Whirled Musings

Across the Universe with Cosmic Connie, aka Connie L. Schmidt...or maybe just through the dung-filled streets and murky swamps of pop culture -- more specifically, the New-Age/New-Wage crowd, pop spirituality & religion, pop psychology, self(ish)-help, business babble, media silliness, & related (or occasionally unrelated) matters of consequence. Hope you're wearing boots. (By the way, the "Cosmic" bit in my moniker is IRONIC.)

Saturday, June 25, 2011

For he's a jolly good felon: True-dough speaks out for Death Ray

Note: The bits in orange type below are additions to the original post.

Huckster extraordinaire Kevin Trudeau, star of idiotic infomercials and rabble-rousing radio, has long been one of my favorite snargets (see links at the end of this post). Well, Dear Ones, True-dough has just reached a new level of snarget-worthiness with yesterday's KT Network show, in which, according to the blurb on his site, he "reveals what is really causing civil unrest and riots around the world and how the government is trying to crush free enterprise and anything that could empower YOU!!" True-dough can speak quite well to the topic of being "crushed" by the government, as he has been playing the role of martyr for many years, ever since he served prison time for larceny and credit card fraud, which are felonies.

Now he wants to paint the entire selfish-help industry as a martyr to the government and the "criminal" mainstream media.

Yes, among the things that the big bad gummit is trying to crush, according to True-dough, is the selfish-help industry, as indicated by how they went after poor James Arthur Ray, recently convicted of three counts of negligent homicide, which are also felonies, despite some of Ray's defenders trying to pretend otherwise. My friend Dave Cook alerted me to this segment, which starts at about 36:00. "Yes," he wrote, "I listened all the way to that point to hear what he had to say about JAR, so you didn’t have to… You’re welcome." (Thanks, Dave!)

Dave added: "Oh, if you listen to the first part, 'KT' talks about his running for office and how you can help him. What a douche."

Here's the link to the entire segment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97PZY1--Eq4&feature=youtu.be

And in case you don't care to hear all of KT's grandstanding and the usual ads for stuff "they" don't want you to know about, here's the link to the part that starts at about 36:00: http://youtu.be/97PZY1--Eq4?t=36m

Addendum, 26 June 2011: As you may know by now, I did not listen to KT's entire rant. And that has earned me some harsh criticism and accusations of willful blindness and/or various sins of omission.

Since I wrote this I have been informed that True-dough included some racist rants in this program. I was not aware of this at the time I wrote this post, because I only listened to a very few minutes of the video -- just enough to support my basic point that KT was defending James Ray. And then I pushed the "stop" button. I have listened to entire KT shows before when they were only audio. But video is a larger download and my satellite Internet service has a strict Fair Access Policy. Once you go over a certain amount for the month you are seriously slowed down or all but cut off. Ron and I were reaching our limit. We cannot afford to be without Internet. Our livelihood depends upon it.

And that's the truth, though apparently not a good enough truth for those who have Issues, and who think that I willfully chose to ignore the racism because I'm "all about the whiteness."

Had I actually heard the racist remarks I would certainly have mentioned them as one more criticism among many that I have of KT. You can choose to believe me or not. For those of you whose judgment is not clouded by your own agenda: do you honestly think I would miss a chance to snark about and criticize True-dough?

I may do a follow-up post on his ignorant, racist remarks as soon as I hear the relevant parts and know more of what I am talking about.

For now, this blog post purposely focuses on Kevin True-dough's defense of James Ray and the selfish-help industry. I have no doubt there were many other objectionable bits in that KT show even beyond the racist remarks; as far as I'm concerned, almost everything KT says or does is objectionable.

In my original post I mentioned that his video elicited fawning comments from supporters who apparently look upon True-dough as one of the last great heroes. I got called on that too, accused of ignoring the people of color who had criticized his racist rant. At the time I wrote this blog post, however, I saw four comments, and they were all favorable to True-dough. I did not see any critical comments. That is why I did not mention them.

Over the years many people have criticized Kevin True-dough for many things. But he still continues to stay in business, because even though he has severe critics he also has many, many supporters. This is one of the points I have repeatedly made about him on my blog. Again, I did not see the remarks criticizing his racism. Had I seen them, I would have investigated further to see what they were talking about.

[Back to the original post] As I have noted before, it's not that I am any big fan of big government. The U.S. government has done and continues to do some dodgy, oppressive, and downright criminal things. That's one reason True-dough is able to attract so many followers (that, and his endless stream of frauducts and flopportunities, such as his Global Information Network pyramid scheme).

However, as I have also noted many times before, the government's misdeeds do not exonerate True-dough and other hucksters.

To me, KT's rant, and the fact that he has so many supporters -- plus the fact that Death Ray still has many supporters -- are just a few more indications that we shouldn't count Ray out of the selfish-help game any time soon. People want heroes, and many are willing to overlook the felonious deeds and serious character flaws of some of those "heroes."

