Just Let Me -- G -- Indoctrinate You!

Monday, November 28, 2011

It's a Sixty Million to One Thing

Dear America,

boy, have no idea what just happened...

one day I plum went 'out to lunch' [badump ba] and the next thing I know, I never came back.

days, weeks, months, who knows.  but the real question is, who really cares, right?  

For what it's worth, we have entered the official holiday season;  as these are the days when the line in-between naughty and nice gets a wee bit blurry.

The real concern, is that nobody really cares about that either.  So while my head is spinning and foaming at the mouth, crazy girl is about to be unleashed to tell you all about it.

So ode to figgy pudding where do I begin...

Yes.  Let's start here:

Talking Turkey:  8 Easy Steps for Discussing Reproductive Health and Justice at the Holiday Table.

Yes, I hear you; you'd love it if I just made that up.  But it's real my friends, no imitation cream whip here.  This advice column is featured on Planned Parenthood, in hopes of assisting the tongue-tied collegiate returning home for the holidays and being challenged across the table...you know, over the gravy and through the dinner rolls...with thirteen rounds of politics, religion, and family in technicolor.

Setting the stage for truly meaningful family breakthroughs, it reads:

"The holidays are upon us! Going home or getting together with relatives for the holidays is always a stressful time, but if your family members are the type who regularly protest outside the local Planned Parenthood, you know that this holiday is going to be a doozy."

Besides warning against sounding off on talking points to make your point, and recommending a "big picture" approach catering to the general welfare of all women, and suggesting to everyone to "know the facts" -- it takes the higher ground, embodying the stance of true compassion while taking morality out of the picture entirely...

Because, you know...

"It’s all in how you frame it. In so many of these political disagreements, when things get heated we revert back to bumper sticker slogans instead of really talking about an issue. Instead, take a few deep breaths and try personalizing the issue, or evoking empathy.

Oftentimes it’s easier to dismiss abortion or other health care procedures as “bad” when it’s framed as a political issue. But when you’re talking about an individual woman making a personal decision, it’s harder to just write off."

Yes.  Because we can -- because we have a right -- because it's just not the right time -- because abortion isn't personal, it's business, or is it personal -- because it isn't murdering a life when we can't see it -- because there just isn't any good birth control methods these days  -- because teaching our boys and girls to wait is so Victorian -- because having the child and giving it up for adoption to a couple who cannot conceive is so assbackwards -- because abortion is just another method of birth control  -- because some countries still worship boys more than girls and choose to kill her...

How is that for "framing" things? 

I would go on, but I need to tie in something the Pope said recently.

"It is my hope that the Church's conscientious efforts to confront this reality will help the broader community to recognize the causes, true extent and devastating consequences of sexual abuse, and to respond effectively to this scourge which affects every level of society."

Sure.  It is on a totally different subject, but trust me, it works for everything.

The Pope is spot on; the sexual abuses within a trusted institution -- as the Catholic Church -- is but a microcosm of society; and until we all admit that, and deal with it head on, we will continue to bear the horrendous ill effects upon generations to come.

Having sex without thinking about consequences, without a care in the world, without love, without marriage, without care of the child being intimately and profoundly harmed, is wrong in every way.

In the article, an attorney for the side of survivors noted,  "The pope would have us believe that this crisis is about sex abuse. It isn't. It is about covering up sex abuse," Clohessy said. "And while child sex crimes happen in every institution, in no institution are they ignored or concealed as consistently as in the Catholic church."  [that is, David Clohessy, the National Director of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests]

Piggy-backing on Planned Parenthood's list of heartfelt advice, Clohessy makes an excellent point as he misses the 'big picture.'

Is the cover up more the issue?
Or is this more a chicken and egg thing, as in which came first? 
Who really cares which is worse?    Tell that to the survivors of Syracuse, Penn State...or the Boy Scouts....just to name a few; or no, I got a better one -- how about the institution simply called FAMILY.

It is the sexual abuse of one person upon another.  That is where is starts.  While we are all connected, in community with one another, it always falls back on the moral integrity of just one person making a really bad choice.  

"It is my hope that the Church's conscientious efforts to confront this reality will help the broader community to recognize the causes, true extent and devastating consequences of sexual abuse, and to respond effectively to this scourge which affects every level of society."  just back for seconds with the Pope

Freely aborting our babies -- the liberal argument tries to persuade us to believe that it's just about a woman's right to choose.

Pedophilia -- within institutions large and small -- chooses to center on 'the big picture' cover up and troubleshooting to protect liabilities, rather than place a laser beam focus back upon personal responsibility, finding our moral compass, and returning back to our tried and true fundamentals of making good, decent people all the way around; of course, all beginning with the very institution our country's founders elevated to it's highest regard:  the FAMILY.

