I just watched the video clip of Ann Coulter talking about Palin and the Pledge for America. As usual, it was fun to watch her be not only funny, but completely make her points clearly, in opposition to the other guest who was spinning so earnestly, that she forgot to be even marginally coherent.

http://townhall.com/video/ann-coulter-on-palin-and-the-pledge-for-america/

Anyway......

Typical John Boehner. Another wannabe "leader" with impressive credentials like joining with the Gang of Fourteen to roll over on judicial confirmations....who was his buddy in that? Oh yeah! John McCain!

It chaps my a$$ when I listen to all the "Johns coming lately", seemingly embrace the righteous indignation of the only real grassroots movement this country has seen, since the sixties. They bring their watery gruel of vague promises...er...excuse me...Pledge!, to kind of, sort of, work toward maybe going back to the very place we were when they fell out of the power tree.

This lame attempt to seem to agree, with the people they are obviously still trying to farm without actually promising anything concrete, shows me that the GOP still does not get it. How about some firm commitments? How about firm promises to write some defined bills on term limits, earmarks, the Fair Tax, Constitutional citation of authority for a any bill......hmmmm...now that I think about it, they could simply write the anti-bills that pro-actively out-law all the current crop of liberty stealing bills that the Dems are trying to shove down our throats...Card Check, DREAM, Cap and Trade, etc....and *Bring them up for a vote*?

Sure, the POTUS could and probably would veto them. Make him do that!  Put lie to all his talk of bi-partisanship. Unless of course.... enough of the Democrats who saw all their fellow Democrats get thrown under the bus....backed over...and run over again, in this election....decided that maybe getting on board with honoring their oaths of office might be a good idea. But, even if they didn't, come 2012, President Obama would not be able to run against an obstructionist GOP. He'd have to run on his obvious and cynical vetoing of good ideas, that the HUGE majority of people do want. And on the GOP side, those who violated their "Pledge" and voted against them, would let us know who to vote out, in the next round of retaking our government from the one and only, Incumbent Party.

The Contract with America was popular because they vowed to vote on those things. But mostly, those things were defeated anyway...simply because the power structure was such that no one in the Legislature was afraid for their job. They knew that it was largely symbolic that time, and that merely bringing it to a vote was enough hope to tip the balance. It did reign in Clinton's left leaning tendencies, and he swung back toward the center, just enough to take credit for Welfare Reform. But almost nothing in the contract actually came to anything. The GOP let us down then, and we voted them out after eight years of business as usual.

Politics is like the tides though. It doesn't come in all at once. It comes in ever increasing waves...until it reaches the high point, then slowly creeps back out to sea, eroding a little bit of beachhead at a time. Ann Coulter has a good column today, on Goldwater and Reagan. Goldwater lost. His wave was not yet big enough to carry all the way in. Reagan though, won, because he rode the next wave on the incoming tide. But, he  added to it, by embracing the will of the people. The GOP sees this wave as inevitable. And they think they can ride in on it, without adding to it. In fact, they are trying to slow it down enough to climb on. They somehow don't get that there will be a next wave, and if they don't add to it, by doing something substantially different than they have been...if they continued to try to wsim against the tide.... it will just wash them back out to sea. The Republican Johns just want to get un-flushed long enough to float to the top, to abuse and erode us some more. I smell something...I'm not sure if it's fishy...or something else...

How about a firm promise from the GOP, to elect one of the incoming Freshmen Citizen Legislators as the next Speaker of the House? Now that would be a healthy sign from "leadership" that they are committing to rehabilitate the GOP, and aligning it with the actual people they are sworn to serve, instead of merely trying to co-opt the wave for their own purposes. How about a Pledge to get rid of all pensions for elected officials, since they ought only be there for a few years anyway?  Maybe a nice parting gift to show our appreciation, instead instead of lifetime high income and lifetime golden health-care that no one else gets. You know what? If they showed any promise at all in those few years, they would have jobs offers doing worthwhile work, from dozens, if not hundreds of private companies. John Boehner is no more a believable surfer than...what 's that guy's name?....Oh yeah....Kerry!...yet another of the many John's trolling K Street, like it was the Vegas Strip....while promising the folks back home that he is just running out for a pack of smokes.

It reminds me of nothing so much, as the out-of-town cousin at a big family picnic. Fresh from the Ivy League, he is no more interested in mingling and talking to his relatives than he would be helping them muck out the horse barn. He's just there to convince everyone he's part of the family and suck up to rich old Uncle Elmer, who happens to have built a successful farm business, and actually enjoys going to breakfast Sunday mornings at the Waffle house, to discuss actual real local issues....for hours.... not just ten minutes on a campaign fly-through, all spent telling Uncle Elmer just how much better he could do with  a smart Ivy Leaguer taking charge...and bringing it all into the 21st century, with lots of brand new ideas like Keynesian Economics!

