People come in two types: those who encourage you and those who want to set you straight.
I once knew a man whom I admired for his astute comments and at first I enjoyed hearing from him. He used a technique of first praising something I had written and then finishing it with a criticism that sometimes left me feeling stupid, but still I learned from it and was glad. However, it got to the point that when I saw him approach I would brace myself for what I knew was coming.
Now, used correctly, it's a great technique, but used too often it loses its grace and becomes only a tell, an advance notice of what is coming. I longed to hear him say simply 'That was great', but it never came. Because of deference to him I never complained and took it like a proper wet-behind-the-ears reporter should, but it was abrasive.
I try to remember that today. We all like to hear praise and I think it should come often, but too much and it becomes hollow. It's the proper balance between praise and constructive criticism that is best. Oh, if only we could find it.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Thursday, July 31, 2008
China?
The Olympic games in China has opened a window that we can use to see inside the real China.
It is enough to cause a Republican's heart to soar when they see all that the Chinese government does to involve itself in the daily lives of its people.
What controls! The power to control the population by limiting the number of children allowed to be born, curtail industry when they temporarily want to limit the smog, limit internet access, driving, cell phones, news and newspapers, approve religion, business, education, and the list could go on and on.
I know it was the desire to show to the world how far they had come in modernity and prosperity that led China to apply to host the Olympics in the first place, as it probably is with any country applying. Pride in all they have accomplished and all that, but something else has begun to be shown as well. We now have seen a government that tries to manage the private lives of each of its citizens to an unprecedented degree.
Unprecedented? That may not be true because there have been regimes that have tried--the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Cuba, the U.S. under George Bush, and others, I am sure.
It is incredible that to be conservative today means to have a paranoid view of the intelligence and wisdom of the citizenry. You'd think that the be a conservative rightist would mean to protect the Constitution, the rights of individuals, free and active thought, and privacy. But, no, to be a Republican in good standing today apparently means just the opposite. It means to control what people see and do, to control the news--and if you think that is not true consider that the administration stands adamant in not allowing the newspapers or TV networks to show the flag draped coffins of our military returning home from our wars.
It means to be hateful of different ideas, suspicious of conflicting thought. If it is not the party line, it is not allowed. If you disagree--perish the thought--you will expose yourself to economic and political recrimination.
Privacy is not a right, they say, but the present administration demands it themselves. Department heads are not permitted to talk freely to the press. Where's "Deep Throat" when you need him?
It is enough to cause a Republican's heart to soar when they see all that the Chinese government does to involve itself in the daily lives of its people.
What controls! The power to control the population by limiting the number of children allowed to be born, curtail industry when they temporarily want to limit the smog, limit internet access, driving, cell phones, news and newspapers, approve religion, business, education, and the list could go on and on.
I know it was the desire to show to the world how far they had come in modernity and prosperity that led China to apply to host the Olympics in the first place, as it probably is with any country applying. Pride in all they have accomplished and all that, but something else has begun to be shown as well. We now have seen a government that tries to manage the private lives of each of its citizens to an unprecedented degree.
Unprecedented? That may not be true because there have been regimes that have tried--the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, Cuba, the U.S. under George Bush, and others, I am sure.
It is incredible that to be conservative today means to have a paranoid view of the intelligence and wisdom of the citizenry. You'd think that the be a conservative rightist would mean to protect the Constitution, the rights of individuals, free and active thought, and privacy. But, no, to be a Republican in good standing today apparently means just the opposite. It means to control what people see and do, to control the news--and if you think that is not true consider that the administration stands adamant in not allowing the newspapers or TV networks to show the flag draped coffins of our military returning home from our wars.
It means to be hateful of different ideas, suspicious of conflicting thought. If it is not the party line, it is not allowed. If you disagree--perish the thought--you will expose yourself to economic and political recrimination.
Privacy is not a right, they say, but the present administration demands it themselves. Department heads are not permitted to talk freely to the press. Where's "Deep Throat" when you need him?
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
It's Easy To Blame Others
Let me tell you, the economic news we are hearing today is downright depressing. I could say scary or or even frightening. No, I know the US of A is not going to fall apart completely, but I do know she is in trouble. She is broken and needs to be fixed.
But who is to blame? We all like to point fingers. We even point fingers to take away credit.
Remember when the Repubs said that Clinton was enjoying a good economy--surplus, employment, etc.--because of the wisdom of the first Bush administration? They sought to deny Clinton credit. Now, eight years since they have ruled from the White House and twenty years since they took over Congress (the Democs have been the majority, a slim one at that, only since the 2006 elections), we now are having severe pains like we haven't felt for some time. We need a doctor.