It is estimated that there are over 60 million survivors of sexual abuse in America today.  Which means -- if I have to spell it out -- that there could be as many as 60 million abusers somewhere in America today.  And I got news for you, they are not all priests, or coaches, or Boy Scout leaders, okay?   But the point is, it is sixty million beginning with ONE.

The Pope chose to use the word "scourge..."  a word which this girl had to look up to get the depth and breadth of it's full meaning.  It was a good word to pick:  "a cause of widespread and dreaded affliction, as pestilence or war."  indeed.  much like the bubonic plague, every family seems afflicted, deeply, at the root -- while it carries the potential to totally wipe us out.  We can blame every institution known to man -- beginning with the Catholic Church if you want -- but it always begins with one man [generally speaking].

and now, because I can't help myself -- I am reminded of a classic movie moment when Kay responds to Michael Corleone [The Godfather...just in case you have been living under a rock]

"Oh, oh Michael. Michael, you are blind. It wasn’t a miscarriage. It was an abortion. An abortion, Michael. Just like our marriage is an abortion. Something that’s unholy and evil. I didn’t want your son, Michael. I wouldn’t bring another one of your sons into this world. It was an abortion, Michael. It was a son, a son, and I had it killed because this must all end. I know now that it’s over. I knew it then. There would be no way, Michael. No way you could ever forgive me. Not with this Sicilian thing that’s been going on for 2000 years…"

just before she gets smacked upside the head. 

good stuff.

a return to all things that make good people is in order.

just because we can do something, doesn't make it the right thing to do; just because we are free to do whatever we want, doesn't mean we should; just because we mother/father a child doesn't automatically make us a good parent -- it is earned after, during and through raising good kids and being good to them -- making all the more reason to truly PLAN for PARENTHOOD all the more essential [duh].

Sixty million survivors of sexual abuse should raise a red white and blue flag for all of us; while "it is my hope that the Church's conscientious efforts to confront this reality will help the broader community to recognize the causes, true extent and devastating consequences of sexual abuse, and to respond effectively to this scourge which affects every level of society."

 God help us all if we don't.

make it a good day, G

Wednesday, November 16, 2011

It's all about those Lazy Americans, Spoken by a Marxist, kind of Thing

Dear America,

"We’ve been a little bit lazy 
over the last couple of decades.  
We’ve kind of taken for granted — 
‘Well, people would want to come here’ — 
and we aren’t out there hungry, 
selling America 
and trying to attract new businesses 
into America.”  
Obama @APEC, addressing CEO's

let's be clear; he's not calling the workers lazy...au contraire

he is speaking down to the nation's CEO's who create and manage the jobs  (for the workers).

Besides being of the belief that progress, ergo technology, takes away jobs and opportunity for the little worker bees (remember that day...the Proletariat-in-Chief revolting against the ATM's and airport kiosks) -- also known as, buying into Fallacy #12, as laid out in my new favorite read, The Naked Communist; it's the one that "[assumes] that technological developments would make machines more and more efficient and therefore throw so many men out of work that they would compete for jobs until wages would become more and more meager..."

...the president is also fiercely supporting the very same mindset that is being promoted by the latest round of revolutionaries of the Occupy Wall Street movement; clearly misguided by their own ignorance -- of How the Real World Works, and more importantly, how the real world requires everyone to work together -- our president takes a side.  And it isn't the right one.  Matter of fact, it is quite un-American to boot.

With the arrival of the factory -- and the factory worker -- Karl Marx and his partner in crime-inism, Friedrich Engels, came to the realization that the evil capitalists, and all their wares, would eventually, most assuredly, be overthrown.  They figured that there would come a day when the modern world would test this relationship of worker bee and CEO; and even though communism survives merely upon one fallacy built upon another -- when answering the question as to the social responsibility of the simple factory, Marx and Engels truly believed "no private individual should get the profits from something which many people were required to produce."

Again, from The Naked Communist:

"Marx and Engels did not believe that wages were adequate compensation for labor performed unless the workers received all the proceeds from the sale of the commodity.  Since the hands of the workers produced the commodity they believed the workers should receive all the commodity was worth.  They believed that the management and operation of a factory were only 'clerical in nature' and that in the near future the working class should rise up and seize the factories or means of production and operated them as their own."

like that would solve anything.

but details, right; while this incite is only immediately followed up with a question, "without his willingness to risk considerable wealth would there be any factory?"

you know, tomorrow, the Occupy Wall Street revolutionaries plan on taking down Wall Street -- they have every intention to bring it to a screeching halt using whatever means available and possible.

I cannot help but notice how incredibly easy it is for people to pipe up and revolt AFTER the wealth, after the profits, after some people might have made more money than others (in perfect relationship to the degree of effort, responsibility, investment, and level of risk put up in the first place).

But when a president of the United States -- the birthplace of self-reliance and mass purveyor of free enterprise, independent commerce, free trade, with equal protections and opportunity safely held under the Rule of Law for one and all -- continuously speaks of such ill will against those 'who risk', in effect it becomes real cause to sound the alarm. This progression is inevitable within the common sense frame of mind.