There is a fine but important point that gets missed in the Main Stream Media.....or more likely, avoided like the plague. "Party" is not really a noun. It's a verb. It's an action. It's used sometimes to denote a place where action will be happening, as in "Where's the Party?"....or as short hand for a particular event....ie, things happening. We use a lot of words that way...as nouns, but that actually are not things. That is called a nominalization...which is itself a nominalization. To denote the act of nominalizing.

http://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/~wilkins/writing/Handouts/nominalization.html

Here's a simple test though, that you can use to tell the difference. Ask yourself, "Can I put it in a wheelbarrow?" If you can, then it is an actual thing. And we know that it is more or less, the same for everyone, objectively. If you can't put it in a wheelbarrow...OK, maybe a really really big wheelbarrow :-) .... then it is a verb...a process....that has been shortened down to represent some general idea and objectify it, so people can talk about it. What is important though, is what the label actually means to the person you are talking to.

So, while handy for shortening conversations, what it really does is gloss over the fact that when people use these labels, no one is really talking about the same thing. They are referring to their own idea of some amorphous blob of principles of action, and not realizing that everybody else's...even those with whom they agree substantially...is not quite the same as their own. And in politics, it is most often substantially different than their own. That part doesn't come out until later, when the principles in question are being acted upon. That's when a person is surprised that someone who agreed wholeheartedly on a WORD, such as "honor", or "value", or "conservatism", or whatever, acts in ways completely opposite of what they had in mind, by their use of the same label.

When you think about the word Party, as used in the sense of a Political Party...as in The Republican Party or the Democrat Party...it is easy to see that there are more attributes in in common with  both, than differences.

The Tea Party is not a party in the sense that the word is used for Political Parties. Although the MSM would like you to conflate them in your mind. It makes it much easier to fool people, if they succeed in that. But, there are no Tea Party "members". There are Tea Partiers...those who attend events, where actual processes happen. Have you ever been to a Republican Party? Or a Democrat Party? Of course not. You may have been to a Republican Party "event". Or a Democrat Party "event". That's quite a bit different though, in that those "events" are strictly to raise money and whip up support for those candidates and already elected people who want to either hop on, or continue to ride the Gravy Train.

Have you been to a Tea party? Maybe. See the difference? When is the next Tea party? Does it make any sense to ask" When is the next Republican Party?"

Tea Partiers understand that they are people, who are acting. They are not "members" of some general blob of an unidentifiable set of motivations with a label, that can be used to smear them in the media. Every Tea Partier who attends any Tea Party, knows how they feel about issues, and why they are there. They are there to act. They may come together to show others that there are many of us, and to be heard. But, they are not confused by those who want to call them extremists, bigots, radicals, or anything else. Those who say they are "members" of a "Party" are simply admitting that they are willing to let someone else act in their name, on the basis of some vague set of labels, that have very little bearing on their own personal ideas, that those labels are supposed to represent.

The Two Party System of politics doesn't exist as a form of governance....any more than Big Time Wrestling exists as a sport. It doesn't matter if you root for Johnny America or the Golden Sheik. At the end of the night, they are both out together at some sleazy bar, having a drink on your and my dollar. It doesn't matter who won the "bout". There was no bout. There was a "show". It's "ABOUT" the concession sales. And those always go better, when the fans get all excited about the manufactured and imaginary conflict between the "opponents".

Vote them OUT. Vote them ALL out. Every single ONE of them. It's YOUR job to vote out YOUR Incumbent. No one else can do that for you. Professional Politicians count on the fact that people tend to like their own guy, because they feel they know them. That's false. Each and every one, participates willingly in the system that is robbing us blind. If they are running for re-election, they are complicit. It doesn't matter if they brought home the bacon for your district. It's stolen bacon. And they know it. Don't vote for the noun Parties. Vote for Individuals, who promise to value the processes you value, and hold them to it. Forget the Ds and Rs. In the next wave, I predict we will be seeing a lot more Individuals with Ds after their names, who also embody and support the process of being free. Right now, most of them are staying out of the riptide though. I sincerely hope I never see a candidate with a T after their name. Because that will just be the first increment of  returning to  business as usual in Washington. That's how Politicians farm us. By convincing us to let them do our thinking for us.

Citizen Legislators have no interest in that. It isn't about ego and perks for them. It's about doing something for the community they are going back out to live in themselves. If there is really a grasssroots movement to take back our liberty and our government, then we know that we not only have to water it on a regular basis, but cut the grass as well. Planting it and walking away doesn't work. And hoping someone else will cut it the way you like, is rather a pipe-dream, is it not?

Vote is a verb. An action.  It's some we DO, to make our lives better. If you don't perform the action, then your "vote" isn't really anything at all.

Party like it's 1776. I'll see you there!

I am actually surprised that higher education has not taken the next logical step in this country...since we've either dumbed down or specialized every field to the point that you almost have to have a college degree to find a decent job that isn't in the trades, yet most graduates have less general knowledge than the high school grads of one generation ago.

One of the *problems* here in the US is that not enough smart people are educationally created and/or selected out by our system, to fill all the positions we have available. Instead, we must rely on smart people from other countries to come here....perhaps even learn English to do so....and then decide to stay after they've finished up. Which is fine in some ways. It tends to select for some of the best minds available from outside the US. But, are we letting a lot of native talent slip through our fingers, simply because the main body of Universities have become bastions of political and social engineering?

