Yesterday I had a coaching call where in twenty minutes I broke through a client's denial and went straight to the heart. I asked her what she wanted in a perfect partner, and she described him. Mind alone mattered, she said. This, I pointed out, simply wasn't true. She didn't care if he died of lung cancer? If he was two hundred pounds overweight? She had to back up and correct that. Then I asked her to describe her perfect partner emotionally. For three minutes she described his "deep self knowledge" and emotional equilibrium, etc. etc. How he would back her up, and support her, and so forth and so on.
I stopped her, and pointed out that no where in her list was the simple word "love" to be found. She broke down...love just wasn't a part of her family dynamic. On a deep level, she didn't know if she was deserving of love. Rather obviously, this is the weak link in her chain. Without healing this, she will enter into a series of loveless unions with damaged people. The simple, awful truth that people will literally kill themselves to avoid facing--we attract people who are at our energy level, and below. If we are not attracted to the people who are attracted to us, we have work to do.
The good news and the bad news are the same: we attract what we are. If you yearn for the type of man or woman who is currently not attracted to us, WE CAN GROW. We can heal, change, learn, wake up. Our partners in life say more about us than almost anything else. The reason this is painful is that it can't easily be faked.
All I do in my coaching is look at those three major arenas, and see where there is a "break" in the energy chain. Survival? Check. Sexuality? Check. Physical health/fitness? Check. Self-love and love for others? Check.
Those are the root. Any problem that doesn't show up in one of these areas probably isn't much of a problem, in comparison. Heal the "weak link" and the entire organism can grow into self-expression, intellectual clarity, and spiritual harmony. Because I know what a fully functioning human being is, it is easy to see where cylinders aren't firing. Most relationships are based on "you don't call me on my bullshit and I won't call you on yours." It is critical not to fall into that trap.
##
I won't post the link. Can't bring myself to do it. But if you Google "Human Centipede trailer" I can promise you will see something you never dreamed of. I promise you. I hope I'm healthy enough to resist the morbid curiosity that might motivate me to seek this insanity out, just to be a cinematic completist. Dear God, I can't imagine the mind that thought this up.
##
Office2 allows me to download/upload stuff from Google Docs to my Ipad...pretty efficiently. So far so good, and the potential is there for a "Google Gears" style app that allows you to work online/offline with automatic cloud backup to a document that can be accessed through any computer. And that will be just too cool.
XX
The Facebook page praying for Obama's death has topped a million people. This is so fascinating. People can carry automatic weapons at his speeches, Fox News can joke about cross hairs, Sarah Palin can talk "Lock and Load," and at every turn, people keep insisting that there is nothing unusual going on here. Fine. To me, this is another version of fat people insisting their bodies break the laws of physics, or people claiming that their relationship history has nothing to do with them.
Here's a postulate for you: the more advantage a given person would have if a situation continues, or the more advantage they would have if it changes, the more likely they are to delete information that is inconvenient to notice. In other words, if you oppose Obama's policies, or have racial animus (which I believe to be about 10% present across the board) you will simply be tone-deaf to threats, because on a deep level, well...it just wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if something ugly happened.
You are, of course, perfectly free to disagree with this, but I have to be honest and say that that is exactly the way I regard defense of the indefensible.
Each side of the political divide tries to say that they have the superior moral position. All right--if you think that, here is a chance. Show us. Stand up and condemn this language without equivocation. If this is not the not-so-hidden heart of the Right, stop letting these troglodytes hijack your party.
Unless, of course, deep down, they are saying what you are thinking.
15 comments:
Human Centipede - Oh dear God. that's just wrong. Wrong. WRONG!
I condemn calls for assassination of a President, without question.
I've condemned them since well before January 2009.
There! That wasn't hard. And it shouldn't be, given that just about my first political memory from, oh, about age 6, was hearing from my Irish-American mother about the assassinations of JFK and RFK.