Just who is this guy and what are his true beliefs?

There is just one more excerpt from The Naked Communist that I wish to share aloud... before I give it a rest for the day:

"One cannot pore over the almost endless products of his pen -- the weighty, complex books or the reams of sniping, feverish correspondence without feeling that Karl Marx projected into Communism the very essence of his own nature.  His resentment of political authority expressed itself in a ringing cry for universal revolution.  His refusal or inability to compete in a capitalistic economy wrung from him a vitriolic denunciation of that economy and a prophecy that its destruction was inexorably decreed.  His deep sense of insecurity pushed him to create out of his own imagination a device for interpreting history which made progress inescapable and a Communist millennium unavoidable.  His personal attitude toward religion, morals, and competition in everyday  existence led him to long for an age when men would have no religion, morals, or competition in everyday existence.  He wanted to live in a classless, stateless, noncompetitive society where there would be such lavish production of everything that men, by simply producing according to their apparent ability, would automatically receive a superabundance of all material needs."  [about Marx]

scary, isn't it?

"He wanted to live in a classless, stateless, noncompetitive society where there would be such lavish production of everything that men, by simply producing according to their apparent ability, would automatically receive a superabundance of all material needs."  And if I'm not mistaken, sounds to me like we are knee deep in the imaginations of a community organizer [like Marx] who has never held a real job in his life.  If Obama had a drinking problem and left his family to fend for themselves half the time, we might find ourselves spot on.

A real, live, naked, Communist rests his future upon the belief that "each will produce according to his ability and and each will receive according to his need."  And in order for this to succeed, the motivation to turn a profit (large or small) is replaced with working to benefit society as a whole -- replacing a nation built upon a Declaration of Independence and Constitution with a new one; and thereby transforming a nation of self-reliant capitalists with the proletariat's pipe dream... giving rise to a collective authority and priority, as dictated by the state. [and, of course, ending with extinguishing all incentive to progress as individuals at all]

It begins with presidents (kings, dictators...) declaring a class struggle in every possible way.  It progresses, with advancements in technology made to look evil -- with risk takers, and the whole lot  (especially those pesky CEO's) made to look utterly lazy.

Make it a Good Day, G

the capitalist system is not perfect BECAUSE man, the capitalist, is not perfect...
...if only men were angels...
...blah, blah, blah, blah, blahhhhhhhhhg.

Monday, November 14, 2011

It's Just Thirteen Questions and a Pew Thing

Dear America,

happy monday

we are trying something new today...
I encourage you to take a simple quiz via the Pew Research Center.
It will only take about three minutes -- or less.

Go ahead. Go here.  I'll wait.

It's just thirteen questions.

But if you are anything like me, the quiz itself is nothing; the true test comes immediately upon finish...when you are assaulted with how the average American has responded, with demographic breakdowns and all.

It's just thirteen questions.

Your little G thing got every question right [because they were simple-simon] -- BUT the average American girl, only got 6.8 of the answers correct.   [men, 8.5 out of thirteen]  With 100%, thirteen out of thirteen, I landed in the top 8%; meaning, 92% of the respondents got less than that. [hate to have to spell it out, but kinda feel like I have to be really clear]

When given the answers right in front of you -- with a straightforward, multiple choice selection and no tricks -- only 40% of all women who took the quiz could pick out how many troops have been killed in Afghanistan since the war began; only 36% of all women could emphatically point out that Republicans control the House; only 51% of all women could demonstrate their full awareness of the current unemployment percentage (as promoted by this administration) holding steady at a rocking 9%.  (Did they really think it was five, or the fifteen?)

Quite honestly, this is heartbreaking.

How can we expect to uphold the fundamentals when we can't even keep up with the current events?

Do you really think we can get away with walking around in our own little bubble without responsibility to the whole?

Sure -- maybe this Congress has a NINE percent approval rating (meaning, we dis-approve of 90% of the lot); but what does it matter when 90% of Americans answering thirteen SUPER SIMPLE questions can't even get a hundred percent correct? This only goes to prove one thing -- seems ninety percent of us are walking stupid (or ignorant, or uneducated, or selfish, or ingrates, or spoiled, or looking forward to being communists...to name only seven out of thirteen).

Think about it, but don't hurt yourself; it is only Monday.

Make it a Good Day, G

a little 'Garbage' is playing for the song of the day -- just a click away on 'It's Just Thirteen Questions...'  TuRn It uP and dAnCe

Friday, November 11, 2011

It's an 11-11-11 Thing

Dear America,

it's 11-11-11

thank you.

enough said?  no, not really.

but let's just let the video do the talking and the feeling for today.

Make it a Good Day, G

Wednesday, November 9, 2011

It's a Naked Christmas Tree Thing

Dear America,

miss me?
yeah, no, not really. got it.

that's cool.
just in case you wanna know, I have been busy.