Let's face it. Today, it really doesn't matter what college one goes to, in order to be considered "qualified" by business. Ivy Leagues perhaps form the basis for some important social connections later in life. But, that says less about the quality of the education than it does about class based en-culturation. 

Why have not Google and Microsoft and well....every other major company, not simply created their own Universities, where there is no tuition, only merit based competition for available slots? I'm surprised that Bill Gates, who has demonstrated his interest in education, has not picked up this ball yet. Microsoft already has intensive certifications that are prized among businesses, with degrees coming in a distant second for those companies that need programmers. Putting that into a campus environment with living and eating space, would not cost much more. Putting it on-line to a greater degree would likewise be relatively cheap. Phoenix University has that model just about down, do they not?

How much is spent recruiting and training highly skilled and loyal employees for Companies, big enough that they are household names? The military gets cream of the crop folks this way. Surely though, there are many many smart kids who do not want to be in the military, who nevertheless would be assets to to the country, if given a superlative education without the barriers of affordability or the maze of loan acquisition to run?

A graduate of Google U, would have gotten there by dint of brains and hard work. And while they may choose not to go to work for Google once graduated, they would already be steeped in the culture of the company and likely to stay. If not, then that would be one highly qualified person at some other company, who is already networked into Google to some degree, and would likely bring values adopted there, with them. Linking together like that naturally, would provide a strong capitalistic basis for rational cooperation among those who are most likely to be successful early, and later start businesses of their own, in that context, would be tremendously powerful.

If the standards and practices that already exist are not adequate to improving our nation, and are already proving to be a detriment to the economic health and social well-being of our country, through dilution, I say the capitalists ought to do the job themselves, on a long term profitable basis. A lot of potential cream is being spilled. Surely the people and institutions who have improved our way of live immeasurably through the creation of products, could do the same with our best resource, people!

I responded to someone in a column comment, who referred to herself in a way that I think is useful. I thought it was worth repeating here.

she said.....

===================
....snippage....

Fellow Tea-Baggers, watch for these kinds of tricks. We have got to learn to recognize their tricks and ignore them.

....snip....
===============

I reply.....

I really like that you have embraced the term "Tea-Baggers". And I am doing the same as of now. Taking the labels of one's enemies, and making them one's own is a powerful thing.

Nothing gets their goats more, IMO. During the Revolutionary War, a little ditty was sung amongst the British troops to dis-spirit the fledgling nation. It made fun of our Fore-Fathers and our desire to be free of tyrants. They thought that making fun of us would deter us, and their over-arching sense of superiority and their fine uniforms would drive us rag-a-tag peasants back under their thumbs.

Only weening elitists can possibly think that words will turn back honest outrage. It was so for the Brits of the time. And it is so for the "Faces" of the "Progressives". They really do think that we are too stupid to realize that changing the name of their agenda, after they had worn out their hi-jacking of the once positive term "Liberal", would fake us out.

Watching Olberman or Madow smirk as they oh-so-silkily proclaim us "tea-baggers", does tell us a few things though. It tells us where their minds go first. It tells us that despite their avowed open-mindedness, they do indeed believe in their hearts, that it is an insult. I wonder how Rachael's male counterparts feel about her revealed bias about them. Lastly, do they realize that if we are "Tea-Baggers", that implies that someone is getting "Tea-Bagged"? If so, I wonder who they think that is?

So here's a big shout-out to all you "Tea-Baggeds" Enjoy!

Thomas

PS Oh yeah....the song? Yankee Doodle.


http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1870/whats-the-song-yankee-doodle-all-about

He's not even close to a blue dog. And yet, I think it is worth the time to at least poke these guys. Perhaps they are not willing to give up their jobs, just to please the Party Leaders. Anyway, here's what I wrote. Maybe you could do it too. Railing doesn't seem to work. So, maybe showing them a different kind of stick may.....

Senator Brown,

I work in Dayton as a Fire Lieutenant. A couple years ago, we had our own little Health Care Reform. Perhaps you already know about it. It passed our union vote easily, because we can see that things are really out of hand what with budgets and health insurance and the like.

Basically, it does what has been available for a number of years through the Tax Code. I believe the city is saving millions of dollars, just in our one smallish city. But, I'm sure you can find the actual figures better than I could. And the result is that those of us who are basically healthy, are able to save part of our health care costs for later years, when that may not be the case any longer. I know that most of the retirees are not only concerned, but actually hurting from the rising costs of that today.

I won't have much worry over that, thanks to our plan. And the young guys, will have zero worries, as well as a tidy nest egg by the time they retire in twenty five years or so. It has seemed to me, and I've often wondered aloud to people who are worried about health care costs, why our plan that is an already formulated, just about perfect plan for anyone, isn't already the norm. There is nothing special about being a firefighter or government employee. A private company could set this up just as easily.

Here's how it works. We each have a Health Savings Account, which is set up with a bank...almost any bank will do. And we have high deductible insurance, which doesn't kick in until two thousand dollars have been spent out of our accounts. That is provided for by the Tax Code, and has been for some years. It's just that almost no one seems to know about it. Or confuses it with the Cafe Plans that were "use it or lose it" propositions. With an HSA, anything not used, rolls over into the next year, even earning some interest.