Speaking of scoundrels sticking together, Scientist Bob Proctor had supportive words about James Ray in response to news about Ray's conviction. According to a piece on the Arizona Republic site:

"Anybody had the right to leave there (the sweat lodge), and they didn't. Some did," Proctor said. "It was a tragic thing that happened, but I don't think (Ray) should be the one that's held responsible.

LaVaughn wrote a good post about this, and Scientist Bob's amazing gift for rationalization, on her Celestial Reflections blog.

I'll be waiting to see if True-dough starts a fund to help Death Ray. Perhaps some of what he raises for his own defense fund will go to help Ray's cause. Turds of a feather...

Addendum 19 July 2011 ~ While Googling around I came across this interesting March 2010 discussion on Cecil Adams' Straight Dope Forum, regarding True-dough's Ponzi-like Global Information Network, as well as his past with motivational infoproducts giant Nightingale-Conant. I don't know how I could have missed it previously. Particularly fascinating is a comment from a participant named banjoDavid (03-04-2010, 03:01 AM ), who said he was a studio engineer with N/C back in the day when they were selling True-dough's stuff. Though I suspect that the full story of True-dough and N/C has yet to be told, banjoDavid offers some insight that jibes with other information I've heard:


I worked with Kevin Trudeau for a couple of years. I was a studio engineer at Nightingale-Conant during the late 80's until I got sh%&t-canned 13 years ago. I recorded Mega Math and Mega Speed Reading. I condensed Mega Memory from 6 a hour program to a 2 hour program. In order to do that, I had to get Trudeau's OK for the edits, as stipulated in his contract. I had to work through his attorney, because he was in the Federal pen for credit card fraud. I recorded the training tapes for the Nutrition for Life multi-level marketing scheme he was involved with.

I was the low man on the totem pole at Nightingale, and Kevin Trudeau was part of the sh%it detail I had to deal with.

He told me one day, just as an aside, "I spend most of my time in court with lawyers."

The speed reading program with Howard Berg was really bad. This was in the day they were publishing 6 cassette programs. Side 12 was Kevin pitching his other products. The program needed a lot of editing, but I was told to push it through fast, and skip the editing. Some distribution company heard it and refused to sell it the way it was, so I was told to re-edit.

There was time to do it over, but not time to do it right in the first place.

When I joined Nightingale-Conant in 1987, there were about 250 employees. It was a well respected motivational and sales training tape company, the best. I was proud of the stuff I worked on, and I learned a lot.

When Trudeau got out of the pen, he and his cellmate Jules got involved in Nutrition for Life, an Amway-style pyramid scheme scam, and we produced the tapes they sold.
Not we, I. I recorded him in Studio A for 2 or or 3 years, i don't remember many details. Jules did a Yoda impression that he thought was hilarious. I had to record this crap, it was my day job. Trudeau did TV infomercials with Danny Bonaduce about some health products around that time. Nightingale housed the Trudeau Marketing Group in the building for a while, and the company's morale slid downhill.
People were laid off from Nightingale in a few waves. Mike, Rose, Roger, Steve, and many others. When I was laid off in March of 1997, they fired 50 people that day. The personnel director had a sign on his desk that could be moved around to say, "Have a nice day," or " Take a hike."
Guess what it said that day?
I took a hike. I'm still pissed off and bummed. It was a good company, and buying into Trudeau's bullsh%t cost them their reputation and a lot of jobs, mine among them. I think there are about 75 people working there now. Trudeau is long gone from Nightingale, and they don't even sell his stuff anymore. He does that on his own.

Before you buy from Kevin Trudeau, read on the internet about the complaints against him.

I'm not making this sh%t up. Thanks for letting me rant

I find several points in this comment interesting. To begin with, I've heard from various sources that True-dough nearly drove Nightingale-Conant into bankruptcy due to his tendency to...um... party hardy on their dime. (By the way, Peter Wink, who worked for N/C in the early to late 1990s, and who now works for True-dough, and with whom I had several conversations that resulted in a series of blog posts -- here's the first one -- was NOT one of these sources. He did not seem to know much about KT's previous association with N/C when I asked him, and since we had agreed not to converse about KT, to whom he is steadfastly loyal, I did not push it. Peter did, however, tell me that his own marketing and negotiating skills helped save N/C when they were in trouble in the early 1990s.)

What really interests me about banjoDavid's remark is that it would appear N/C was making lots of money selling True-dough's stuff even while he was doing time in the Federal Pen, and they continued to sell his stuff and associate with him after he was released. (Apparently True-dough did not learn his lesson in prison, judging by the business ventures he and his cellmate got into once they'd been released.)

Particularly since N/C has long been associated with Scientist Bob Proctor and other New-Wage hustledorks, it's hard for some of us to shed tears for them, and easy, perhaps, to speculate that they may have gotten a bit of what they deserved from their choice to associate with True-dough. However, I do feel bad for people such as banjoDavid and other employees who apparently lost good jobs because of N/C's poor choices and KT's shenanigans.