Knee deep in reading this week -- just a little gift to self that keeps on giving [to myself]; and at the top of the book pile with top priority is..............The Naked Communist.  Oh MY Goodness.  Winner winner chicken dinner.  Un&%#*ingbelievable.  What a good book.  It is so good, I am taking my time with it.

So between the reading and the recently added part time work that has become a full time job -- my energies have been twisted at best, and totally shot at worst.  But enough about me.

I just had to jump in to chat it up a wee bit today.   And no, not to talk about my little sugar Cain; not to talk about Gloria 'pumped up kicks' Allred...of course, that little nickname of hers should make you wonder; and no, not even to talk about the hypocrisy of realities that surely lives and breathes within the Left aorta of the heart of society.

No, I am gonna lock into one thing and one thing only -- and as it would turn out, it has nothing to do with anything related to the Herman Cain scandal.

No.  I am here today to mention the Christian tax -- all wrapped up and tied with a bow at The Heritage Foundation.  [yeah, they didn't refer to it as a "Christian Tax" -- but I will]


I know.  What's the big &%$*ing deal, right Joe...as in Biden....because that's just the way we roll around here.... it's just fifteen cents.  

But think about it.

The Left continuously picks and chooses when they enter the 'separation of church and state' zone and when they don't (of course, the idea itself -- of this so-called "separation" -- is a whole 'nother controversy...which WE have not enough time for today).

But the whole thing is odd, really.

The Administration has decided it needs yet another department to elevate the image of the Christmas tree, of all things.  Which makes me wonder, why now?   which is funny, considering that it seems to be a common refrain around here these days (indeed, and it does sound like we are gonna circle around back to Cain, but no, not really).

But anyway, here's some details, handpicked from the post written by David S. Addington, from Heritage:

"In the Federal Register of November 8, 2011, Acting Administrator of Agricultural Marketing David R. Shipman announced that the Secretary of Agriculture will appoint a Christmas Tree Promotion Board.  The purpose of the Board is to run a “program of promotion, research, evaluation, and information designed to strengthen the Christmas tree industry’s position in the marketplace; maintain and expend existing markets for Christmas trees; and to carry out programs, plans, and projects designed to provide maximum benefits to the Christmas tree industry” (7 CFR 1214.46(n)).  And the program of “information” is to include efforts to “enhance the image of Christmas trees and the Christmas tree industry in the United States” (7 CFR 1214.10)."


ex squeeze me?

....in the era of let's take God out of everywhere -- and often -- especially that crazy Christian one, this administration targets Christians, in the particular, charging fifteen cents a pop to "enhance the  image of Christmas trees?"  under the guise of "helping" the Christmas tree industry, you think charging more for them is going to be a benefit?  in a recession?  (yes, the recession...still)  but seriously?

AND you want a bunch of left wing, secular bureaucrats to run the program?

hold up while I get a good belly laugh on the floor...morphing, of course, into an even bigger, better cry (aka fully enhanced)..

Way to ring in the Christmas season, Mr. President.

And pulleeze -- don't even try to give me the cultural Christmas excuses -- Christmas, all of it, including but not limited to all of it's symbols, especially the Christmas Tree -- is celebrating the birth of Jesus.  Do Jewish people get a tree?  do Hindus get a tree?  do Muslims get a tree?  NO  NO  and hat trick NO.

Sure, these days, it is hard to tell; but maybe that is the problem (and we'll save that for another day).

Given my mood -- being totally unnerved and unsettled by this little book highlighting the true color of red defining Communism -- perhaps this news is just poorly timed according to my own little world. 

But is it just me?

and call me funny -- but wasn't the president, just last week, mocking Congress (and God) all in the same breath, when he was trying to push his latest jobs bill?  When he thought congressional actions to be incredulous, spending essential time to "re-affirm" our motto, "In God We Trust" ...like, what a waste of time that was....stupid congress...and like, how is just trusting in God gonna help us make jobs...

So lets talk about waste then:   On a day, of all days, when you announce cutting back on government "swag" all the way around the evergreen branches --  tell me -- just how many bureaucrats will it take to "enhance" an image that clearly doesn't need this kind of help?  what will that really cost us, the taxpayer, when all things are said, and done, and promoted, by a government gaggle of unbelievers?   Is this part of that thing Michelle was referring to --  in re-defining our traditions and whatnot?

sounds like we are beginning to 'change our history' -- beginning with re-defining the Christmas Tree for us; playing with the altering of it's image, perhaps.... it's meaning... and overall, transforming and ENHANCING our traditions...because I'm with the government and I'm here to help.

from the little red book, The Naked Communist:

"...But in rejecting the Judaic-Christian code of morals, Engels tried to represent that Communism was merely moving up to a higher level where human conduct will be motivated exclusively by the needs of society: 'We say that our morality is wholly subordinated to the interest of the class-struggle of the proletariat.'"
Right, because people, by themselves and left to their own devices, are just      that      good.