The city saves giant piles of money, because High Deductible/Catastrophic Health Plans are far cheaper than Full Coverage. Here's what makes it work for us though. The city then also funds our HSAs with $1500 or $3000 dollars (single or family coverage). We can then add to that if we like, by having money taken directly out of our paychecks. I take out enough personally to cover the difference, which is about fifty bucks a pay.

In the second year, I already have a few thousand dollars in my account which has rolled over. By the time I retire, I will have enough to not only cover out of pocket expenses, but also the premiums for the insurance I will have to buy for myself then. The people in our plan, who already had expensive conditions are going through their HSA money, it's true. OTOH, they were already spending that much and more in deductibles, out of pocket before, when we had "Full Coverage". So they are a couple thousand ahead of where they were.

We have bargaining power with our out-of-pocket expenses now too, as our insurer has brokered prices, which we actually see in our statements. It's amazing how much effect that has on people's decisions as to whether the sniffles merits a full doctor's visit, or perhaps might be amenable to 15 bucks of over the counter medicine....which is also paid for with pre-tax dollars, though not part of the allowable deductible. Carrots are far more effective than sticks, it seems.

Since we as a nation, have seemingly decided that health care for everyone is the compassionate thing to do.... and I agree with that....the smart thing then, would be minimize the costs of providing it. As it currently stands, pretty much our Emergency Rooms function as clinics, because poor people know they can get seen, and they also know that they won't be paying for it. This leaves less capacity for actual emergencies. In my job as a First Responder/EMT-A, I would guesstimate that about a third or less or our runs, actually merit Emergency Room status. The other far larger fraction, is people with minor complaints who would be better served at a clinic or Urgent Care. Unfortunately, medic units do not deliver patients to anywhere but Emergency Rooms. And at $750 a run or so, that's a fairly expensive cab ride for someone with the sniffles, that we the taxpayers end up footing the bill for.

With an HSA set up for everybody, this problem would largely disappear. I know that many people think that the poor are too dumb to figure it out. But, they don't seem to have any difficulty figuring out their food stamp card. When it is a limited resource that they can see and have some control over, they seem to do just fine in that department. Having an HSA card would be no different....except maybe provide a little more dignity for folks.

At any rate, you seem like a thoughtful politician to me. I can't help but wonder, given the huge public reaction to this stuff over months and months, if you are sure you want to stay on this train-wreck of a bill, when something so elegant and proven effective is already available, and could be fairly seamlessly implemented. My union brothers and sisters are watching this carefully. I don't know how it is in other locals. But, in ours, we tend to vote a bit differently than it might seem, if you were believing the AFL-CIO big-wigs. And we do all go out and vote. As a firefighter, I know how important it is to stick to your guns when it counts. But, I also know that when the building is coming down around you, it's time to get out. I'm hoping you will make it out.

with respect,

Thomas Drewing

For awhile, I thought the country was going down the tubes. It is easy to think that if you watch any amount of what is called news these days, but is actually just fear-mongering and pandering to whatever "HUGE DANGER!!!" is currently being peddled by the Lame Stream Media. "Oh my God! It got warm outside today! Quick! Give me all your money, so we can SAVE you!"

But, I now believe that we are waking up.

The other evening, I was out with a friend. We were standing outside having a beer, (because I smoke) on the patio next to the fire. It wasn't a big fire. In fact it was too small to give off anything close to enough heat. There was a young guy standing there too, and we fell into conversation, about the world. He was obviously sure that his vote for Obama was going to fix everything, and was happy to share his 25 year old deep political and social wisdom.

Now this guy was cold too, and his solution was to keep stirring the tiny ineffectual fire and spreading sparks all over us. My friend, after about three or four minutes of this, said to him, "If one of those sparks gets in my eye, I'm going to punch you in the mouth."

I was a little taken aback. To smooth the situation, I ventured to the guy, "You know, all the stirring in the world isn't going to warm that up. It needs more wood." And gestured to the enormous woodpile stacked near the fence. He looked over at it, then just looked back at the fire and his stirring stick slack-jawed and unhappy, that we had interrupted his rude, yet ineffectual behavior.

So I went over and got a few logs and threw them on. A couple minutes later, a waitress came out and marched right over to us and began to berate this poor schmuck, for putting wood on the fire. When he didn't speak up for himself, I said to her, "I put it on there. The point of a fire is to create heat."

She looked at me. Then turned back to him and berated him some more. When he just stood there and took it, she then grabbed the log that wasn't yet alight, and took it back to the woodpile. Then returned for another, saw they were now on fire,and decided that was enough to make her point. She disappeared back inside, without ever having even glanced back at my friend and I.

I asked him why he let her talk to him that way, without saying anything. And he had no answer. I was inclined to let it go though, as the other two logs were catching nicely and beginning to throw off some heat.

We continued to have polite conversation about life and politics. But, it quickly got boring. Instead of defending his points or responding to ours, the young guy just repeated mindless talking points or diverted from the questions. He could neither respond to logical argument, nor put forth any of his own for his positions. But, as he did that, he began to regain his confidence a bit. With each pronouncement that the President is closing Gitmo, and has ended the war, he became more sure of himself and regained his apparently more common smirk of superiority.