Related Whirled links about Kevin True-dough:

Labels: , , , ,


Blogger theoreticalgrrrl said...

As an insomniac I'm often up late at night channel surfing and have come across Kevin Trudeau's various infommercials. If he's so "oppressed" or there's some massive conspiracy to silence The Truth by the government how does he manage that?

These selfish help gurus promote turning a blind eye to the problems in the world around them, and encourage people to be competely self-absorbed and narcissistic. If they were right people like Martin Luther King, Jr. or the abolistionist movement or suffragist movement would not have been able to make the impact on the world that they did. They would have just accepted "loving what is" and not focused on the negative because that supposedly makes the problem worse. They completely went against the law of attraction and looked at what was wrong and *magically* defied a universal LAW of the universe to help create a better world for so many people.

I think if anything the government, as it is now, is probably thrilled that these gurus are doing their best to get people to not challenge the status quo.

(end rant)

Saturday, June 25, 2011 4:37:00 PM  
Blogger RevRon's Rants said...

If Trudeau were the great irritant to "them" he so loudly claims to be, news of his untimely demise (or his return to prison) would be little more than a three-inch, page two piece in your local paper. His narcissistic conspiracy theory rants are amusing fare for insomniacs, particularly when he's hired a couple of Hooters girls to feign amazement at his every proclamation. Their amusement value declines significantly when you consider that some people actually fall for his spiels and spend significant $$ - especially when they should be spending those $$ on actual medical care, rather than marketing voodoo.

Sunday, June 26, 2011 8:41:00 AM  
Anonymous Yakaru said...

I saw one comment on a Huff post article arguing that Death Ray was framed because the powers that be are furious with those who shared The Secret with the public.

KT is in a similar vain. If he continues he'll finish up sounding like Luis Li.

I think what you just said on twitter about people just wanting a fight rather than a dialogue is true. I find it pathetic to claim -- or to pretend to believe -- that you implicitly agree with all the things True Dough said which you didn't specifically criticize.

Playing "gotcha" at this level is a bit lame.

Sunday, June 26, 2011 4:35:00 PM  
Blogger Cosmic Connie said...

Hey, everyone:

LindaEm wrote this comment to my previous post but I think she meant it to go to this one.

LindEm said...

"I guess KT is another sociopath. He has all the answers, doesn't he? And he's running for office when he is not even aware of the truth of history regarding Mexicans in the United States. Does he not know about the Bracero program where Mexicans were lured here and worked themselves to death with little of the promised recompense? And I can't believe he blames the media for convicting James Ray just because he was trying to help people better themselves? Almost everyone in the self-help industry is smart enough to say nothing until much of this blows over. This guy is uneducated and paranoid. And scary."

===End LindaEm's comment==

Though I published it on the previous post I wanted to publish it here as well because Linda brings up a very good point. Unfortunately I did not listen to the entire KT video myself, for reasons I explained in addenda to my original post. I only listened to a very few minutes where he was apparently defending James Ray and the self-help industry and calling the sweat lodge a very tragic accident but nothing more. When he started reading from Time Magazine & calling them & CNN criminals (apparently for not giving him air time or something)... THAT was when I hit the "stop" button.

I did not hear any of the racist rants that apparently preceded and followed that portion.

Anyway, Linda makes some very valid points. I'm sick of hearing people blame everything on the "immigrants," and that's one reason I've never seen eye to eye with the Republican party. KT is certainly playing to paranoia, xenophobia, and just plain ignorance.

But as I noted on Salty Droid's blog, KT is kind of a part of the selfish-help industry but he is also above it in ways that I am sure many of the gurus envy.

I'll reply to everyone else's comments here tomorrow; do know that I really appreciate all of your contributions. But I wanted to get this one in since my alleged "ignoring" of KT's racist rants has been a point of such contention.

Sunday, June 26, 2011 9:49:00 PM  
Blogger Cosmic Connie said...

Finally catching up on responding to comments...

Theoreticalgrrrl, I've often wondered the same things about True-dough myself. While occasionally he makes a salient point about the ills of government, his martyr shtick is bogus and purely self-serving. I'm amazed his fans don't see through that, but then if they did, most of 'em wouldn't be his fans any more.

The selfish-help gurus do indeed profit by encouraging people to focus on themselves and turn away from the bad stuff in the world. All of which, as you noted, leaves the populace more vulnerable to control from the same insidious forces that True-dough warns about.

Tuesday, June 28, 2011 2:26:00 PM  
Blogger Cosmic Connie said...

Ron, great point about what the government COULD do to True-dough if it were really trying to stifle him. Someone else made the same point on my Illuminutty post re his "secret brotherhood" claims. That person said that if KT really had been a member of a secret organization that guarded its secrets as jealously as he claimed "The Brotherhood" did, he would have been destroyed for revealing them. (As it is, he claims that he is sharing the information he learned at great personal risk to himself. Uh-huh.)

As for his martyr-to-the-government act, it still seems to be working for him. And that's both funny and sad.

