The beginning of the end...

First things first- YAY PHILS!!!! Knew you could do it! No stopping fate...

Read something scary this morning. Apparently the Bush administration is putting a last minute full court press on laws that would deregulate many industries that do significant environmental damage, laws that would take significant time and effort to reverse. The corporate lobbyists are going nuts trying to get everything in place and in effect before the new administration, so that nothing can be undone. These laws would allow for higher emissions, increased deforestation, increasing coal mining in protected areas, and other such actions. This weakening of environmental protections have been a goal of this White House from day one, but they have waited until people's attention has been shifted elsewhere and have touted the possible financial benefits at a time when everyone is concerned about money.

It's another prime example of short term gain trumping long term negative effects. Just because the full impact of these measures may not be felt for some time, it does not mean that it is okay to move forward. Supporters will claim that these acts are fiscally responsible, and they may be; but what about environmental responsibility and generational responsibility. People are used to nature being a renewable and bountiful resource, but even if there is a large supply, it is still finite. The human population is doubling at an astounding rate, which means that we are consuming double the resources even if we stay at the same rate. Industrialization of countries that were not consumers for these resources before is adding to the drain and taking a huge toll as well.

The earth is not a giant credit card with an unlimited spending limit, that we can take from as we wish without ever having to pay the costs. Human skin regenerates, but if you take enough off or damage it enough, it doesn't grow back. We are pulling the skin off the earth every day, digging deeper and deeper into her to pull out what we want. Eventually, we will take so much off this planet that it will not be able to grow back. In the meantime, we have created vital systems that cannot survive without these resources. What happens to our progeny when they are gone? Why do we feel we should be waiting until the last minute to deal with these issues?

Politicians have said that we need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and that gutting the pristine forests and oceans of our nation is the way to do it. I would argue that we need to reduce our dependence on oil, period. We need to embrace a simpler life altogether. A life that will not only reduce our negative impact on this planet and sustain its resources, but that will also leave us better equipped to weather any shortfalls that may happen in the future. This means less driving, more walking, less reliance on chemicals and industrially created products, smaller homes and vehicles, reusing resources and creating products with a focus on reusability, a shift away from a consumer-based "throwaway" society.

Our lives are not any happier or fuller than our ancestors were, just arguably more comfortable. But comfort, and what it takes to be happy, is in the eye of the beholder. Ask the Amish if they lead lives that are full of basic contentment, and they'll tell you yes. Ask your neighbors the same question, and I bet you wouldn't get that answer. Maybe, just maybe, the Amish are on to something...

On a personal note...

What is it about love, the passionate love that two people share? How can it be so desired and yet so feared? Why is it so simple, yet so complicated? Why is it so important in our lives, but we spend so much time convincing ourselves that it isn't and we don't need it just so we can protect ourselves? Why do people want someone to love them for who they really are, yet be anyone other than who they really are in order to get the object of their love to love them? Why do people die for it, but also die without it?

If I had the answers to those questions, I'd be a millionaire and my blog would be read by a lot more people than it is now. I wish I could say I understand that kind of love, but to understand it you have to have experienced it and know that you were at the time is was happening so that you could take note of the experience. Since that has not happened to me, then I can't say I understand that kind of love. I can Monday morning quarterback with the best of em, but that's about as far as it goes. So much needs to align in order to experience true love, it's amazing that it happens at all. You have to be in the right place at the right time, both physically and metaphorically in your own life, and meet the right person. And that person has to have the same thing happen. When you think about it that way- WOW! Maybe getting struck by lightening doesn't seem so rare of an occurrance after all, or I have really pointed out how remarkable an occurance true love is; I'm over 35, so it has been said that the two happen at about the same frequency.

They both happen often enough to make people afraid to go out into a thunderstorm with an umbrella and to spend a lot of time and money hoping that we will meet the One. Unfortunately, they do not happen often enough in MY life. However, hope is something I try to keep in plentiful supply in my life, so you never know...

Staying strong in the face of adversity

Last night's World Series game was something to see. I think it reminded some people and players about why certain teams make it to the World Series. Here were some men in just shirt sleeves, playing in the pouring rain, strong winds and temperatures in the mid 30's. They were doing everything they could to see the ball in the rain and to hit and pitch a slippery ball with precision. While they may have been gripping in the dugout, they had their game faces on in the field. Both sides were there to win and both sides wanted to finish it. They were no less committed to the outcome because of the weather.

Bad weather is placed in our way all the time. We are all given struggles to contend with. But do we pack it in and say, "this is too hard, I'll quit", or do we live our lives like it's the World Series and keep on going? The World Series, for many players, is a once in a lifetime event. They give it their all because they may never get the chance again. Your life only comes once; are you going to live it with the same level of commitment?

Living a life of purpose with a strong sense of investment in the outcome is important. The people around you, your loved ones and friends, require nothing less from you. Live in the present moment, doing all you can to work towards the brightest future you can imagine. Learn from the past without dwelling in it. The key to any journey is knowing where you are going, even if you aren't quite sure of how you'll get there. We will never be able to predict how the journey of our lives will unfold; that's one of the challenges of life, but one of the most exciting things as well. Knowing where you want to be at the end of it will help you to make the decisions that come up along the way and shape the nature of your journey.

Commit to your living your life and to the outcome you desire for yourself and others. When you do, you'll find a little bad weather really isn't such a big deal, it's only temporary and all part of the game.

GO PHILS!!!!!!!!

Interesting question...

First of all- WAY TO GO PHILS!!!! Keep it up!

I saw an interesting advertisement (what for I don't know) that was sponsored by a think tank of scientist (never said what kind). It posed a question that was answered by a few scientists. Not surprising, each scientist came up with his own answer. The question was, "does the free market corrode moral character?"

After giving this a bit of a think, I would have to say the answer is no, because to answer yes would say that its the market that shapes us, and not the other way around. That's not to say that I think that the free market is beneficial to our moral character. I feel that any market, free or otherwise, at the end of the day reflects the moral character of the people that comprise it. Any market system, on paper, is good. It's how it is distorted by human character in action that keeps it good or makes it bad.