We were just about finished with our beers about then, and he started stirring up the sparks again. I looked at my buddy and said, "Let's get out of here." He nodded and I went inside to take a leak. A minute or so later, he joined me then we walked out to the car and left.

On the way home, he said to me that he had probably gone too far. I asked what he meant. And he told me that as he was leaving the fire, the young guy had waited until he was downwind of it, deliberately stirred it again to raise a big cloud of sparks on him, and said with a big grin "Stumble safely now!"

So my friend had turned around and walked back to him, and punched him in the jaw. Didn't knock him out or anything....just a firm challenge punch, with no real damage, he said. And as the guy did nothing to defend himself, left it at that and went to pee.

I allowed that he probably did go too far. But, that as we had been there for five minutes after that, and no fuss had been raised, we were probably not going to get arrested or anything. OTOH, I had paid with my debit card. So, if they wanted to find out who we are, it wouldn't be a problem either.

I have been thinking about that incident for a week or so now. And I have been wrestling a little with my own feelings. I have always been loathe to fight, and have only done so myself when directly attacked first. Had I been the one provoked at the end, I believe I would have simply turned around and gotten in his face, and waited for him to throw the first actual punch, which he would not have, and it would have been over.

OTOH, all that would have taught young guy, was that he could count on other men to have restraint, in the face of obvious and snarky provocation. He would not suffer any consequences for his actions. It would simply reinforce his crappy behavior.

At any rate, I've changed my mind. I've decided that my friend's actions were a better response than mine, for both young guy, and for society in general. Now, he knows that his behaviors do have at least potential consequences. And I think he may be a little more polite in the future. He may even avoid a real butt-whipping  by someone who unlike my friend, might not show any restraint at all, and just fully express his anger by beating the snot out of him.

Violence is inherent in our species. And unfortunately, when that capacity is trained out of the best of us, that leaves only the worst to wreak havoc. Cowards and weaklings do this by imposing ever more group solutions, that nibble away at the freedoms of individuals, trusting that they personally will suffer no consequences, because the cops will protect them from those they provoke. And bullies give in to their emotional and hormone driven impulses, with no thought of consequences.

Where are the good men, who are neither? Men who neither use aggression to push others around, nor allow it to be done to them, or other weaker innocents? I maintain that like my friend, we are starting to wake back up.

In attempting to train out the wolf-like instincts of men, we seem to have, as a society, also reduced the pool of sheep-dogs. But I see, in this situation, a glimmer of hope. My friend fought back. He didn't turn the other cheek, or slink away. Maybe he didn't do it perfectly. But, maybe he did. Maybe we are returning to a society where good people will not just roll over and take it anymore. And perhaps, "fighting words" will come back as a relative standard. Respect for others has to be rooted in something. Real consequences strike me as far better in that regard, than simply the smug assurance that someone "else" will punish whoever dares to take offense at whatever insult one cares to hurl.

On this Memorial Day weekend, I am thankful not only for all the brave sheep-dogs who have given their lives to protect our nation. But, I am even more grateful to those who are protecting us, by coming back from serious war and confrontation, both hardened to real battle, and at the same time, disciplined to exercise restraint. These men and women are our future business leaders. They actually know, having been in real life and death situations, that making decisions has consequences. And they know that making them, is both necessary and unavoidable. They won't simply wait for things to collapse, as characterized by the last year or so here.

Those who don't understand that "no decision" is also a decision...but one that leaves the lowest common denominator as the standard behavior, will not understand this. These people, when forced to make a decision...one that they absolutely can't get out of...will make them out of fear, rather than considering what is best in the long run. They will make them out of self-interest, rather than principle. They are the Barney Franks and the Nancy Pelosis of the world.

If you want to see our sheep-dogs waking up, I suggest you attend the next TEA Party in your area. You may be amazed at the sight of so many different kinds of people coming together to stand up for the principles our nation was founded upon. You might also pay attention to the Memorial Day Rolling Thunder event. Real men are coming back into style. And the wussies are very afraid.

...one has to have some sense of what the truth actually is. Many Liberals simply don't have this capacity. And those that rise high as politicians are the most self-deluded of all. As a firefighter/EMT, I see this all the time. People who are raised in environments where there is no reward for telling...or even remembering... what actually happened, have a different mechanism that occupies the same part of their mind, that truth does in a well-raised person.

It's basically a matter of behavioral conditioning. At a very early age, a kid learns quite effectively to observe whomever he or she is talking to, for signs of displeasure at what they are saying. They know that saying what the authority figure in front of them doesn't want to hear, is likely to lead to pain.

Now this person may be their mother. Or it may be some other child in the household, who sits higher in the food chain than them. Most of these households are fatherless. The lack of a central arbitrating authority contributes mightily to this pattern of dysfunction. But that lack, means that the child does not have to think beyond the current moment, to later consequences, for the most part.

They know that if they can manage to get out of trouble in the moment, that the emotional force of whatever happened will wear off, and it will be forgotten. So their focus is to supplicate.