Tuesday, June 28, 2011 2:32:00 PM  
Blogger Cosmic Connie said...

Yakaru, thanks for the comment and for your support both here and on Twitter. I see the offended parties have been trying to play "gotcha" with you too. Sigh...

I think that at first the ndns were getting after me for ignoring the racist rants (and the "people of color's" criticisms thereof) rather than for implicitly agreeing with the racism. Later, after it escalated because I insisted I hadn't *heard* the rants, they decided I was a liar and a racist myself. That's their verdict. I've been tried, convicted, and sentenced to wear a scarlet L (for liar) and R (for racist) until I grovel and apologize, which of course I am not going to do.

Regarding the HuffPost comment, it's really sad to see supposedly educated adults mounting that kind of defense for James Ray. But as you said, it's the same kind of wide-eyed/seekrit-info/paranoia crap that True-dough pulls.

Tuesday, June 28, 2011 2:40:00 PM  
Anonymous hHH said...

Connie, slightly off topic, here is a quote from Aldous Huxley's famous Berkeley talk

"You’ll find for example that the experienced hypnotist will tell one that the number of people, the percentage of people who can be hypnotized with the utmost facility (snaps), just like that. is about 20%, and about a corresponding number at the other end of the scale are very, very difficult or almost impossible to hypnotize. But in between lies a large mass of people who can with more or less difficulty be hypnotized, that they can gradually be if you work hard enough at it be got into the hypnotic state, and in the same way the same sort of figures crop up again, for example in relation to the administration of placebos.

A big experiment was carried out three of four years ago in the general hospital in Boston on post-operative cases where several hundred men and woman suffering comparable kinds of pain after serious operations were allowed to, were given injections whenever they asked for them whenever the pain got bad, and the injections were 50% of the time were of morphine, and 50% of water. And about twenty percent of those who went through the experiment, about 20% of them got just as much relief from the distilled waters as from the morphea. About 20% got no relief from the distilled water, and in-between were those who got some relief or got relief occasionally.

So yet again, we see the same sort of distribution, and similarly in regard to what in BNW I called Hypnopedia, the sleep teaching, I was talking not long ago to a man who manufactures records which people can listen to in the, during the light part of sleep, I mean these are records for getting rich, for sexual satisfaction (crowd laughs), for confidence in salesmanship and so on, and he said that its very interesting that these are records sold on a money-back basis, and he says there is regularly between 15% and 20% of people who write indignantly saying the records don’t work at all, and he sends the money back at once. There are on the other hand, there are over 20% who write enthusiastically saying they are much richer, their sexual life is much better (laughter) etc, etc. And these of course are the dream clients and they buy more of these records. And in between there are those who don’t get much results and they have to have letters written to them saying “Go persist my dear, go on” (laughter) and you will get there, and they generally do get results in the long run."

Is all this new wage/self help controversy really over that suggestible 20% ?

Wednesday, June 29, 2011 3:12:00 PM  
Blogger Cosmic Connie said...

Very interesting, HHH, and not really off-topic at all, particularly since I suspect that True-dough is trying to employ some lame "hypnotic" speech techniques (or at least manipulative ones, e.g., those silly dramatic pauses and such).

IMO it's not just about the suggestible 20%, but also about the much larger (approx. 60%) group that get very few if any measurable results, but in whom hope springs eternal.

Wednesday, June 29, 2011 3:53:00 PM  
Anonymous Martypants said...

Somewhere between "He's a jolly good felon" and "turds of a feather" I recommitted to just listen to you sing to me here forever Connie.
Cheers - you always make me realize I need to write more. Just 'cuz. :)

Wednesday, June 29, 2011 8:58:00 PM  
Blogger Cosmic Connie said...

Aw, Martypants. You love me even though the Indians have officially branded me a racist and a liar. I. Am. Touched.

And yes, you do need to write more, so get to it! Thanks as always for your support.

Wednesday, June 29, 2011 9:05:00 PM  
Anonymous Martypants said...

I ONLY love you because the Indians branded you a racist and a liar. Everything until that point was pure idolatry. Now I am full-bore on love.

Wednesday, June 29, 2011 10:44:00 PM  
Blogger Cosmic Connie said...


Actually, Marty, "branded" was probably the wrong word. I got *hash-tagged* by the Twitter Tribe, under #Racism and #Liar.

Thursday, June 30, 2011 9:47:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Connie my friend, I would really love to see you call a person names to their face just once.

"For he's a jolly good felon: True-dough speaks out for Death Ray" .

Yes I would love to hear you sing this above little ditty to that person's face. Would you? And stand there to let them react to you?

The nerve people have to slander others in blogs is what gets me typing here. Connie, if you and I were at a local bar, while I am sure you would be breathtakingly charming and hott, and a ball to spend time with, and I can tell you I am a good time socially, but I promise I would not hesitate to speak directly to you about the things I post here RE: your gossip mill.