If you have a group of people who feel strongly that the needs of others are as important as their own, then the free market is a wonderful system for them that rewards initiatives without the negative effects of greed. If you have a group of people who are self-centered and who as a whole do not care about the needs of others unless it is shown to benefit them, then a free market system will only reinforce that selfishness by financially rewarding those who make profit at the expense of others. The system did nothing in and of itself, it only enhanced the characteristics that were present in the people who comprised it to begin with.

That is the danger of looking at any economic system in black and white- capitalism, socialism, communism- and applying the label of good or bad. What is perfect on paper may not bear any resemblance to what that system turns into in practice, and a system that works very well for one culture may be an absolute disaster for another. That's why there is no point in labeling systems and sticking to dogma. There is nothing wrong from picking and choosing what works in practice for a particular group of people from any combination of systems. Who cares if we, or any country, are capitalist, socialist, communist, or whatever? It's about what is beneficial and effective. We don't get any brownie points for adopting the whole of a system to the exclusion of others if it means we fall flat on our face. Bankrupt is bankrupt.

The best system is the one that works... so get over the labels and demand that our politicians enact practical strategies that do the greatest amount of good with the least amount of harm, no matter where they came from; maybe we need to give commusocicapitalism a try.

"We hold these truth to be self-evident,...

that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness." So said Thomas Jefferson is the Declaration of Independence, and this has been the credo by which we have identified ourselves to the world for the last 250 years.

That is what makes what happened in Texas recently so deplorable. A black man was run over and dragged to the point where his body was mangled and officials were still finding pieces of his skull 3 days later. One of the two men involved in the crime was a member of a prison white supremacist gang during a four year stint that began in 2003, which was for a murder charge that was pleaded down to manslaughter. The 3 men were known to each other before the incident and there was alcohol involved. However, whether this was an actual hate crime or not, the fact that it echoes a similar incident that WAS a hate crime that occurred only 200 miles away leaves a bad taste in the mouth of many. All 3 of these men were born after civil rights were enacted and became a part of daily life in this country. None of them grew up in a culture of legally enforced segregation. Racism was not a legally mandated and protected state of being, and to be racist was by choice for these men.

Is Texas an isolated hotbed of racism? To think that is true is downplaying the breadth of the issue and painting an unfair portrait of a considerable number of whites in Texas. It does lead you to wonder why, in a generation with no direct experience with legal segregation, the behaviors and attitudes of racism and segregation remain? While it is naive to assume that just because a form of oppression is outlawed, the oppression is going to miraculously disappear. It takes time for people to change, especially those who lived the bulk of their life under by it. But you would think that there would be hope for those who were never a part of that system, for whom equality under the law was a given and was legally protected. Why is this not the case?

How much improvement in race relations has there truly been in the last 40 years? I think that now that some of the newness has worn off and the assumption of civil rights has become commonplace, we have lost the sense of urgency in safeguarding its implementation. I speak to both whites and blacks. Self-segregation is as common now as it ever was and it is being justified now on a cultural basis instead of a racial one. There is little dialogue to promote common understanding between the average white and black person in this country, so there is little chance that this is going to change. After fighting so hard and paying such high costs to de-segregate this country and bring legal equality, why are we voluntarily segregating ourselves and leaving opportunities for misunderstanding that can lead to such acts of hate?

At the end of the day, we are all humans in the eyes of God and the rest of the creatures of earth. We are all Americans in the eyes of the rest of the world's citizens. We need to look for the common bonds that unite us as a way to open up dialogue and to create the open and free society initially envisioned by our founding fathers and expanded by men like Martin Luther King. We can not afford- economically, culturally, and in societal terms- to have two such distinct "countries" existing here. The last time we had two distinct nations within our walls, we were almost torn apart and destroyed by the Civil War. The cost to all would be too high if that were to happen again.

Let us remember the principles which define this nation and truly be "one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

The cost of war and greed

I read an article today that said that the deficit and the amount that it will cost has all but put the squash on any tax breaks that either candidate will be able to enact. That in eight years we have gone from no deficit to one that will negatively affect our economy and quality of life is astounding and disappointing. This war that we have been a part of for almost SEVEN years now has been remarkable in how little it has affected the daily lives of most Americans. I'm sure that the majority even forgets for periods of time that we are even at war. Except for those that have close family in the military, this war has seemed to cost them nothing, so no one has done much in the way of major agitation to end it. Now, however, it is going to truly start hitting people in the pocket. And there is no current end in sight to the presence of our troops and the continual drain to our pockets. American greed, in the way of using home equity to support lifestyles beyond our means, finally has a cost that will begin to hit home. There will be a direct benefit to society encouraging its members to practice practicality and frugality, instead of rampant consumerism and "keeping up with the Jones'".

Everything has a cost- a fact that we conveniently choose to ignore. But we do not have the option to ignore it anymore. The sad thing is that even if we all choose to cut back and make things work, we have selfishly made it that much harder for our children and grandchildren to get ahead. We may be the last generation for quite some time who have had the ability to give our children a better life than we had. And that is only when we consider the economic ramifications of our actions. How much of a detrimental future effect has other actions of a moral, ethical, sociological and cultural nature had? Those costs are even harder to see because they are so insidious. We have taught a generation of young people that sex is a pleasurable leisure activity devoid of emotion. We have shown that there is no one more important than self. We have demonstrated that being seen as cool is more important than displaying maturity and good judgement and is something to aspire too. We have made being a child's friend more important than being a good parent and providing a solid example. We have created a world full of subjective ethics, where good and bad is on a sliding scale determined by what is beneficial to ME. We have told our children through our behavior that the measure of success as a person is measured in things, not character.

Character is a quaint, old fashioned notion we place in the same land of nostalgia where we place the "good old days." We bemoan its loss, but refuse to take the responsibility for our part in its downfall and refuse to take action to restore it into our culture and way of life. "Why should I (be honest, recycle, exercise moderation, care about others), if no one else is doing it?", is a phrase I hear a lot. What we forget is that by not stepping up and doing what we need to do, we become another's excuse for not doing it. Someone has to start doing the right thing, providing the example of mature, responsible behavior. Stop being someone else's excuse, start being their inspiration- the person that others look to and say "If they can do it, then so can I."