They do this by starting to talk, and carefully observe the reaction of the person they are talking to. If they get a good reaction, they stay with that line. If they sense that what they are saying is not being well-received, they quickly switch to another line, until they get feedback that tells them they are on track again. They continue this until they get a signal from the AF (authority figure) that they are satisfied. Then, that *becomes* their story. And they are sticking to it!

I can't count the number of times I've heard those exact words from people in the projects, or other households, where there are no good male role models, to act as arbiters. It's a hierarchy thing. It keeps kids from being beaten better than any other strategy in those circumstances.

They aren't lying. They aren't capable of it, literally, since what actually happened has no value to them, with regard to their immediate desired outcome, which is to escape punishment.

I have to laugh at the current situation. President Obama got elected by telling middle America what we wanted to hear. And he's very good at that, and many people bought it. Those on the far left, supported him vociferously, because they knew he didn't mean much of what he was saying, but had to say it to "fool" the middle-of-the-roaders.

Now it turns out that he wasn't lying about many things, that they thought he was. He is a narcissist, who craves power and attention. And he will sincerely stick to his story, no matter how many times he has to revise it, in light of public reaction to it. He's got *NEW* friends now!

It's times like this, that I ponder what I haven't put my energy into, that in retrospect, might have been beneficial both to me, and my fellow man. Right now, I'm lamenting that I haven't put more time into building up this blog, to something that more people would look forward to coming and reading. Because, I have been doing something since the "Stimulus" Bill was passed, that has seemed to me to be very effective, judging by the reactions that I've gotten from the various callers. I've been having a bit of fun with it, in that perverse way one sometimes does, when things seem bleak, and a little bit of fun can soothe the savaged soul.

 

Since then, what I have been doing, is deliberately NOT donating money to Republican organizations. I have donated my political money, mostly to the Republican side for some years now, because I perceived that their agenda was more in line with my own thoughts on governance. It hasn't really been a lot. A few hundreds of dollars a year on average. But, it has been enough that I get maybe two or three soliciting calls a week from various organizations, such as the RNC, GOPAC, College Republicans, and the like.... and maybe two or three a day, around election times.

 

Now the way I have been going about "not" donating, is what I think has engendered a tiny window of opportunity to at least feel heard, if maybe in fact, not making much difference overall. It's satisfying emotionally at least, to have some young enthusiastic political phone worker, pause for a moment and actually listen to what I have to say.

 

At any rate, the typical call goes something like this. I answer with a bright cheery hello, and politely listen to the entire pitch, supplying the "yup!s" and "uh-huhs" where appropriate. This allows the person to really feel like they have a potential live one...maybe even one in the bag! Then when the big question comes along....salespeople call this the "close"....I again "cheerfully", simply say "No." Then I shut up and wait for them to think for a second or two....which thus far, they always do, because at that point in the script, they have learned that people always either donate, or raise some objection...which they have been carefully coached to answer smoothly and adroitly, usually be attempting a down-sell for a smaller amount.

 

That second or two pause, is what is known as a rapport break, in some circles. And it is quite deliberate, on my part. The effect of a rapport break...with anyone, not just phone solicitors....is to induce a bit of confusion, where the person seeks to re-establish the rapport that they were enjoying just a fraction of a moment before. People are uncomfortable when they are thrown something unexpected. They search internally, to return to a path that they know, and feel sure-footed on.

 

What happens next, is usually one of two things. They either assume that the lack of further information means that it was that the amount asked for was too high, and go to the down-sell immediately...thereby getting back on the track they are used to. Or, they ask for more information in some way. I've yet to have one simply say thank-you and hang up, at that point. If they go immediately to the down-sell, I simply do the same thing again. I cheerfully reply "No.", in a tone that implies there is is an answer, and they simply haven't guessed it yet, but still give them no further information. Imagine asking someone a riddle, that they make guesses at, but which they have not yet gotten the right answer to. The "no" starts out in a low tone, and lilts to a higher tone as you draw out the syllable. Like that. I wait for them to ask.

 

That's important. Waiting for someone to ask. It means that they will actually listen to your reply. In this context, it even means they are curious to know why, because most people simply hate not knowing something, that they believe they understand already. And trust me on this, all phone solicitors believe they've heard it all. At his point, you have actually pierced the cognitive barriers of a professional persuader, and now you have something they want...something to fill that gap in their model.

 

Finally, once they have asked, I tell them. Now reading about it, it may seem complicated...or even a little bit cruel to some folks. But, I assure you, nothing could be further from the truth. It's quite easy in practice. You just have to say "No." one or two times, in a way that elicits their receptivity. You don't feel like the server is being cruel to you when they ask you if you'd like appetizers or dessert do you? Of course not. They are simply exploring your receptivity...and maybe enticing you a bit with the reasonable tools of the trade. No big deal. Heck, political donations don't even make you fat!

 

I tell them that I have abandoned the Republican Party, because three Senators.....Specter, Snow and Collins....crossed party lines to vote for the Stimulus Package. Ideally, at this point, they will object that it didn't matter anyway, as it was going to pass regardless. If they don't object, (notice how this sales call is going now...who is parrying objections?) then I simply continue with my reasoning, and supply that fact, myself.

