17:05:00.000-05:00A response to the [alleged] letter of Mr. Charles ...A response to the [alleged] letter of Mr. Charles Grennel to Jill Edwards (student, UW) <BR/>Subject: Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs<BR/><BR/><BR/>Thank you for your interesting tale of sheep, wolves & sheepdogs. You make such a fascinating distinction between the three. However, in your fervor for simplification, you've left out a major character in your pastoral parable: the Shepherd.<BR/><BR/>The Shepherd is the leader who is responsible for deploying the sheepdogs around the perimeter for protection. When the Shepherd decides to send his sheepdogs to the wolves's den to eliminate the threat before it's at the gate, he has stopped being a Shepherd and has begun his role as conqueror. No longer content with the resources of his own land, he has turned his eyes to that of his neighbors. He has convinced both the sheep and the sheepdog that it is for their future protection. And in his zest for securing this future protection, how many of his neighbors sheep were slaughtered?<BR/><BR/>Please don't misunderstand me. I'm grateful for the sacrifices of the sheepdog. Evil and violence exist in the world and I respect all who are willing to stand in opposition to them, but we live in an age when all of our shepherds have disappointed us. All of our leaders have been involved in scandals of greed and debauchery. Pensions are robbed, jobs are outsourced, the environment plundered, health care is pathetic and the noble sheepdogs are asked to pay the ultimate sacrifice so that the shepherds may <BR/>continue to pursue their agenda of power and greed. When we the sheep, buy into this lie we are leading ourselves to the slaughter. Our freedoms are more endangered by the shepherds than from the wolves. And let's not forget that the ultimate role of the shepherd is to protect his sheep long enough to harvest their wool and slaughter them for meat himself.<BR/><BR/>Show me a good Shepherd willing to fight the corruption in his own yard and I'll show you a sheep who's willing to fight the wolf himself.<BR/><BR/>Baaaahslappymcgeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11149318959689333341noreply@blogger.com