Let's take our future, our children's and their children's future back. Let's start making choices with their personal and societal consequences in mind. Let's give how our decisions will affect others as much weight as we give how they will affect us. Let's start to hold government just as accountable for the decisions they make in our name. Let's take the time to become educated in the ramifications of actions we may take so that we can make informed, rational decisions. It's really not that hard- it's done one decision at a time.

We all have the ability to change the world into a better place if we all make the small changes we need to to better our part of it. It does not need to be a revolution that sweeps everything away overnight. If we take the long view, the ripple we create with our small actions will widen and grow until over time it will change the world. Commit to change and throw your pebble into the human pond. Then just watch what happens...

Where's FDR when you need him?

First things first- WAY TO GO PHILS!!!!

I was talking with a friend and in the conversation some interesting things were said about this election. First of all, my friend and I both agree that whoever is elected is going to be a one term president. I also believe that unless the incoming president can come in and command FDR style allegiance and the cooperation of the Congress, things are not going to change very much or very quickly, even though everyone agrees that the old way of doing things doesn't work anymore. Barack Obama has not been around long enough to have formed the necessary relationships and will have to contend with racism within congress and their constituencies. McCain's own party will not support him in the type of government intervention this would require and the Democrats won't work with him in this way so that he can fail and they will get to say, "See, that's what you get for electing a Republican!" Our government, being a reflection of the American people, think in the short term- the next election. The policies that will save this country and return it to a place of strength are long term and will require a total paradigm shift. They will require a major change in thinking and action on the part of government, society, and the American people. It is not a return to "the good old days", it is a recognition of the reality of modern life and technology, as well as the increasing globalization of resources, finance, and influence.

After much reflection, I believe that it takes someone who grew up in this type of world to understand and appreciate the changes that have occurred in this nation and I honestly, and with no disrespect, do not believe McCain is that man. He is only human and to succeed, he would need to be the type of person who can totally reject all of the notions he holds based on his lifetime experiences and open his mind to current reality and the different mindset it requires. This type of person is rare and generally does not enter politics. To elect McCain and to expect him to be the architect and promoter of this type of change is not fair to him or to us. While I think he is probably a good man whose intentions are good, I don't think he is equipped to do the job.

I think in that way, Obama is the better man. Having grown up in the times that have shaped modern America- post civil rights, TVs and computers as a part of daily life, a media that actively scrutinizes those who are in the public eye, the UN and international consensus and cooperation, I think he is better able to understand the ways that these and other facets of modern life have shaped who we are. These are not things to be accepted as changes to what he knows of life, they are a part of life for him as they are for everyone. That said, I have my reservations about him as well. What will he do to get the kind of consensus needed to enact the policies needed to create change? Will he be able to do it without having to "sell out"? Will he satisfied with only serving one term in order to achieve the kind of lasting change we need? Will he be willing and able to get over our generations "need to be liked" enough to do what it takes to do the right thing? Will he be able to overcome the influence of growing up in the "Me generation" of the 70's in order to put the interests of others before his own? Maybe he will, but we really don't know enough about him and how he reacts to being under pressure to know these things. I am hesitant about putting such an unknown entity into such a key position at such a critical time. The price we would pay for his failure is a bit too high.

Whoever ends up in the White House in January is in the position to set the benchmark for greatness for the presidency in this century. They also have the chance to go down in history as the Herbert hoover of this century as well- a brilliant man who was unable to rise to the challenge of the times and left to be overshadowed by the man who came after and took it in hand. We all know what the legacy of George W. is; just answer the famous question put forth by his hero Ronald Reagan, "Are you better off than you were 8 years ago?" After a costly 8 year presidential failure, can we afford to make that mistake again? If we can still answer that question with no 8 years from now, will there be any America left to govern?

The myth of Small Town America...

This election, the candidates are going out of their way to play to the sentiments of "small town America" without specifically addressing any of the needs of those in urban and suburban areas. This is part of their appeal to the "average American."

The irony is that "small town America" comprises only 20% of our population. 80% of us live in urban or suburban areas. That's where the jobs are, that's where the housing is, so that's where we live. The vision of America the heartland full of average Joes (like Joe the plumber) who watch baseball, eat apple pie, and buy and drive American is a myth. If you want to see an average American, look at the person parked next to you in the suburban strip mall parking lot, on the train in the seat next to you on your way to work, or standing in line at McDonald's. THAT is what America looks like. And they have become the under served majority in this campaign.

Urban and suburban renewal and reform are topics that address the concerns of the majority of Americans, because they either live or work there; therefore our cities' health is of vital interest to them. But what have the candidates said about the fact that the tax base has shrunk in many of our cities, that the loss of jobs and property value in our cities have created an economic crisis in others, and that these difficulties have forced local governments to cut back on many vital services that directly contribute to the safety and quality of life of the people who live there. People who because of the lack of jobs in small towns do not have the luxury of living there? Not much.

People have the idea that cities are for the very wealthy or the very poor to live in, and that a city's health is only important to those who live in it. That is not so- today's cities are as diverse economically and socially as they have ever been. A city's perceived desirability affects the value of all the property surrounding it and the amount of attraction businesses have toward setting up shop there. While vast areas of this country are rural, that's not where the money is and that's not where you see businesses clamoring to be. Out in the middle of nowhere is still out in the middle of nowhere. Money and industry is found where the people are, and that's cities and their outlying areas.

We need to change our perceptions of what the average American looks like, so that policies meant to benefit the average American truly benefit the average American. We need to make sure that the money spent to make positive change in this country is spent effectively, wisely, and in the correct places. This is a democracy, which means it is our job to do so.

The Reality of School Age America for Boys

For anyone who is the parent of a school age boy, a very disturbing fact came out of a study that was published last month. Nearly one out of five boys in the US had emotional or behavioral problems that concerned their parents enough that they sought the help of a doctor or health care professional. Only one out of ten parents of girls did so. It has also been noted that the percentage of boys attending college is decreasing.

Do we have a bunch of less than bright, emotionally challenged boys in this country? Take a look at the playgrounds and other places boys gather. I do, and I can tell you I don't think that's true. I don't think boys have changed that much from when I was a child, but schools and society's expectations of boys have. It is my opinion that by equalizing the opportunities afforded to both boys and girls and making classroom situations more "girl-friendly", we are doing a disservice to boys, and ultimately both genders.