"If the Republicans can't even stand up on their hind legs when there is nothing at stake, how can I expect them to stand up when it matters? So, I've abandoned them. They were counting on me to support them before, which I did. I was counting on them to support my interests, and they have let me down. Since it is obvious to me, that simply telling them what I want isn't good enough, I am doing the only thing in my power that has any chance at all to have an effect. I'm hitting them in the wallet. I'm boycotting them, until such time as they get their house (and Senate) in order. I realize that they aren't going to miss my fifty bucks all that much. But, if enough people stop donating, and even a few take the time to tell them why......"

"And I hope that if you (Mr. earnest phone donation solicitor) have any way to report why people aren't giving, you will do that. Because I know that it's got to be tough for you to listen to people's anger all day, on this job. I mean, I'm not mad at you, in the least. You don't make those kinds of decisions. You are just doing a job that is not only meaningful, in terms of the direction of our country, but it is being made much harder by our own leaders too. I sympathize with you in this, and I want you to know that I don't think I could even do it. So, thank-you for that! I hope enough stuff like this filters up so that our leaders can start supporting you better too."

 

Now notice that I am doing something here. I'm regaining that rapport with the person I'm talking to. I'm giving them an out. I'm on their side now. Which means they are on my side. I'm not mad at them, and they are not mad at me. We share a common goal, of building a better party.

 

"So, when the Republican Party either gets their people in line, or tosses them out of the party, since it does no good to have back-stabbers in it anyway...especially since the numbers are so far out of whack already, and as you said, it doesn't even matter...I'll start donating again."

 

All this may indeed be hubris on my part. It may be that not a single one of those folks have passed on any of the information I gave them, about my dissatisfaction. I see though, that Michael Steele has resigned. And I see that Arlen Specter has changed his support for Card Check. I have no way of knowing if my little protest had anything at all to do with this. I'd like to think so. I'd like to think that there are at least a few hundreds or thousands of people who have sent a similar message, that maybe that is what is making a difference. But, even if I'm tilting at windmills, I'm having fun doing it. And while the Man of La Mancha may not be remembered as a hero, I think everyone has a least a soft spot for him in their heart. I pursue even my folly with gusto!

 

Oh yeah. I mentioned "Carrots" in my post title. Carrots are at least as important as sticks, in changing human behavior.

 

I'm now pursuing a new phase of my protest. The next call I get, will be to inform the person that I am donating 2 five dollar contributions, on the condition that they let someone higher up, know in some fashion, that one is for Michael Steele resigning, and one is for Senator Specter changing on his prior support for Card Check. I will get that person to promise to do that, and tell them that I will take them at their word.

 

Now I don't know if you dear (read: "rare") reader, have anything that you do, simply for the feeling of satisfaction it gives you to stand on your principles, even though you know that most people will never even notice. But, if you like to enjoy yourself a litle bit, in times like these....rather than just laying back and taking it....please feel free to add this little pinprick to your toolbox. Who knows? Maybe with enough of us pricking the elephant, he will decide it's time to mosey back to where he won't step on us.

 

C'mon Sancho. Let's go see if we can knock the corner off another of those big-a** propellers!

Dreaming the impossible dream....

I resolved never to let myself be put into such a situation ever again. And it took me years of self-examination and pain to extract all the lessons of my experience.

Senator Obama has my sympathy. My pain is nothing compared to his. I only had to go through it one time, and believe me, that was enough. I never want to face such a thing ever again. Yet, he has had to go through it what? Six or seven times now? It seems that just about everyone he has ever befriended, or worked with, has turned out to be a criminal or demagogue.

Its bad enough to find out you were fooled by one bad egg. To find out that almost everyone you've ever surrounded yourself with, has been taking advantage of your naivete' must be devastating. And yet, I'm sure that as with me, the passage of time, and these hard lessons, will make him a better man twenty years from now.

...but. It seems to me that this ruling is very convenient for the candidate that does want to disarm us all. He is patient. He is shrewd. He also knows that with all us "gun clingers" busy celebrating our *victory*, that many of us will not turn out to vote for the mediocre candidate the Republicans have put up. He knows that in a face to face confrontation between gun-grabbers and gun-holders, he would be easily backed down.

This seemingly great, but in reality all too narrow....in light of the obvious language of the Constitution... decision, was no smack-down. And what is at stake here? How many SCOTUS judges will the next POTUS put on the court? We have seen that in politics, as in life, there is no victory, that is more than temporary. And often, giving away a hand or two, sets up the big win for later.

With my poker metaphor firmly in hand, I submit that winning this pot simply allows the fresh-faced junior Senator to fold his hand without showing his cards. To flatter us to our faces, knowing that when the time comes, we will have dropped our guard enough that we are less likely to have the cards or the will, when its time to go "all in". He does have a few tells though.

http://www.sportsmenforobama.org/content/view/14/27/

How many of the last few elections hinged on the support of those who believe that the 2nd Amendment, is the right that underpins all the other rights we have?