BUT would you say all the things you say here trying to build up a case that Ray is not a human being but some evil kicking post worthy of all your insults, to the face of the person and all the other persons you are talking of in your blogs? To their face and stand their for their reactions to you?

Saturday, July 02, 2011 3:58:00 PM  
Blogger Cosmic Connie said...

1. Both Kevin Trudeau and James Ray ARE convicted felons, so to call them that on a blog post is not to commit "slander," which, the way I understand the term, is defined as oral repetition of something one knows to be untrue.
2. I can't sing so I would never attempt to sing anything to anyone. I also don't hang around in bars.
3. To criticize or make snide remarks about someone is not to deny that person's humanity. I have never made or tried to make the case that James Ray (or anyone else I write about) is not human. My opinion is that James Ray is not worthy of *all* of my insults, only the ones that are specifically about him.
4. I have no objection to having a face-to-face conversation with any of the people I write about, but they are too busy and important for the likes of me. My blog apparently doesn't bother them. We've established that it does bother you.

Saturday, July 02, 2011 6:11:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Connie, can you clarify, because I did NOT ask if you would be willing to have a a "face-to-face conversation" with any of the people you write about.

I asked if you would say every single word and deliver it in the tone of your blogs to the people's faces? and stand there and let them react to you?

I am going to assert that you would not dare to say the things to people's faces that you write in your blog in a million years and if you did you would come across as rube and aggressive and I would guess that the reactions of any people present would make the situation VERY unpleasant for you.

Gossip only ever gets delivered behind people's backs.

Saturday, July 02, 2011 6:23:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And judging from your blog , I also have the perception that you are and you would be way to kind and decent and respectful of others to ever talk to people's faces the way that you dare to write about them in your gossip column here.

That is what I don't get about your thing here. You ooze generosity and kindness but in my way of seeing this on line fiasco, view yourself justified in campaigning about public figures you have never met in cruel, mocking, vicious and relentless ways.

You're an enigma girl. I like that in you but wish it were otherwise in this instance.


Saturday, July 02, 2011 6:29:00 PM  
Blogger RevRon's Rants said...

Anon - You may be assured that Connie is (and I am) more than willing to say to anyone's face anything that we say to/about them on the blog. More, in fact. Let us know when you'll be here, and we'll prove it to you. Or do you only whine and snipe from the safety of anonymity? Pot, meet kettle. But we'd be more than glad to remedy the situation, at least from our end.

Oh, yeah... have a nice day. :-)

Saturday, July 02, 2011 7:02:00 PM  
Blogger Cosmic Connie said...

Thanks, Ron. I appreciate your comments and support.

And as it happens, Anon, I *have* met some of the people I write about.

Saturday, July 02, 2011 7:09:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Connie, does Ron speak for you? Are you one single entity? Should people direct all questions to him in the future?

if not, I respectfully request you speak for yourself, if you would. Would you say all the things you say in your blog word for word to people's faces in a public setting and stand there and accept the consequences of talking to people in that way?

Saturday, July 02, 2011 7:21:00 PM  
Blogger Cosmic Connie said...

Anon, Ron knows me better than anyone else does so sometimes I let him answer questions for me. If I disagree with something he says, or if I want to qualify it, I do.

Actually, I feel that your question about a hypothetical situation (i.e., whether or not I would speak to my snargets in person the way I write about them on my blog) is as irrelevant to the essential points of my blog posts as you say your insistence on complete anonymity is to the points *you* are trying to make. I have never been able to figure out whether you are deliberately creating a diversion, are genuinely curious, or both.

The short answer to your question is that my snark is generally worse than my bite.

For the most part, I am not snarky in person. Snark is part of a deliberately created online persona for the purpose of this blog.

While I do NOT feel that I am all that charming in person (contrary to your speculations), I actually do attempt to be polite to most people in social situations. I would probably not, for example, stand up at a New-Wage seminar and shout insults at a guru, no matter how much I disagreed with him or her. That would be inconsiderate of the people who were trying to hear the speaker. On the other hand, blogging about that speaker interferes with nobody's experience. They can choose to read my blog or not.

You can go on all you want about how this variance is typical of Internet "gossips" (as you've described me), and how we behave online in ways we probably wouldn't behave in person. It doesn't invalidate my blog in any way.

Despite what you see as a disconnect between my online persona and my behavior in person, it could hardly be said that I am writing about people "behind their backs." Nor am I hiding behind a cloak of anonymity. This is a public blog, available on the search engines, and anyone who wishes to do so can read it and respond to/refute anything I write. My real name appears on this blog. Some folks have said I'm foolish for not hiding my identity, and they may be right.

I submit that I am not "hurting" the people I write about. They're still making money hand over fist, they still have their fans and followers, and they're making their own reputations. I have little if any influence there. I merely report on, and express opinions about, the things they do and say publicly.

I submit that the worst thing I am doing is angering people who are followers or fans of the New-Wage rock stars (and wannabes) I write about. I'm rocking their boats a bit, as it were, but not endangering them or causing them harm in any way.