While I applaud the fairness provided by gender blindness, I have come to recognize that girls and boys are different. It is not entirely societal; scientists have found that their brains work differently. That only makes sense, because the biological roles of men and women are different; a fact the modern society and technology are making increasingly irrelevant. But that does not mean that the fundamental biology of men and women is identical.

Boys in school are not allowed to be active, which it is in their basic nature to do. Recess is not a daily given and in many areas, recess has become a privilege that is taken away for "bad" behavior. I, for one, fail to see how it makes sense that a child who is acting up because they are energetic and need to move is helped by having his one outlet for physical activity taken away. No wonder we have so many "hyperactive, ADHD" diagnosed boys. I'd be hyper and fidgety too. Even day long meetings of adults include scheduled time several times a day to get up and move around. Why should we expect more from our boys than we expect for ourselves?

I think, that while we need to be sure we provide equal opportunity and encouragement to both boys and girls, we also need to appreciate and respect the different learning styles that best suit the unique characteristics of both boys and girls. Taking the time to separate them for a point of the day to try teaching methods that would be most effective for both boys and girls could help. Switching between active learning segments, which work better for boys, with more passive segments for girls may as well. Letting teachers gear the learning style toward the temperament of their classroom instead of stressing test prep may work as well.

There are a lot of possible solutions out there. Since it is becoming clear that the system is failing 50% of the student population, we need to seek them out and try them. As much as anything else, it is not just a matter of what's right, it's truly a matter of national security and well-being. These children are the future of America, they deserve to be as well prepared to take over the mantle of leadership as we can make them.

Dogma vs. faith

This is a subject that has been very much on my mind lately. While I am considering it from a spiritual viewpoint, there are other areas where it fits as well. I guess it boils down to what you believe vs. what the accepted norm is and what your motivations for action are vs. why others or the establishment would have you do what you do.

The world is filled with dogma: religious coda, political party ideology, societal norm, prevailing trends, self-help and how-to books. Everywhere there are pundits telling you what you should think, how you should feel, what you should do, and what kind of person you need to be. They speak from their own experiences; some with good intent, others with nothing but self-serving aims. Good or bad, they are describing a system of thought, belief, or action that seems right from their perspective, which may or may not gel with yours. They leave the impression that not buying into the dogma demonstrates a lack of faith. There may be a lack of faith present, but that is only coincidental. Lack of "buy in" does not immediately equal lack of faith, just a lack of faith in the whole of that particular dogma.

True faith is the result of a conscious choice to believe and comes from consideration of the merits of what beliefs compose and affect that faith. You don't have to fully understand something to believe and have faith in it; I do not understand gravity, but I believe in it and have faith in it, its abilities, and its effects. I experience and recognize it, and my experiences form the basis of my faith. How can I believe in or have faith about something I know nothing of? Faith is an inward decision influenced by outward thoughts and experience. Dogma is only the same as faith when the outward experience of dogma meshes with one's own experiences in a way that inspires faith. Until dogma becomes "yours", it is outside; faith is inside.

We all need to have faith. Faith is the sister of hope and is part of our identity. However, to have faith, we must remember to question and to look for what is real to us in our experiences. Accept those things and their existence, whether they conform to what others think, do, and feel or not. Once you recognize and accept the validity of those things, then you have the basis of faith.

Your faith is yours, and yours alone, first and foremost.

The European Union?

The market had its single biggest weekly increase since 2003. I guess this isn't the Great Depression part 2, after all. The market did not lose 90% of its value and we do not have a jobless rate of 25%, as happened in the depression set off by the catastrophic events of "Black Monday" in 1929. Interesting...

Americans have always done their best to make Europe into some form of conglomerate. The creation of the EU reinforced that view. This week the unity of law in the EU is allowing an Australian man who lives in England be prosecuted for a crime by Germany for a "crime" that was committed in England and is not recognized as a crime in his native state. Until he can be extradited, he is sitting in a British jail. Sounds, crazy, doesn't it? Let me tell you what happened... He posted some very charged writings on the Internet, which Germany claims fall under the crime of "Holocaust denial" and that because they could be read by Germans, the man had committed a crime. There are no such laws against "thought crimes" in England or Australia, so the man committed no crime in either country. However, due to a 2005 law, the EU has a Europe-wide arrest warrant, so the British police were required to serve the man with a German arrest warrant and confine him accordingly until he can be tried in a German court of law.

Flip the coin- last week the 4 biggest economies of the EU- Britain, France, Germany, and Italy- met for a mini-summit to develop a comprehensive joint plan to deal with the current economic crisis. They were unable to do so. It turned into "every country for itself". France recommended a "blanket guarantee" of all European banks, a suggestion rejected by Britain and Germany. They did not want to spend their money to shore up the weaker banks in the EU, believing that they had the stronger banks that would not need that form of guarantee. Meanwhile, as neighbor countries such as Ireland have started guaranteeing their banks, people have pulled out their money and deposited it in these guaranteed banks. With the country next door only being a short train ride away in many cases, this is not as ridiculous as it sounds. This causes money to migrate, causing the strong but not guaranteed, banks to lose much needed capital which leaves them dangerously underfunded. This is the situation France's suggestion is trying to avoid.

The point is, that while the EU is very unified on some fronts, it is very divided by national lines and self-interest in others. They may hold a lot of the same principles dear, but they are different peoples with different traditions, cultures, and economic habits. Americans, and Europeans, are remiss in assuming a unified front and identity in the EU member nations.

That said, the fact remains that while we are separate nations with separate identities, due to the globalization of the modern economy, we all need to communicate and come to some consensus as to how to calm and stabilize the international economy as a whole. We need to stop denying that the misfortunes of one nation has no effect on the rest of us and start exploring and strengthening those common bonds that join us together. Even if some are not affected now, we all will be affected at some point. This is one of those opportunities to create true unity of spirit and intention that when exploited can create true positive change and well being. I hope that the nations of the EU, and the world, take advantage of it.

A Day in the Life of a Troll

Ever meet one of those people who manages in time to suck the life out of everyone they associate with? I have the unfortunate privilege of having to be around one of these people far more often than I would like. There are those of you who already know who it is... I shall not name names out of tact, not to protect the identity of this person. This is a person who claims to be a Christian who communicates directly with God Himself, and then proceeds to lie, cheat, steal, and manipulate in every opportunity where it is to his benefit. A Christian who gives Christians a bad name.