Utopia here we come.  Can't wait.  Perhaps somebody could produce a secular Advent calendar to mark the days...hey, if you have the means, go for it, no need to thank me or give me a penny.

And make a mental note, if you will:  secular, faux-fir Christmas trees are not only the next big thing -- they are the only thing.  You heard it from me, little G, here first.   Jesus is not the reason for the season, got it? genericbegeesus dot gov IS, starting tomorrow....because, you know, "...[Marx and Engels believed that] Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the sentiment of a heartless world, as it is the spirit of spiritless conditions.  It is the opium of the people."

and now, it's time for me to curl up with The Good Book (the real one); then, get right back at The Naked Communist cuz it's getting hot up here in America.

Make it a Good Day, G

my apologies, drank the eggnog just before dropping in...

but just one more thing before I go:

....had no idea that Karl Marx was such a fruitcake...
but this, along with all the other things aforementioned, we will save for another day.

Thursday, November 3, 2011


Dear America,

"You have legislation 
reaffirming that “In God We Trust”is our motto? 
That’s not putting people back to work! 
I trust in God,
but God wants to see us 
help ourselves 
by putting people back to work." 
Obama, earlier today.

wow. right?

Context: Rep. Randy Forbes brought forward legislation affirming "In God We Trust" as our nation's motto -- and overwhelmingly, with a vote of 396 - 9, the House approved.

Not only does our president immediately march out to the podium to mock this action, he actually says something to the effect of 'like, what good is that?'   when he adds, "that's not putting people back to work!"

Yeah, right, he "trusts" God -- but like, not that much; in his eyes, this motto sucks because like, God, can only do so much, right?  God is limited, according to the Golden Child.  Sounding an awful lot like he thinks of himself to be smarter and more all-knowing than God, Itself, he quips, "God wants to see us help ourselves..."  ergo, and approve my jobs bill.

AND just the way he makes it a question!  

 "You have legislation reaffirming that 'In God We Trust' is our motto?"   

Really, Mr. President?
Anyone taking this statement out of context may allow for plenty of room to make a case against our country's entire foundation, as found in the words of our Declaration of Independence, which invokes the power of Divine Providence and Nature's Law and Nature's God throughout; lest we ignore the rather huge opening you leave us with, questioning your own true beliefs.

But for the sake of this conversation today, let's just run with giving you the benefit of the doubt....that perhaps you didn't mean it in that way... that you may have misspoke a wee bit...that you didn't mean to insinuate the fundamental ignorance of handing over our trust to God (...kinda like every other intellectual, liberal elitist who clearly wishes for this country to march through, over, and beyond God as quickly as we possibly can) .

Mr.  Oh "I trust in God, BUT..." Bama....seriously?

just so disappointed in this president of mine...

So yesterday, in the naming of the blog itself,  "It's Fundamental Change without the Fundamentals Thing"  -- I will gladly admit, I was mocking the conscious choices made by this president to run as far away from our nation's fundamentals as he could get.   But little did I know the president would support my charge with such a blatant show of one-ups-man-ship of our tried and true fundamentals the very next day.  The audacity of the man, really.

Keep on bringing it, Mr. O, that's all I got to say; keep on keepin' on; because the more you open that mouth of yours, the more I have to talk about.  amen!

[warning: flagrant sarcasm around the next bend]
So speaking of the limited power of God -- mythology, demons and angels in general and in particular --  here's a few cogent points "Debunking Obama's Latest Jobs Myth":  GO to  The Heritage Foundation.

Our foundation, calls for each one of us to be stewards of our own good self-government, with the firm belief and faith in something Greater than ourselves -- calling It whatever you wish; for "God," Itself,  IS the most generic and yet the Most High, the most profound, all at the same time.

Our foundation, marking our best and first intentions, set a course to Trust in God -- that Divine Providence Thing --  both in the micro and in the macro; so much so, we developed a brand new world -- the world's first Republic outlining the principles and values of faith within the fine print and bold declarations making our feelings, faith, fundamentals widely known.

While drafting our individual self-reliance as one of the cornerstones; we, the people, became the new king in town.   We, the people, held all the power to capitalize on Life, Liberty, in the Pursuit of Happiness.  We, the people,  would reign for all time through the power of a LIMITED Government and under an UNLIMITED GOD.

IN God We Trust is not a slogan to hang new legislation on.  It is a way of Life; it is a firm belief, inside and out, with or without, in sickness and in health; it is a marriage made Absolute and resilient for all time.

Spinning this into something more personal, I am reminded of a class I took at my church.  It was simply called Financial Freedom.  Even though the material was from a long while back -- like almost twenty years -- the basics of it are still very much a part of my everyday consciousness.