Now, will some Obama supporter please explain to me where you were between 2001 and 2008, when people were making movies about Bush being assassinated?
And may I suggest that, while calls for Obama's asassination are indeed loathsome, they are not exactly a monopoly of the more deplorable members of the political Right?
--Erich Schwarz
Now, will some Obama supporter please explain to me where you were between 2001 and 2008, when people were making movies about Bush being assassinated?
I was in the exact same place, saying that it was wrong for people to say such things about the President. I was in the exact same place, saying that it was wrong to have stickers saying "W not my President". I posted against such things, as I post against the same things with Obama...
... where are your posts on sites that celebrate such things against them? Why continue to speak against Steve saying something about it, instead of speaking against the wrong where it will do good?
Last I heard, threatening the President's life was the one "speech crime" in the USA. In a age when legal savants reinterpret tortures such a waterboarding as lawful interrogation, surely advocating or praying for the Commander-in-Chiefs assassination can be interpreted as malicious intent and sedition. I'm for getting real tough on these vile miscreants. It's time the Federal Powers set an example and incarcerated the more vocal and clearly lunatic of this potential dangerous rabble.
I'm for getting real tough on these vile miscreants. It's time the Federal Powers set an example and incarcerated the more vocal and clearly lunatic of this potential dangerous rabble.
Before using the rule of law to bring these miscreants into line, think of the precedent that is set by such actions, and how it can be applied when your particular party isn't in power. I was just as disgusted by some of the plays of liberal supporters against Bush.
What happened to the moderates? Why does it all have to be my way or no way? Can't we see what a slippery slope that we're now in the full progress of sliding to its disastrous end?
What happened to the moderates?
They became Democrats after the Conservative Jihad kicked 'em out of the party.
And just for the record, I called Bush "Governor Bush" for the first four years he was in the White House. And then he actually won a mostly honest election, so I started using "President." But "not my President" accurately described my take on Bush between 2000 and 2004.
"... where are your posts on sites that celebrate such things against them?"
I forgot about that day in my life where I signed a contract to read Web sites that you pick for me, and then write posts on them. What day was that, again?
There is a vast amount of stuff on the Internet and I am a busy person, so what I have time and interest to read and to post on is limited.
"Why continue to speak against Steve saying something about it ..."
Dude, dissent is not suppression -- no matter how far people have retreated from "Dissent is the truest form of patriotism" since January 2009.
I'm not even disagreeing with Steve -- just making my own point here, which is that this isn't something that started with Obama, and that if the Left would like to see more deference towards "their own" President, they'd have more luck if they'd bothered to show similar deference to the guy who was "not their own" President before 2009.
I work in a place where it was perfectly OK, for eight years, for people to have printouts on their lab doors visibly comparing George Bush to a chimpanzee. I didn't mind that: I'm a big boy, not a Leftist thumbsucker, and I can take political humor. But I have to wonder just what the reaction would be among my coworkers if I ever chose to put anything resembling such a poster up that happened to disparage Obama rather than Bush.
If you want deference to people in authority, you can get that, to some degree. If you want to be able to (figuratively) fling monkey dung at their heads, a la 1960s "distrust authority" hotheads, you can get that too. But don't ever, ever expect to be allowed by your political opponents to select the moment at which absolutely everybody in the entire U.S. is mandated to rotate 180 degrees from one posture (throwing feces at Dubya's head) to another posture (reverently kissing Obama's toe). Life just doesn't work that way, out in the nasty adult world. You reap what you sow, and spending most of a decade disrespecting the office of the President does have consequences.
--Erich Schwarz
And just for the record, I called Bush "Governor Bush" for the first four years he was in the White House. And then he actually won a mostly honest election, so I started using "President." But "not my President" accurately described my take on Bush between 2000 and 2004.
But that's my point. There was no election illegally won. The impact of electoral votes had never been illustrated in recent elections, so people though that since they didn't know about them that they shouldn't count. Wrong. And that same thinking ('not my president') is the same thinking that the conservatives are using now. But now that it's on the other foot, it's being lambasted as 'miscreant' rhetoric.