I didn't start this post to vent (well maybe a little), but to examine the corrosive effects one's own bad actions have upon themselves, as well as others.

Many people who are lacking in integrity and ethical values and conduct see a reflection of their bad character in others. It is beyond their belief that others are not like them; in their minds everyone is as challenged as them. This belief only reinforces their internal justifications for being the way they are and feeds the behavior.

They then act out according to this skewed view of others and push away anyone who would possibly want to be close to them or help them. They cause others to feel backed into a corner and to have to defend themselves. This creates a vicious cycle; one set of bad acts setting off another until there is some sort of conflict or abandonment.

The saddest thing about this is not the damage this person causes to others, but the damage this person has done to themselves. They have created for themselves a world full of fear, distrust, and negativity that they live in daily. They are incapable of seeing the good, the love, the understanding, or the compassion that exists in the people around them. Everyone is an enemy in their eyes. To imagine what this is like, pretend you have been dumped behind enemy lines and can't get out. How paranoid would you get? How oppressive and dark would the world be to you? Now do you see why I say this is so sad?

If you are living in such a dark world, how can happiness and warmth stand a chance of entering it? How can you see the small joys in life if you are always looking out for the knife in your back? Why would you give up the wonderful things in life for the thrill of small, petty victories?

While I have come to despise this person I know, I have come to the point of truly pitying him, because he is far more miserable than I could ever make him. Everything bad that is happening in his life, he has brought upon himself, with far more precision and effectiveness than I have the stomach to create. Brings new meaning to the phrase, "Karma is a bitch!"

Finding the benefits of age...

PHILS ARE GOING TO THE WORLD SERIES!!! You can take the girl out of Philly , but you can't take Philly out of the girl....

I am finding, except for the minor aches and pains and the fine lines, that I am enjoying getting older. There's a time in your life when you begin to come into your own. A time when you begin to truly be who you are. A time where you stop making apologies and excuses, to yourself and others. A time where the only expectations you feel you need to meet are your own. Where you decide which people, things, and responsibilities truly matter. I have reached that time in my life, and for the first time since I was a child, I am ME. And I like it.

I look back and see that there are things I could have done differently, maybe even should have done differently. If I had, however, I would not be who I am today and have the wonderful people and things that I have in my life. While I am far from finished with my life, I appreciate the experiences I have had, good and bad. The good experiences have been a source of joy and hope and the bad ones are the ones I have learned the most from. I wouldn't trade the pain for the lessons I have taken away. I just make sure to make good use of those lessons and to avoid those situations in the future. I am a work in progress and it has taken me almost 38 years to get where I am today.

I consider myself fortunate and am grateful. For me, every day is Thanksgiving (minus the day off and turkey- darn.) There was always a measure of triteness in all those sayings about being thankful for what you have, but not anymore. I see the wisdom in it now.

At the end of the day, one truth remains. It is not about me. Yes, I am me and I live life through my own experience of it, but the purpose of my life does not revolve around me. I am like a piece of the puzzle; I am unique and have my particular place where I fit. The puzzle may not be able to be whole without me, so I am necessary, but in the end I am a part of the puzzle. So it is with life and the world. I am part of it all, a necessary part, but I would have no value without it. The purpose of my life is to find my place, my part in the grand scheme of things, and do my best to fill it.

At one point in my life, youthful ego would have made this hard to accept, but not anymore. I realize that it is not a statement about me or my worth, but placing everything in perspective. I have a finite time on this earth, it is my duty to do what I can while I am here to improve it, and then to move on and let others take their rightful place. As long as the whole lives on, I and my contributions are immortal. How neat is that?

If this is 37, instead of dreading getting older, I can't wait to see what's next!

America- the beacon of demoracratic values?

I read this morning about the secret memos from the White house to the CIA supporting the use of torture techniques on prisoners. I find it funny, in an ironic way, as well as disturbing and troubling. We, as a nation, sell ourselves as the land of the free, who respects and promotes the human rights of our citizens and others around the world. Yet, in our own national interests, we will abandon that basic tenet of our national philosophy. It's not as much that I am appalled by the use of the techniques- I am, but the hypocrisy of our leaders and our culture and how we damage our international stature by getting on our soap box and try to tell other people what to do with their own country bothers me more.

We espouse that first and foremost, we stand for democratic principles. We believe that everyone has the right to have a say in who governs and how they govern, yet we continually tell people in other nations, in a paternally condescending way, that they do not have the ability to determine for themselves who and how it is done in their country. Without saying it, we are spreading the idea that we have it right and that we have the only form of government that should exist. We ignore the culture and history of anyone who has a different tradition and viewpoint than our own and try to make them into a version of us (but not better because our ego requires us to be first in all things.)

Not every group of people wants democracy, as witnessed by the existence of other systems of government that exist successfully in the world, if left alone. Not every people values the individual as a sovereign unit as we, and western tradition, do. There are many cultures where a person's value is based on how they contribute to the whole, with the society as a whole being the most important good. This is a foreign mode of thought to us, but just because it is foreign does not make it wrong. If we truly valued the right of a people to determine their own form of government, then we would say, "That's not how we do it, but if it works and you all are relatively happy with it, so be it." Take China for example. Their culture has always had a more collectivist bend than ours, and the large population reinforces that view. That mode of cultural thought is thousands of years old, not a couple of hundred. Before communism, many people could not even get the basics of food, clothing, and shelter. Local warlords ruled with an iron fist, because there was no central government strong enough or broad enough to have the power to rule exclusively in all four corners of the nation. China, for all but the urban areas, was essentially still in the Middle Ages, living under a feudal system. While I may not agree with the Chinese communist government's policies and deplore the negative effects of the Cultural Revolution, I can recognize that today's China is a place where everyone has the basics, everyone has the ability to get at least a rudimentary education, and where there is a consistent focus that attempts to create a unified existence for all areas of the Chinese nation. Would I want to live there? No, I wouldn't, but I did not grow up Chinese, with Chinese values and traditions, and I am not experienced in the pre-communist history to know what it was like before communism. Since I can never understand what it is like to be Chinese, who am I, who is anyone who is not Chinese, to tell their people how their country should be? Give them the respect and the right to determine that for themselves. Arabic nations, their culture, and their traditions are just as foreign to us, but we have invaded their nations to "bring democracy" to their people, without seeing if it was really the best form of government for them.