We've won a pot. That's all. The tournament is still a large question. It is not yet time to celebrate and become distracted. Getting up and voting in November is the final round. I'm the last guy who ever thought he'd be voting for John McCain. However, during the Clinton years, I resolved to be a one issue voter. I'm not changing my mind at this point, even though the temptation to relax is there. I know it seems like all is quiet. When is the next action likely to occur?

Wild Bill Hickcok won a few important showdowns, face to face. He did not however, die during a fair fight. He was shot with his back to the door, while he wasn't paying attention. Too eager to relax with some poker, he failed to find his customary seat in a corner. Are you paying attention? Check your powder.

Sometimes something is so huge and obvious, that it only gets noticed in parts.

Three blind guys happen across an elephant. The first, upon grasping the great beast's leg, declares that the elephant is like a tree. The second,  upon feeling the great sides of the animal, declares that no, it is obviously like a wall. The third, who has hold of the trunk, tells the others that of course they are wrong. The elephant is most certainly like a snake.

A government representative happens along just then, and realizes that he has just found a goldmine, because his brother-in-law is looking for grant money and here are three very lucrative proposals that can be written up and pushed through by his friend the politician. They will be easily passed under the new provisions mandating effective programs for the blind.

Autism, Asperger's, ADD/ADHD, Gifted, ENTP/INTP (Myers/Briggs Type Indicator), Geek......these are all different labels that are used by people with differing agendas, to think about the elephant that is in the room....and that sometimes threatens to stomp on everything that most people think of as "normal".

As identity level statements, they can be more or less useful to those who are labeled as such, depending on context. People tend to live up to or down to, what is expected of them by those who love them, or interact with them, in authoritative ways. Parents, teachers, doctors, social workers, etc....all have a great deal to do with how the person decides or reacts to their environment and develops or fails to develop social skills.

As a person who could easily be labeled with any of these statements, I both empathize and sympathize with anyone who is dealing with the challenges that being other than "normal" brings.

I was fortunate enough to have slipped through the cracks, in an era before public "help" was widely marketed, and whose parents were of modest means. It presented me with many challenges in my life. But, the final shakeout is that I am a happy, productive, well adjusted individual. And I learned enough in the process of coming to that, that my own daughter, who is equally outside the "normal" range, will end up a happy well-adjusted adult, with the help of all the tips and tricks I've gathered for that purpose.

There is no way I can avoid oversimplifying in so short a space. But, for anyone who wishes to see the elephant in toto, I recommend these resources. Do a google-search for "prerainmanautism". Learn about NeuroLinguistic Programming (google "NLP"). Read Thom Hartmann's book "Healing ADD". Read Karen Pryor's Book "Don't Shoot the Dog". Look into Myers/ Briggs Typing Instrument (google "MBTI") Read "The Ugly Duckling".

There is a common thread...more of a rope actually....that runs through all of this stuff. And that is the developmental aspects of socialization that every person must negotiate in growing up. It almost doesn't matter "why" some people have this constellation of characteristics. It mostly matters how those end up being expressed, and how that affects the person's ability to successfully interface with their fellow humans. That's what determines whether or not we are happy. Each of us ultimately have to decide for ourselves, with much help from those around us, how to deal with being outside the average range. And the normal response of those within the mainstream range, is   perfectly human. They, like all people, want to feel good about themselves. It is all too common though, for people to do that, either by "helping" others who are "less fortunate", or casting them aside as "defective". Both are insidious in effect.

The Government and the Medical System are just that....systems. They operate independently of the intentions of the individuals who make up those systems. Like all systems, they seek to further themselves. They seek to create "need" upon which they can grow and become more powerful. Anyone who has read much of Thomas Sowell's work, will understand this at some level. But, your kid need not be pulled into that maw, where grant funding, social spending, educational spending, promotion-seeking bureaucrats, practice-expanding shrinkologists, beleaguered teachers, etc, determine what directions the systems themselves lurch.

You can learn to see the whole elephant. You can help them learn the skills they need to interact with the majority...no matter how unlikely that may seem to you right now. The difference between a low functioning autistic/ADD/Aspie/delinquent child, and a high functioning one are mostly in how they have learned to interact. The high functioning ones are forgiven mostly. They are known as geeks, geniuses, entrepreneurs, etc. But, the happiest of all these folks, are practically indistinguishable to most people. They are the ones who have learned to blend in. To not scare people with their differences. They are guys like me, who have learned to keep our heads down, when that's what is most appropriate.

Please don't take my word for any of this though. Look at some of those resources and decide for yourself. It may require some dot connecting on your part. Or it may seem obvious once you have put them all into a common context. Then examine how your own beliefs and behaviors regarding your child affect how they perceive themselves. If you are tempted to feel the least bit guilty for not having spotted this before...then realize that literally billions of dollars have been spent by systems that are not at all interested in your kid's well-being, regardless of the patient, caring and kind individuals who make up that system, and are just as in the dark about it as you were. And remember that they are "professionals" whose own identity level beliefs are filters through which they can only see darkly. Unless they themselves are one of these exceptional individuals, they have no idea, and deserve no blame for not knowing....and much credit for doing what they can, in systems that care no more for them, than for your kid.