As I noted, though, we've been over this before. You may continue the argument on your own.

Saturday, July 02, 2011 8:08:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is of course your right to not do so, but you did not answer the question, are you aware of that? I am going to conclude that you would NEVER do it. And you think that means nothing, and I think it means allot.

And yours and Ron's attempt to infer something about my internet anonymity into this is so ridiculous. I am posting and talking directly to you and you have the option to post anything anyone submits or not.

As for you not hurting anyone, you are kidding yourself. The people you talk about know thousands of people. You are doing your best to cause harm to the people you talking about and the friends family and associates and customers and acquaintances of the people you talk about may be negatively impacted by your relentless campaigning against your targets..

Connie, you may feel better about yourself and sleep better at night , thinking you do not negatively effect any real living breathing vulnerable people , but it is my opinion that you do.

Saturday, July 02, 2011 8:37:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ok I am done



......drinks are on Ron if we ever meet.

Saturday, July 02, 2011 9:00:00 PM  
Blogger RevRon's Rants said...

Hmmm... We are real people, who put our names to everything we write, and whose physical location is readily available, yet we are being lectured for not being up-front by someone who hides behind anonymity, and who then has the temerity (or just sufficiently severe cognitive dissonance) to call our pot/kettle comparison of her own words to her behavior ridiculous. Amazing!

The only people who even might be "hurt" by Connie's blog are those who defraud others, take advantage of others' naiveté, gullibility, desperation, or downright stupidity. And judging by their self-proclaimed successes, I doubt that Connie is really affecting them at all... just giving a few prospective marks a heads up, and perhaps even saving them from wasting their time, money, and energy.

If anon is so intent on defending the hucksters' right to fleece their marks, who are we to challenge her, eh? I can't say that's precisely her intent, since unlike her, I don't claim to read others' minds and motives... only their results.

Sunday, July 03, 2011 11:43:00 AM  
Blogger Cosmic Connie said...

I answered your question, Anon; you just refuse to see it.

Your coming in and dropping your own little "bombs" completely anonymously -- with no fear of repercussion or worry that your identity will be revealed -- *is* relevant. I have the choice of publishing your comments or not. But you seem to ignore the fact that whether or not I publish your comments or those of any other critics, by the very act of blogging I am making myself vulnerable in ways that you and all the other Anonymi are not. You don't seem to think this is significant, but I do.

The burden of proof is on you and any other accusers to demonstrate exactly how I have "hurt" the people I write about. Yes, they "know" thousands of people; so what? They are public figures, having become public mostly through relentless self-aggrandizement. People who want to believe their spiels will do so, and will continue to hand them money, regardless of what I write on my blog.

A couple of years ago I was privy to an email exchange in which one of my “snargets” referred to me as a nasty mosquito, not worthy of consideration by the big important money-makers. This person did, however, suggest a few underhanded, dirty “SEO” tricks that the snargets could employ to severely undermine me if they wanted to waste any time on me. But he added that their time was better spent creating new products, especially since I have such a small audience. I imagine this person’s attitude is typical of those of the people I write about, if said folks are even aware of my blog’s existence.

I strongly suspect that Whirled Musings appeals mainly to those who are already disillusioned as a result of their own experiences with New-Wage scam artists. Believers will continue to go on their merry ways until and unless they are presented with enough evidence to make them start questioning their beliefs. If and when that happens, some may find satisfaction or at least a couple of hours of entertainment from reading my blog.

Sunday, July 03, 2011 11:55:00 AM  
Blogger Cosmic Connie said...

Ron, your comment crossed in cyberspace with my most recent one, but thank you. You said it better and more concisely than I did.

Sunday, July 03, 2011 11:58:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Both your points of views are very convenient to yourself, as a married couple, as writers practicing and showing off their their skills and as people who appear unhappy with other people promoting themselves and appearing to profit from it more than you have and it all smacks of a lack balance and critical thinking iMO.

I actually don't "like" most of the people you target. I won't name names as that would be doing what you do, but most of those people would never get a penny from me or my attention. I am certainly not defending them.

I am pulled to comment on the criticism and the art of blogging about others.

As for the anonymity piece you guys are both grasping at straws. . Anonymity is a totally acceptable practice on the web. I do not use my anonymity to gossip about others. I use it to talk to you who have the option to post my harsh comments to you or not. If your blog was not regulated by you and you did not have the option to cherry pick what you posted, i would never dare to not like i do or say what i say.

Sunday, July 03, 2011 12:52:00 PM  
Blogger RevRon's Rants said...

Anon, I have no problem naming names where felons and frauds are concerned. Better to minimize future felonies and frauds. Nor do I have a problem writing you off as a whining little troll who never addresses the actual points made ion a blog, and only offers complaints about your image of the bloggers' motives.

That you fail to see (much less acknowledge) the incongruity of your vacuous sniping versus your derision of others' issue-related sniping clearly defines what is either a profound cognizant dissonance on your part or a complete lack of integrity. Either way, your argument is a complete failure.