When we do this, all it does is create justified resentment and tarnishes the value of the principles we hold dear. We cause other nations to look at us and find what is wrong within our culture and use it as justification to not make reforms to bring more freedom to people. I would argue that it is not democracy that people around the world envy, it is our wealth and power. Even our economic system of capitalism, that helped to fund that wealth, is not without serious fault. Anyone who has read or seen the news in the last month can attest to that.

My point is, let's be honest. If we are in another country or are taking actions that are designed solely to promote our national interest without thought to the rights of another, let's not try to spin it like we are not. Let's practice what we preach; respect other nations right to self-determination and become a true example of what we believe. If we want to be the land of the free and the beacon of democracy, then let's act like it. Stop torturing our prisoners, work to create opportunity and maximize the potential of our own people. Provide the guarantee of a safe environment for all and equal access to those things needed to provide basic existence. Encourage the national culture to value the exercise of the rights of others as much as we value the exercise of our individual rights. Encourage individual and national responsibility for ourselves and our environment. Greed in all its forms is NOT democratic.

Let's show the world a nation they can admire. Let America be the land of the free in the eyes of the world, not America, the land of the self-righteous and the greedy.

The Rise of the Everyman

Imagine, if you will, the following picture. You’re sitting down, getting ready to watch the next Democratic or Republican convention nominee accept his party’s endorsement. The music swells and up comes… your next door neighbor. I think I just felt you shudder with fear. You are saying, “My next door neighbor isn’t qualified. He isn’t smart enough. He isn’t, well… presidential!”

Your neighbor is just like you: normal, ordinary. Not what a world leader is supposed to be like. When we picture a world leader, as our president is, we picture men like Ronald Reagan, FDR, Abraham Lincoln, or George Washington. They were men with charisma and conviction, who were compelling speakers with ideas that inspired both individuals and the nation. They were leaders, whose persona was larger than they were. They were Presidents of the United States, and they were great.

Every four years, we look for the man, or woman, who will fill those large shoes; shoes that are almost too large to filled by any person. And every four years, more often than not, we are disappointed when that person does not appear at that nomination podium. Maybe it’s that disappointment that has lead to an interesting trend; what I call the rise of the everyman.

In case it wasn’t a trend, the pollsters, pundits, and campaign strategists have made it one. They take a candidate and make him “one of us”; an everyman. Al gore in a flannel shirt, Bill Clinton playing his sax on TV and eating Big Macs, George W with his poor grammar and cowboys boots, and Sarah Palin with her homespun phrases are all recent examples of this. It is not enough for a candidate to be accomplished, experienced, wise and driven; they have to be one of us. We have to be able to imagine them as someone who you could kick back on a Friday night and have a beer with. Anything else is stuffy and elitist.

Over and over in opinion polls and “man on the street” sound bites, people talk about likeability as a main reason for their support of a candidate. They like the way that h their candidate seems to be a “good guy” who understands him. However, the reality of most candidates is quite different. The vast majority of them are not like us; and if they started out that way, they aren’t anymore. Al gore was born into wealth and a political dynasty. Bill Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar who became a law professor and married an Ivy League grad. George W was born into a wealthy family and had the luxury of under appreciating a Yale education. While Sarah Palin may have been born into a middle class life, she became a well paid local sportscaster before her political career. As governor of Alaska, she had a staff on call to help her manage and balance her family and her home life with her career. Not quite average lives, are they?

The hypocrisy gets peddled because it works; it gets candidates elected. But it’s a double edged sword. We love these candidates because they are “real”; flawed just like we are. Once they get into office, though, we expect them to all of a sudden to become presidential; the representation of the best of us on the world stage, our better. This is something an “everyman” cannot be and we turn on them when they fail, when they act in a way that we would. Look at Bill Clinton and his womanizing and George W with his embarrassingly awkward gaffes. Even worse is when it is shown to be an act, like Al Gore in a plaid flannel lumberjack shirt.

Americans want substance, we need substance, but we don’t demand it. We take the pre-packaged image placed in front of us and settle for it. However, it’s not the image that leads in a crisis or that has the wisdom and experience to come up with solutions to international problems. This is not the realm of the everyman. He worries about the things that affect him, without a lot of thought about the things that don’t. Not exactly the characteristics that befit a president and major world leader, and certainly not the image that we as a nation of that stature wish to convey.

Next time you find yourself thinking of pulling the lever for an “everyman” candidate, ask yourself if you would feel safe and confident with your next door neighbor as President of the United States.

First things first...

First, I want to thank everyone who has taken the time to write or call with words of support- it means more to me than I could say. I am blessed to have a small, but warm and caring, group of friends. I say thank you for you every time I pray.

And now for something completely different...

The leadership and media have been trying to spread an important, but ironic, message: stop the bleeding. Just in my limited exposure to the news of the day this weekend, I heard quite a few times the call for people to stop pulling their money out of the market in response to what has been happening. I applaud efforts to encourage people to resist the hype and to begin to use some sense and recover their sanity. I do, however, find it ironic that the talking heads of the news media are echoing this because they are doing the same thing with this financial blip that they did with housing and lending.

When the housing market began its inevitable and warranted correction and the access to risky loan programs, like no doc and interest only, began to dry up, all the media hopped on the bandwagon and played Henny Penny. Henny Penny was the hen that was hit by something small, an acorn if I can remember, and cried that "The sky is falling!" and whipped her neighbors up into a frenzy. Well, the media has shown several times now that it can do it better than her.

The real estate market, like the stock market, is a market segment that has a large subsidiary impact. What I find is that is a good barometer for how people and companies are feeling about their situation and future. The real estate market, while based on common sense, is about hopes, dreams, and the perceived future. People don't just look for a "house", they look for a home- a search they place a lot of emotional involvement into. The stock market is about how companies and speculators think or feel things are going to happen based on the indicators they receive today. It is a combination of gut instinct and fact, and with substantial amounts of money to be made or lost by the speed at which you act, sometimes gut feelings rule the day. The point is that with emotion playing so large a part of the equation in these key sections of our economy, anything that plays on fears in these areas can cause a catastrophe.