The most essential element probably being the one which demonstrably thanks God within the daily routine -- shouting out thank you out of the blue or after something good happens!  thinking it in the back of our mind like a meditation!  waking up in the morning making it our very first thought!   -- that sort of thing.

The idea is that we are circulating our good graces -- we are fueling the universe with appreciation and reverence for all of God's gifts [be it our talents, our pocketbook, our children, our life's work, etc...]

And the more we circulate -- keeping this pure joy in motion -- the more it builds upon itself.  For even our 'Financial Freedom' has a life force of it's very own.   We can be of the negative... reactionary....stifling... repelling kind... believing that 'the world does not have enough' mindset  -- OR - we can be of the multiplying.... abundant... forthcoming... unlimited kind...believing that 'there is plenty to go around' mindset.  [another exercise in the power of good over evil....]

But the point is, the power to decide 'how to think' is within every one of us [and, of course, it also plays into being an integral part as to the outcome].  That power is not by proclamation from government, but by affirmation, and individual atonement, with God's grace. [For more along those lines, read more about Nature's Law...google it...it is, after all, the one, the only, real true green energy you know.]

The Occupy Wall Street people -- fully supported by this administration, by the way -- is of the mindset of 'not enough.'  I don't have enough, so you need to give me what you have. Share the wealth! cuz Lord knows, I don't trust God to do it....

Start writing "thank you God" on the memo line of your checks and see what happens.  Start appreciating what you already have.  If nothing else, give thanks for being able to freely speak, for goodness sakes.  For every little thing -- good and bad -- look up and say thank you; there is reason back behind every little thing that happens.

Be a part of the conscious, positive, abundant, unlimited-ness in the world around you and all of a sudden the world around you will respond -- in buckets sometimes.

Case in point: the natural world never questions the magnificence of God; the trees never look upon other trees thinking to themselves, I don't have enough leaves... acorns... flowers...fruit...you need to give me some of yours -- they just LIVE!

Sure.  It sounds silly; but I beg of you, start recognizing how much of the natural world accepts where they are and makes the best of it.  Bear witness to nature's affirmations all around -- that the sunflowers really do stand tall and keep their face to the sun!  That there are thousands of polar bear thriving right now, in the natural, in spite of climate change.  The natural world revels just as much in the dead of night as it does upon morning light.  The natural world adapts to circumstances, never settling into the realm of 'not enough.'  It just keeps going.

This is the kind of faith our founders had in mind. The inherent mindset was one of UNLIMITEDNESS and total, absolute, abundance all the way around.  Circulating.  Thriving.  Living.  Capitalizing upon God's good graces.

And when we have a-good-and-plenty, we share it with others from the goodness embedded in our heart; taking care of the community and the common good through our churches and charities, knowing we have more than enough to go around.

This is why we affirm the motto, In God We Trust.  This is why our fundamentals are so vitally important.  It all connects to back to the Divine in all things we do -- individually and collectively.

"You have legislation 
reaffirming that “In God We Trust”is our motto? 
That’s not putting people back to work! 
I trust in God,
but God wants to see us 
help ourselves 
by putting people back to work."

what desperation.  what kind of affirmation is this?

it's a fundamental transformation kind of affirmation, that's what it is.

Make it a Good Day, G

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

It's Fundamental Change Absent the Fundamentals Thing

Dear America,

happy wednesday.

returning home from my part time gig last night -- the one that feels like the more and more I show up for it, the more it feels like a full time gig (but we'll save that conversation for another day) -- I managed to catch the most fascinating five minutes with Greta Van Susteren I have seen in quite some time; she was interviewing a representative from California, Kevin McCarthy.

Basically, she was trying to get down to the bottom of the "problem with Congress."  Why isn't anything getting done?  Why does Congress insist on playing politics?  that sort of thing...

and let's just say I was stunned by the rather quiet storm of his response; not sure if it simply was his candidness in the moment, or the combined effect alongside his calm, balanced demeanor -- but he laid it all out there without skipping a beat or mincing words: the president never gets beyond the talking phase (and more than that, gives the impression that the organizer-in-chief may in fact prefer it...the bureaucratic stranglehold works).

GO HERE to read the transcript or watch the ten minute spot; however, I highly recommend that you watch it for the full effect -- if you get past the first two minutes, you're virtually home free, easily settling in until the very end.

"you never get to an agreement with him...he never finishes,"  
said of the president, per Kevin McCarthy.

well I'll be... color me surprised.

He never wants to get to a bi-partisan decision because it would not serve his purpose -- otherwise, the smartest president who ever lived would make it so.  The president is covertly resorting to Alinsky rules in everything he does -- making the making of chaos job one; making governing through the policy of 'divide and conquer' job two; making the overt use of ridicule, discrediting the opposition at the very core, job three.