I fond it amusing that you seem to think you have an accurate picture of what our lives are like, and that you cannot see that you do to us exactly what you whine about so incessantly in your accusations toward us - and apparently everyone else you've ever encountered on a blog or forum. The disconnect - if real - is astounding, and probably worthy of inclusion in the DSM.

You seem to think everyone is perfectly aligned against you. Well, perhaps it's just become apparent to lots of folks that at least in a discussion forum, you are nothing but an annoying little ass. You might be tolerable in real life, but I doubt you'd find many people who have experienced you on blogs who would be particularly anxious to find out. None that I know of, anyway. One consolation: if you manage to alienate everybody you encounter, they can't accuse you of being paranoid. :-)

As to the notion of our perfect alignment, let me state - for the record - that I think Connie is being stupid for allowing you voice to continually whine on her blog. And yes, I've told her so to her face. That should make you happy.

Sunday, July 03, 2011 2:09:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ok Ron.

Sunday, July 03, 2011 2:20:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Connie I guess you rattled True-dough's cage so hard that he came out to have a snarkout in your home turf. Not a good idea. When is that boi going to learn that you are the truth meter of new wagers lol. Give it up Anon.


Sunday, July 03, 2011 11:09:00 PM  
Blogger Cosmic Connie said...

Anon Sunday, July 03, 2011 11:09:00 PM: LOL. Actually I think True-dough enjoys the controversy and challenges to his "authority." It keeps his name at the forefront. His VP of Marketing, Peter Wink, once told me as much.

If True-dough is not skeered of the big bad guv'ment agencies with their big bad fines, he's certainly not rattled by a little ol' snarky blogger. Besides, he's way too bizzy for the likes of me.

My Anon friend and I go way back. She may be a True-dough *fan* for all I know, but I can safely say she prolly isn't True-dough incognito.

Monday, July 04, 2011 10:32:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am a Connie *fan* and you know that babe.

I have no loyalties to anyone you have discussed. I don't even know who Trudeau is. I thought he was Senator of Canada or something. What lured me here, what I took offence with what I perceived as internet gang banging i took issue with internet bullying and gossiping on people who were in the media spotlight and so , just dove in and started shooting.

I see now that I added absolutely no value to anyone nor myself by doing so, but only made an arse of myself and annoyed a few people here and there.

But know that I truly do not know the people you talk about or have any particular personal investment in them.

Monday, July 04, 2011 11:18:00 AM  
Blogger Cosmic Connie said...

'Kay, Anon. Thanks.

Monday, July 04, 2011 11:21:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've been reading this blog for some time. On a number of prior occasions, the targets of posts do come on here (most recently Gary Douglas) and respond (well, sort of, Gary D's case) to the posts. I am sure on many other occasions fans have pointed them out to the subjects of posts. So I don't really think this is "behind their backs." I suspect people 'in the industry' Google themselves regularly. Yes, I'd bet on that.

Given the length of many of these posts, I find it hard to believe that the theoretical exercise of 'reading every word to their face' makes any sense at all.

Tuesday, July 05, 2011 11:58:00 AM  
Blogger Cosmic Connie said...

Good points, Anon Tuesday, July 05, 2011 11:58:00 AM. Not only has Gary Douglas (founder of another frequent topic of my blog, Access Consciousness) come on here, but numerous "Accessories" have too.

And on my Whirled Wars post (Dec. 31, 2009), Joe Vitale's pal Pat O'Bryan, aka "Minor Snarget" engaged several people in a lengthy exchange in response to that post.

Although I implied in a previous response on this thread that most New-Wage gurus haven't heard of my blog, I am sure some have, and Anon, you do make a good point that the gurus probably Google themselves (or have their minions do it). If I happen to be at the top of the search results I'm sure some of them have seen my posts.

Anyway, apart from the logistical problems and sheer ridiculousness of the prospect of my reading these posts to anyone's face, I'll simply restate the point I made to the quarrelsome Anon: my "in-person" style is different from my "blogging" style. The same could be said, I think, for most bloggers and most writers.

Tuesday, July 05, 2011 1:05:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Connie, I was wondering, if the individual people you blog most about did not charge $ but still said the same kind of things, and promoted the same ideas and points of views, would you take issue with them and still blog about them?

Is it that they are making a business out of what they talk about that irks you? Take out the , problem solved? Is profit the bulk of the the issue for you?

I ask because you are doing something similar to those you take issue with, you are talking (they are talking) and saying that taking is important, ( they are saying that what they say is important) and rhetoric and discussion is the vehicle you both transfer whatever value you hope to transfer, but you do not charge any $ and I get the impression that money exchange is what you view most separates you from the objects of your disapproval. Just curious what you view on this might be.

Wednesday, July 06, 2011 9:50:00 PM  
Blogger Cosmic Connie said...

Anon, I thought you'd left. Hello again anyway.

