Posted on 11/01/2014 3:12:58 PM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
Obama has gone places with his life. Doesn’t immunize him from being called what he is.
What he does in his private moments is up to him as long as no laws are being broken. It is between him and The Almighty, and not my concern, although at least he does appear to be frolicking with females.
Considering, his vices seem pretty normal for one in his income bracket (not approval, just noting). Anyone with that sort of money would likely want to enjoy it, at least a little, and not everyone has the same pursuits in mind.
But, back on the topic of spaceflight, there are a host of other people working on this project, and I seriously doubt they are all "...lecherous, disgusting old sybarite"(s).
In the end, I wish them success, not so much because it will support Sir Richard's lifestyle, but because it will move humanity one step closer to the stars.
Had to look up the word ‘sybarite’. Now I know. (That might have to be an FR ‘Word of the Day’ entry sometime.)
The dude is rich beyond my wildest dreams of avarice. What he does with his money, as long as it isn’t illegal, is his business.
Not talking about Obama. Talking about you. Thanks for playing, you can sit down now.
OTOH, this Daily Mail piece is nuts:
Branson labeled ‘outrageous’ over attempts to distance himself from Friday’s tragic crash
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2817501/Branson-labeled-outrageous-attempts-distance-Friday-s-tragic-crash.html
I'll toss the question back at you: What in my post referred to anything but the man and his character?
I agree with both of you that it doesn't make sense to judge his professional dreams and accomplishments in the context of what I perceive to be a sleazy personal life.
I'm not telling you or anyone not to admire or even emulate him.
I'm the kind of guy who dumped his iphone because of the public pronouncements of the company CEO.
Similarly I don't care if Bill Clinton signed welfare reform; I still think he degraded the country, the Presidency and a young woman who, like her or not, was somebody's daughter.
I think there are plenty of examples of geniuses, entrepreneurs and statesmen who are decent and admirable. I happen to prefer them to the leering hedonists.
Precisely.
What does that have to do with space flight?
Those traits, those vices, are all entirely legal.
I don't believe that a man's life and work are entirely separate or separable, Joe. I think that, almost inevitably, virtue rewards and vice destroys.
To what extent that applies to Richard Branson and his work, I don't know. Maybe some around him do.
Considering that none is without sin, should I revile all, even the most noble efforts of humankind?
Do you refuse to dress warmly because much of the information on hypothermia came from experiments carried out on camp inmates?
Do you refuse medical care because the doctor has been divorced?
At what level of sinfulness would you approve of what level of actions for the benefit of humankind?
Would you tell the fire department they can't put out your house because you heard they were at a bachelor party at a titty bar?
Whitey, how you live is up to you, but it is the accomplishment in this instance I laud, not the personal habits of the person running the show.
Whoa, whoa, whoa.
You should read the posts, my friend. And I do, or have, considered you a friend in the area and one whom I looked up to.
I did NOT wish failure on Branson. Quite the contrary. I chimed in rather loosely about the great man not being quite so great in my view.
You’ve thrown some garbage at me now that is neither accurate nor warranted. I don’t understand why. My posts to you have been mild and, in the latter couple posts, as honest and thoughtful as I could be. I wouldn’t have given you the time if I hadn’t always thought highly of you.
If you are willing to accept without reserve the art, literature, science or social achievments of morally indifferent or morally reprehensible men (or monsters) through history, that is your choice. It’s a choice I disagree with, but that certainly doesn’t make me want to condemn you, as you have harshly condemned me.
Do you want me to ask you whether you feel NOTHING about, say, the Dachau or the Tuskogee experiments, other than the utility of the science produced? I wouldn’t stoop to such an insult.
I said nothing about suppressing science or public service or private heroism because of divorce or titty bars. I said nothing about suppressing anything because some level of SIN, which I have no expertise except that I commit plenty of it.
I expressed a personal opinion about the personal life of a man I find disagreeable. For whatever reason this has caused you to accuse me of willing people to die.
That is either a grave misperception on your part or the kind of smear I wouldn’t stand for in person.
My apologies.
You were not the one who posted that you hoped Branson failed, I conflated your post with that of someone else, and I have replied to you as if you had.
Any condemnation was unjustified, and I regret having treated you harshly when you were not so deserving.
Re-reading your posts, I believe we are more alike than in disagreement. Please accept my formal apology.
Damn! I am glad for that.
I had just started wondering if you might have me mixed up with the earlier poster.
In fact my original post about Branson was sloppier than it should have been, and probably tied his frolics more closely to the rocket accident than necessary.
My apologies for being quite so sharp with you in my last post. I should have known something was awry.
Again, I have always appreciated your words here. It’s great to know we’re not crosswise.
Take care!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.