Both sides of the fence need to realize that this is the reason for the rule of law.
Is this praying for death thing ill-conceived and disrespectful of the office of president? Yes. But was it just as ill-conceived and disrespectful when done to Bush? Yes. If someone speaks up now should they be taken to task for not being there when it was happening before? I don't think so. But I also don't think that undue pressures brought about by the use of law enforcement should be used to muzzle them either. Common decency and the influence of their more even minded peers should be enough.
But then again, where are their more even minded peers? Here, bringing up ancient history? Or there, trying to influence them that they are wrong?
Hmmmm...?
I forgot about that day in my life where I signed a contract to read Web sites that you pick for me, and then write posts on them. What day was that, again?
I guess it was the day when I signed the same contract, i.e.
Now, will some Obama supporter please explain to me where you were between 2001 and 2008, when people were making movies about Bush being assassinated?
Just because you didn't see Obama supporters in the places where you were disagreeing with the movies in question, doesn't mean they weren't there.
Just as you said you reap what you sow. Your generalizations above about the bent of Obama supporters is what led us to this point. See what I did there?
And in X years when a Republican President gets in power, and something of this sort happens, and I ask the question 'Where were you...' just because I didn't see you, I'd think you'd feel just as wronged since you say that you've condemned such actions well before 2009...
There was no election illegally won.
We will have to agree to disagree on that one.
wraith08: You have hit the nail on the head, pretty much. I believe there are moderates out there. But they are being drowned out by the rhetoric of the extremists on both sides. I think this is, to some extent, due to the internet making it easier for individuals and groups to communicate with large numbers of people. As an example, I am at the end of a chain that primarily emails jokes to those on the chain. This group contains several very conservative members and some of the emails are political in nature, both diatribes and jokes. Many of these jokes I consider tasteless even though I lean conservative.
"I guess it was the day when I signed the same contract, i.e. 'Now, will some Obama supporter please explain to me where you were...?'"
Wrong. I'm asking anybody who's bothering to read (1) this blog and (2) my comments if they would please comment on how Obama's critics hoping for his death are an agreed-upon outrage, but Bush's critics were somehow not an equally bad outrage.
Because I think it's fair to say that they weren't; if they were, I wouldn't be reading people commenting on the Obama death-wishers as if they were somehow something uniquely awful and new. They're just not.
If you're not interested in replying to that, I'm making no demand that you suddenly blog or comment anywhere else; in fact, you're welcome to do absolutely nothing at all.
You, however, seem to think that I should have been commenting on other blog posts of your choice, no doubt by reading your commands telepathically. And you didn't use that magical word "please". No, sir, you and I are not equivalent.
"Just because you didn't see Obama supporters in the places where you were disagreeing with the movies in question, doesn't mean they weren't there."
For eight years, I don't recall that too many Democrats found it outrageous that we had those movies. Other than in the conservative blogosphere, they seem to have pretty much been a nonissue.
Now I'm supposed to repudiate people advocating Obama's death? Gladly! But why is this something I'm supposed to pretend is a unique outrage, which only started in January 2009 and is only due to evil Republicans? Because, quite simply, it is not.
--Erich Schwarz
I'm not on "either side" of the political debate (being more a libertarian than is comfortable with either the Democratic Party or the Republican) but I will gladly condemn praying for the assassination of the current president. Happy now?
Re: Human Centipede ... ROTHTU (Rolling the floor throwing up!)
As to "what happened to the moderates?", Dan ... Actually, this ex-moderate-republican became a decline-to-state voter. And, BTW, centrist democrats are bailing on their party as well.
As to shooting the President ... It's time to wake up people. As much as you might hate that other guy, somebody hates your guy just as much. I really don't want to see this country devolve into anarchy where coups and assassinations become the way that we transfer power. Do you?
Post a Comment