Almost sounding like he is giving the president the benefit of the doubt, believing that the common ground we all share is still attainable --  Kevin McCarthy seems remarkably unable to recognize a deeper, more sinister problem:  the impure, unconscionable, root intention of the president's "fundamental transformation"  of this country.

Here is a splendid explanation [of the actions -- or better still, in-actions -- of a president] via Tibor Machan, featured in an interview from about thirty days ago on The Daily Bell [this guy is one of my favorite people in the whole world -- I could listen to what he has to say for forever and a day].   But be forewarned, this is a round-about explanation, so hold on tight:

Daily Bell: All good points, but let's back up. How has it come to this?
Tibor Machan: Those who are government activists don't proclaim it. They disguise what they're after. They have to do so in this country because traditionally American citizens have not been well disposed to government activism, even though there's quite a lot of it. And often they come to believe it is necessary, that their wisdom is supreme, just as did heads of state for centuries. So, in fact, the so-called progressives are utterly reactionary!
Daily Bell: You've referred to what they do as "nudging."
Tibor Machan: It's not my term. The influential pragmatist Professor Cass Sunstein, who is now President Obama's regulation czar, wrote a book called Nudge with Richard H. Thaler. The full title was Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness (Yale UP, 2004).
Daily Bell: Can you give us a little summary?
Tibor Machan: It has to do with the old chestnut of boiling the frog slowly. You find the same strategy advanced by the Fabian Society in Britain. The idea is that you don't want to use brute force to move people toward a society based on government activism. Instead, you want to nudge people, to move them in tiny increments so they do not find it worth their while to object, or at least not forcefully.
Nudging can take place in numerous ways but a lot of it has to do with creating social norms that people will feel they have to conform to. Recycling might be seen as part of this nudging. Regardless of how you feel about recycling and environmentalism in general, recycling is seen within the public dialogue as a general "good." Thus, people will conform to the demands of recycling because they see it as a "good citizen" thing to do. They won't complain or protest that they have been imposed upon. (Just last week the feds banned over-the-counter inhalers on these grounds!)

skipping down a wee bit,

Daily Bell: So to sum up, we're in a situation – in America and the West generally – where those who believe in governmental activism are gradually trumping those who are trying to wield private morality on behalf of non-governmental civil society. Is that a fair statement?
Tibor Machan: It is certainly fair to say this in an ongoing argument. Whether or not the "gradually trumping" part is correct, only time can tell.

Granted, the interview itself begins and ends more focused upon the aspect of weighing the objective reality and ability of deciding our own morality against the government making such declarations for us. But this 'nudging' thing seems to explain a lot of things; for it seems to be the go-to tool --  not only against 'we the people' as a whole, but also, with great calculation, against the proper balance and decision making process within Congress.

Not only that -- as we have grown to witness in the last couple of weeks -- the president has "decided" he won't wait for congress; he has "decided" in his own way; and moreover, he has "decided" that he will move ahead with making gains on his so-called jobs bill totally circumventing congress through the excessive use of regulations, executive order, and czars, blatantly crossing the soft but diabolical and tyrannical line.

Oh Kevin, and you think this guy can't make any decisions...did you hear the president?  

He said, referring to YOU, 'Congress',  "if they won't act, I will."

Before I move on too much further -- please read the entire interview with Tibor Machan.  Go HERE.

The thing is, there has been a great breakdown in communication around here -- in America.  Unbeknownst to most of us, we seem to have been knee deep in living a lie for nearly the last fifty years.  It can be explained by the Occupy Wall Street movement -- and can be further demonstrated and explained by the growing numbers of Tea Party activists who are choosing to fight back. [of course, not necessarily in that order] 

The government would have us believe that the root of the problem is capitalism; this is evidently what "the kids today"  have been learning all this time, anyway.  But honestly, it couldn't be any further from the truth.

and right on cue -- the way the universe works and all -- allow me to share a two minute video:

Thank you "Uncle Ted," and in turn, a place called "dauckster's posterous"

take that, Phil Donahue.

and finally, from James Madison:

"...It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself..."  Federalist Paper #51, read in it's entirety here.

So now to the big finish -- and I'll be real quick about it.
Much like our Congress in motion, wasn't G thing on some kind of vicious circle this morning...

Make it a Good Day, G

Tuesday, November 1, 2011

It's TipToeing Threw the Tulips Thing

Dear America,

Sorry, but we have to get this Cain Scandal out of the way.

For starters, I remember, way back when -- like in the nineties sometime -- we elected, of our own volition, to the highest office of the land -- our very own Womanizer-in-Chief:  Bill Clinton

And boy, did that come back to bite us, no?

None of it really mattered for the democrats, or really the press, for that matter; everybody made hay and had a good chuckle...oooh Jennifer Flowers  oooh [just another e pluribus unum storyline].... while in the end, the American people still elected him president of all things.