In steps the media; with making the difficulties of a few seem like the difficulties of many, with innuendo and lack of consequences for their actions, and with their desire to raise the intensity of an issue to get a reaction. All of this is for the almighty rating, which they use to dictate their advertising rates. The more panic they create, the more people will feel the need to tune in so that they can keep on top of what's happening and feel in control. The more they tune in, the higher the ratings and the more valuable the advertising time becomes. The more valuable that air time becomes, the more money the media outlets make for doing exactly the same amount of work. Whether consciously or subconsciously, the media has a reason for creating as much panic as possible.

Think the media doesn't do it, or that they don't do it on purpose? Look at the first OJ trial, the Caylee case, the Peterson case, and the death of Anna Nicole. We all know at least the basic details of the story there because the media had it in our face almost 24/7. I'm sure that you can think of more without a lot of effort. But let's look at the reality. Did the second OJ trial get much media attention at all? No, because it was anti-climactic and did not hold the same drama level as the first case; there was no dead blonde and her lover. Is Caylee or Lacy Peterson the only child or spouse that's been murdered and the body never found? Did anybody care about Anna Nicole's exploits before the birth of her child, the death of her son, and her death: all which took place in a short period of time? Did any of these events warrant, or have enough impact on their own to merit, such devoted reporting? We all know the answer- NO. But look at the result. The sensationalism of the OJ trial almost caused a riot when the verdict was handed down, Caylee and Lacy took valuable time, attention and manpower away from equally compelling cases and cost the taxpayers a lot of money. Anna Nicole dominated the news for days, at the expense of other stories that we really needed to see. Don't think that the media hyping a story can do damage? The "runaway bride" cost the taxpayers of Gwinnett County so much money that they sued her for the hundreds of thousands they spent trying to find and rescue her so that they could satisfy the accompanying public outcry. Without the media picking up and running with the story, she would not have felt so much pressure and shame about running away. she would have come home sooner and not have caused so many resources to be wasted.

The media would blame it on us; we tune in, and they are only giving us "what we want to see and hear. After all, it's only entertainment. We have to fill slow news days somehow". What they forget is that by having access to what's going on in the world in a way that most people don't and by reporting on it, they put themselves in the position of being responsible for how they do it. They are paid well for their responsibility (do any of us make millions for talking into a camera?), but don't want to take responsibility for the destruction they create when they are not responsible in their actions.

The media has the power to do a lot of good by turning the public's eyes to the bad AND the good in this world, to the positive things we can do to make the world a better place, as well as to highlight the evils that exist in it. To bring hope, not just fear. Yes, we need to know the "bad stuff", but exactly what stuff and to what extent? We have to be aware of what is going on. But the media needs a new definition of fair and balanced that includes a balance of good and bad, negative criticism and constructive solutions; a picture of the world that shows that while it is not perfect a lot of the time, it's a pretty darn good place to be most of the time. The media needs to show that there is room for the world to be better, but that positive change can and does happen every day, and not just by national and world leaders. The media thinks that we don't want to hear that kind of stuff; I know I do, for one. I'd invest money in it. It would net them more from me than the crap they peddle now that I don't watch. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

The media belongs to us; when are we going to start exercising control over them and over ourselves and the view of the world that we'd like to promote? Next time a story about Caylee comes on, change the channel or turn the TV off. If we did that simple thing more often, I think we'd be amazed at how things would change. Let's take our world view back and look at both sides of an issue or situation, at the good and bad of the world. Let's use logic and reason, not fear and emotion, to color our responses to life's challenges so that we can make good, solid decisions with more positive long term impact. Let's be responsible, both to ourselves, our neighbors, and the world at large, and expect that which represents us and our interests to be responsible as well. We'll all be the better for it.

I stopped to smell the flowers...

Went out into the woods with my son's Cub Scout pak yesterday morning and just got back. It's amazing how at home you can be with next to nothing in the way of possessions and some fun company. Kind of puts things in perspective...

I have often wondered why we make life so complex, why we put ourselves in complicated situations. Does it make us any happier? Does anything we create make us smile any wider than when we are sitting by a nice warm fire in a pretty spot, breathing in the fresh air and talking with friends? Is our heart warmed by anything we buy more than seeing and hearing the laughter of children while they play? Does anything create an aura of personal peace and contentment more than walking in silence surrounded by all the sights, sounds, and smells that nature has created? And how much did these things cost? Nothing. How hard did I have to work to enjoy these things? Hardly at all. Did I have to "make" any of these things happen? No, other than building the fire, all I had to do was just be there.

I had some of the ingredients for a very happy existence in my midst this weekend and all I was required to do was live simply. It reminds me yet again of how little we really need in the way of "stuff" in order to be happy. However, it is hard for so many to live simply because they think they are missing something or that there has to be more. The fact of the matter is- there isn't. It is all perception. Happiness, peace, and contentment is a state of mind. You can have everything, but as long as you believe that there is "something missing" that is all you will see and you will never be happy. That's why there are so many miserable people who happen to be extremely wealthy and successful and why there are some people who are just getting by who are content with themselves and their life.

Madison Avenue spends a lot of time and money convincing us that true happiness is just one more possession away. However, the blame is not only theirs. We respond the way they want us to and we prove them right. Society shapes the media and advertising, and in turn they mirror back the attitudes and outlooks we tell them we value. It's a vicious cycle and will continue until one of the parties changes. Since there is too much money to be made by the media and advertising for them to stop on their own, it is up to us. We have to change our perceptions and focus on the world as it is, not what we wish it was or what it has been. We need to focus on what we have, what is right in front of us, both good and bad, and not on what we had or what we don't have, what we wish we had or what we think we should have. The world around us is a pretty wonderful place full of some pretty wonderful people. All we have to do is open our eyes, our minds, and our hearts and we will be amazed by what we see.

Find the simple joys in your life and hold them close. In them, you hold the keys to your own happiness.

Gotta be relieved...