No, profit is not the deciding factor in determining whom I'm going to target and whom I'm going to leave alone. That is a straw man argument and won't work here.

I've addressed a closely related straw man, the "critics hate money" argument, numerous times before.
Here's one of the most recent:

For the most part I blog about people who are relatively high-profile. They're the ones making the serious money (or at least claiming to make the serious money) but they're also making the most noise about how wonderful and successful they are, and they generally attribute their wonderfulness and success to the product or service they just happen to be hawking. Granted, they're easy targets.

Occasionally, however, I will write about mere wannabes who are selling what I think are really silly products, services, or ideas.

There are many more prospective snargets out there -- both famous and obscure, rich and not-so-rich -- than I have time or inclination to write about.

However, I think that a New-Wage scammer who charges nothing or very little is just as potentially blogworthy as one who charges a great deal of money. While the profit factor does indeed add one more objectionable layer, money is not the object of my disdain.

My sense is that most of the famous stars of "The Secret" (to give one example of a high-profile segment of the New-Wage industry) were a$$holes long before they were making a lot of money. I know this is the case with some of them anyway.

If I have objections around the area of money, those objections are due to the simple fact that many gurus take people's money -- and sometimes a LOT of it -- in exchange for at best, what amounts to little more than false hope, and at worst, permanent harm.

Wednesday, July 06, 2011 11:25:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Connie, i has this afterthought and was wondering what were the ideas you found most unattractive and ventured back, trying not to be to prickly and quarrelsome as I have usually been.

You say it is not about the $ but there is not much (if any at all) evidence of that in your answer (which seem to contradict itself) or blog site.

I cannot find one example of "a New-Wage scammer who charges nothing" that has been blog worthy for you. If all you write about is people who make $ or who are trying to make $ , how can you say that it has nothing about the $?

I dont think there is anything wrong with you critiquing a group who is trying to profit or profiting from their discussions . It may have reminded you of past comments by others, but I was not saying "critics hate money" .

I was just looking to see if it was the points of views and ideas that you disapproved of because the evidence (your blog ) clearly shows people making money from others is one of the things you find unattractive.

Thursday, July 07, 2011 7:46:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is it the people getting all the attention or claiming to make money or self promoting how successful they are and attributing their success to a product or service they are selling that you take issue with ?

Or is it the merits or lack of merit of the product or service? Do you view the products without value or is it the personalities you find distasteful?

Thursday, July 07, 2011 7:53:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Occasionally, however, I will write about mere wannabes who are selling "

if a "selling" aspect is always involved in your topics, it is not a stretch to say that your issue involves people selling and charging $ for x, and it is the "sell" = $ part is integral to who you might take issue with.

Thursday, July 07, 2011 9:28:00 AM  
Blogger RevRon's Rants said...

Anonymous, it's your favorite Nazi oppressor here. If you even have to ask whether Connie takes exception to ideas, you have either 1) not read her blog, 2) been incapable of comprehending what she writes, 3) or are - once again - striving to deflect the discussion.

If 1, consider reading Connie's posts.
If 2, consider having someone else read the posts to you, and explain whatever it is you fail to understand,
If 3, please consider sticking by your word (for once), and after making your latest dramatic exit, stay gone.

Ref #2, above - my condescension is quite intentional, and IMO, quite justified.

Ref #3, above - Don't play the "censored martyr" game in response. You're the one who acknowledged that your comments are out of line and non-productive, and said that you were leaving. I'm just trying to get you to actually stick with the course of action which you publicly acknowledged to be the most appropriate one, and said you were going to follow.

Friday, July 08, 2011 9:12:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks for all your great and well organized points Ron and most of all for setting me straight every time you speak. You are a very generous instructor.

Friday, July 08, 2011 12:01:00 PM  
Blogger RevRon's Rants said...

You're welcome.

Saturday, July 09, 2011 10:28:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What I find most, irritating, is the lack of connection between left and right brain thinking. The failure of both sides it seems, to communicate, with themselves in a complete matter.
Trudeau and his global network of rich and wanna be rich, are unquestionably arrogant, often lying,at times perhaps criminally so. Unfortunately for 21st century quantum reality, their absurdities cloud the intensely powerful kernels of truth they share, and unsurprisingly elicit the knee jerk reactions that cynics, and skeptics so predictably share.

I am NOT placing Cosmic Connie, in the cynic class. It is my first time here and I love her all ready.
I have not read much of her work, but I will. I came here for some specific info on trudeau,Hamilton, neo think, global etc. And could not help making this comment.
I know of much good from these groups, however, it is not something that can't be found anywhere else, for free.

But the linear, left, automatically and continually implie that all they say is wrong, when in fact, most of it is quite in line with latest sciences.
As a self described liberal libertarian, (good transparent government), I find myself having to continually disagree with each side, and then apologize to each and say how much I agree with them.
I better get used to it until more people learn to connect the two sides of their brains via the corpus colasum, and connect high to low, in a harmonic circuit.

Saturday, April 14, 2012 1:25:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home