And it's funny, it seems we still get a good laugh over it, don't we -- be it just Jennifer, or Monica, or anybody else that was in his sights.  We just think of good-ol'Billy boy as some kind of wonderful; as if, thinking back, he was the president who had it all going on -- and even right under our noses, mind you, if not also under the oval office desk. badump ba  [and did I mention, he, like, plays the sax? -- gotta say that like a valley girl]

good times for America, yes indeed.

c'mon, get over it, it was just a little hanky-panky, right [for which he was nearly impeached....but details schmeetails]

And Cain....well he 'enjoys flowers' like everyone else.

After all, he is a man ....ah so many flowers, so little time...

While it must be true that only men "look"...if not also pluck... no?

oh woe is me...
I do declare... 
whatever will you do, Rhett?
which is not really the line, but whatever.
[which just takes us for a spin back to a person's true character...la di da di da]

But seriously -- does he have a roaming eye?  or hands, lips...or anything else?  Flat out he said, "no." [to Greta, last night...you can read more about it here.

From what we now know, as of today -- being about three days into the story -- it was not sexual harassment.

It was more like a making of a general comment, likening the body of one woman in the office to the height and shape of his wife...with doors wide open...with people around...and nothing more (oh, except that little gesture he used to show how his wife comes up to his chin....nooo....he didn't.....)

Women are funny creatures, aren't we. [statement.  because I am one]

It's like on the one hand, we want men to look at us, admire us for our beauty and brains...as we spend gobs of time working out and putting make up on and getting the new Victoria's Secret Wonder Bra and all -- but heaven's to betsy, give us any more than just a quick glance (without our notice, of course) that's when there's real hell to pay, by golly [using the term 'pay' totally on purpose].  Letting the cynicism freak flag fly.

And before you all jump down my sweetandsexybad-ass, let me be clear -- true sexual harassment from an office predator is wrong and the accused should make all things right --  however the matter needs to be settled just short of cutting off you know what from you know where...just sayin'

But you -- girls everywhere -- better really have a case; and you better not have contributed to it in any way (and you know exactly what I am talkin' about).

But this thing, with Herman Cain, is pure and simple a witch-hunt to get him out of the way.  For we can't even begin to ask the question as to "why now" without looking at the suspicious eyes of impeccable timing from God knows where, now can we?

This is like twenty years later!  This is months into his campaign!  This is after substantial gains everywhere we turn.  And besides, this is after"everybody was doing it" in the nineties  --  flirting with political disaster like so -- just look at our past president.

So why now?
he is kicking butt in the polls and in the hearts and minds of all Americans!   He is a real honest to goodness threat for all the right reasons.

as much as many of us may try -- women cannot have it both ways.

We can't scream look at me [from mass appeal in general, to the single lady in particular] -- and then cry foul when "they" do!

The truth is -- the American culture -- if not the entire world -- has created this phenomenon and it is a little late to begin to ask for special rules, protections, and exceptions.  While perhaps, it makes quite clear the case for returning to a time calling for more restraint, doesn't it? Maybe calling on Hollywood to clean itself up.  Maybe going back to using all those hours in school teaching the golden rules and respect of women, like true gentlemen; while teaching women to be little ladies.

[I KNOW!  I hear  you...oh G this sounds so Victorian and all....way to take us back a hundred years or more].

Maybe it's just me; but I am just so sick of this sort of thing -- the games people play; like, look at me, woo who over here and then turn around and slap him across the face with a lawsuit; it just doesn't work for me.  And it especially doesn't work for me twenty years later, only to surface just in time to throw a live grenade into a worthy presidential opponent's campaign.

Sure, there are some real dogs out there in the real world; but I truly do not believe Herman Cain is one of them.

And are you really going to try to tell me women have never done the same thing while making small talk around the water cooler?  oh, Charlie, you're almost as tall as my husband... like I come up to here on him [making a gesture]....seriously?

Now certainly, I am not defending anything goes, whether in part, or in whole. I am, however, of the firm belief that we can return to an age of being better grown ups all the way around.

And more than that, I believe we can do a better job in and around the water cooler, the holiday office party, and the corporate retreat in keeping a firm grasp of our own set of scruples -- to treat people with respect; and, if I may be so forward, be better at loving our neighbor as ourselves [in the biblical sense, that is].

Okay, so can we get back to the real Cain campaign now?

Just maybe if he sings us a new song we will all get a good laugh and move on.org. Time will tell -- but without a doubt, we will all know in a lot less than twenty years (more like in about twelve months).

Make it a Good Day, G

G note:  'Office Predator Drones' are a whole 'nother species separate from the case of men who rape women.   Please do not equate the two, or misconstrue the message of sexual attraction, or believe G to be of the mindset that women can "ask for it" by how women dress.  NONE of these issues have been addressed in THIS Day in the Life.

This attack on Herman Cain is, by all journalistic standards, neither substantiated or proven; from all appearances,  this story, driven by POLITICO.com,  is just making hay.