Just watched Bush speak about the economic situation. I have to say, he must be relieved that there will be no pundits ripping him on cable news. The media will all be circling like sharks for one of the two candidates to respond or not respond in the way they deem appropriate. I'm willing to bet, along with my mother, that the party Bush throws on inaugural night will be even bigger than the one that Obama or McCain will throw...

Oh, and by the way- GO PHILS!!!! For those who aren't Phils fans, sorry (not).

Afghanistan- the forgotten front

At election time candidates will do almost anything to find something to slam their opponents on. Iraq has been brought up again and again as a money drain, a waste of lives and resources, a potential source for major US embarrassment. There has been talk of entering Pakistan in order to chase down our enemies that find safe harbour there.

What I have not heard was much in the way of talk about Afghanistan and what our plans are for the conflict we are in over there. I have a friend who just came back from a year over there, so during lulls in communication, I would check the DOD casualty list regularly to be sure that he was still safe. What I found was surprising. Looking at the death notices, I saw that there have been more US soldiers lost in Afghanistan than Iraq, at least in the last 6 months or so. How is it that never makes the news? I'll tell you why- no one wants to face the fact that we are losing in a country that was "bombed back into the Stone Age" only seven years ago. After our bombing wiped out most major systems and made it difficult for the Taliban to hold on to national power, we assumed that we had won and all we had to do was clean up. No problem- we could do it AND fight on another front at the same time. Now, we are paying the cost for our arrogance.

You see, we forgot one thing that the Russians will never forget. The Afghanis will fight for as long as it takes, make any sacrifice, and send their women and children off to fight if need be. They will fight by whatever means necessary in order to survive. The present nation of Afghanistan is peopled by those who know nothing but war, death, and fighting. Many of the leaders, rebel or otherwise, were battle tested as children in their fight with the Soviets. And they won. They beat the second largest superpower in the world at its time of greatest military might. Did we think that these men were going to go quietly?

When you combine that toughness with the inhospitable terrain, lack of friendly reliable neighboring states to support us, and the fact that religion and politics are one in the same in that region, you get a tricky situation. Since their religious leaders are often key political figures and their faith is the guiding force of their daily lives, when you attack them politically, militarily, or religiously, it is all the same to them; you are attacking WHO they are and EVERYTHING they believe in. When you say that their government is unjust, you are saying that the leaders of their faith are unjust, which by extension is saying their faith is unjust. With the conditions these people have to face in daily life- extreme poverty, death, starvation- their faith is their refuge and their promise of a better life after death. Is it any wonder why they will fight so hard, fight to the death? We are attacking their HOPE. We have to recognize that and be careful that we place ourselves in positions that clearly show that we are not acting from prejudice, but from ligitimate provocation.

The Taliban has not disappeared, in fact they are gaining strength, as the popularity of the US among Afghanis is decreasing. The poppy crop, which funded our enemies and was almost wiped out, is at pre-war levels and again providing a large funding source. Yet we continue to divert the bulk of our military might to a country that never housed the terrorists we were going to war to fight and diverting them from a country that has given them succor and a safe place to hide. We need to take the war in Afghanistan seriously- they are. It is after all, politically and morally, the only open conflict we have a leg to stand on in. It is the only battle where we can legitimately say that we are fighting an enemy that has attaked us, directly or indirectly. As long as Osama Bin Laden is out there and pulling the puppet strings, as long as there are elements willing to hide and support him, as long as there are followers willing to fight for him, then we have a legitimate mandate in searching him out and eliminating him and destroying the network that suports him.

Yes, we need to be careful about how we exit Iraq; now that we have gotten into this mess, we have put our reputation on the line and the world is watching how we handle it. However, we cannot let the situation in Iraq contribute to bankrupting our country (think Osama doesn't love what's happening) or from diverting our attention from the war we must win.

Terrorists succeed when they create fear, panic, unrest, and affect change in behavior through achieving this objective. Looks like they've won to me; so now what are we going to do about it? We must look for constructive solutions to this problem- more manpower and military resources to the area, more humanitarian aid, engaging religious leaders in the region in discussions about how to resolve the conflict, actively pursuing those in the wrong while making a point of protecting those who are innocent. In short, living the ideals we espouse to the world. Far more Afghanis civilians have lost their lives in this conflict than were lost in 9-11. We must step up and do what is necessary to bring this conflict to an end- not treat it as the redheaded stepchild and sweep it under the rug.

And in the beginning...

Well, here it is- my first official blog. The power, the power of it all.... muhahaha!

I've been watching the stock market and the corresponding panic the last few days and have come to a realization: it's a good thing. Every 20 years or so, a war or crisis comes around to give us a much needed reality check. We're getting ours. The market will eventually correct itself and things will be fine, but a lot will happen in the meantime.

I'm a Gen X brat who grew up in the ME 70's and the go-go 80's. In the 70's we were given the ego, in the 80's we were given the sense of economic entitlement. "We want what we want, we deserve it because we want it, and we want it NOW! Waiting for it and earning it is for wusses. My parents have a big house they just downsized and nice stuff. I'm supposed to have it better than my parents, I'm supposed to have MORE! And I'm supposed to have it NOW!"

Problem is Gen X is comparing what they have now to what their parents have now, forgetting the fact that it took 30 years for them to get to where they are. What our parents had at 40, we are supposed to have by 25-30. Our first home is not a 2 bedroom, 1 bath ranch; it is a 2000+ square foot, 4 bedroom, 2 1/2 bath 2 story. We don't get by on just one car per family, we have to have 2 or more and they all have to be new with leather interior. The list goes on and on. We are on a merry go round; going round and round but getting nowhere.

There will ALWAYS be someone who has more no matter what you have; the question is when is enough, enough? At what point do you step off the merry go round and say "I'm satisfied, I'm done." Once on it, can you ever get off?

I think that there will be a lot of people in the coming months who will be looking at the merits of getting off the merry go round. Some because they can't afford it. Others because they will realize that all of the "stuff" they conviced themselves was so important to their survival, now that they can't have it all, really isn't so important. Eventually they, and the generation behind them, will forget this lesson, but until then we may have a society that is more conscientious, less wasteful, and more responsible for themselves.

Since I stepped off the merry go round quite a while ago, I welcome some company. Contentment is best when it's shared.