The Repubs point to the largely Democ refusal to allow drilling in our protected waters as one of the reasons why we have such high gasoline prices. A pox upon you Repubs, of house of vipers! Tell us the truth about Cheney's secret meeting with the oil companies at the start of the eight year reign. Yes, I know, the high prices are our fault. So you say.
There are many reasons why things are a mess today. One is the Dollar. It is cheap in relation to other currencies. It takes more dollars to buy the oil we need. It is one of the reassons why so many foreign companies are taking stake in America by buying many of our companies. Budweiser, for instance. The Belgium company purchasing it is enjoying the fact they don't have to spend as much because our Dollar is so cheap.
How did this come about? Uh, George W's sentient wisdom. That's right. It was revelation. No need to back the Dollar because we all know we are the richest and most powerful nation on earth and, besides, God is on our side. So saith George W. Bush, never a second guess George W. Bush.
It is almost comical, the character that George W has become. Never flinching, never agonizing over decisions, right is right, black is black, never gray, he walks--no, struts--with arms held out to his sides as if he were wearing a pair of six-shooters on his hips. Reminds me of the cowboy characters I remember on the black and white screen as a kid in Miami in Saturday afternoon matinees. Strong, resolute, unshaking. They didn't even kiss girls.
Does George W wear blinders? Can he not see what is happening around him? His biggest fan in Texas, Phil Gramm, says that all this bad economic stuff is in our imagination. Is it? I am retired. My income is fixed. The price of gas has greatly reduced any excess spending I might have done. Is it in my mind? Yes, I need to trim my weight, but I'd hope that it would be my choice, not forced upon me by food prices I cannot afford.
Well, George, in a few months you'll be gone. I, for one, say good riddance. Whoever is elected this fall will have to take a mop and clean up the mess that has been made in the White House. That's too bad. You'd hope that whoever occupies it would take care of it. We, the owners, have to be more careful about who we let live there.
But who is to blame? We all like to point fingers. We even point fingers to take away credit.
Remember when the Repubs said that Clinton was enjoying a good economy--surplus, employment, etc.--because of the wisdom of the first Bush administration? They sought to deny Clinton credit. Now, eight years since they have ruled from the White House and twenty years since they took over Congress (the Democs have been the majority, a slim one at that, only since the 2006 elections), we now are having severe pains like we haven't felt for some time. We need a doctor.
The Repubs point to the largely Democ refusal to allow drilling in our protected waters as one of the reasons why we have such high gasoline prices. A pox upon you Repubs, of house of vipers! Tell us the truth about Cheney's secret meeting with the oil companies at the start of the eight year reign. Yes, I know, the high prices are our fault. So you say.
There are many reasons why things are a mess today. One is the Dollar. It is cheap in relation to other currencies. It takes more dollars to buy the oil we need. It is one of the reassons why so many foreign companies are taking stake in America by buying many of our companies. Budweiser, for instance. The Belgium company purchasing it is enjoying the fact they don't have to spend as much because our Dollar is so cheap.
How did this come about? Uh, George W's sentient wisdom. That's right. It was revelation. No need to back the Dollar because we all know we are the richest and most powerful nation on earth and, besides, God is on our side. So saith George W. Bush, never a second guess George W. Bush.
It is almost comical, the character that George W has become. Never flinching, never agonizing over decisions, right is right, black is black, never gray, he walks--no, struts--with arms held out to his sides as if he were wearing a pair of six-shooters on his hips. Reminds me of the cowboy characters I remember on the black and white screen as a kid in Miami in Saturday afternoon matinees. Strong, resolute, unshaking. They didn't even kiss girls.
Does George W wear blinders? Can he not see what is happening around him? His biggest fan in Texas, Phil Gramm, says that all this bad economic stuff is in our imagination. Is it? I am retired. My income is fixed. The price of gas has greatly reduced any excess spending I might have done. Is it in my mind? Yes, I need to trim my weight, but I'd hope that it would be my choice, not forced upon me by food prices I cannot afford.
Well, George, in a few months you'll be gone. I, for one, say good riddance. Whoever is elected this fall will have to take a mop and clean up the mess that has been made in the White House. That's too bad. You'd hope that whoever occupies it would take care of it. We, the owners, have to be more careful about who we let live there.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Wars and rumors of wars
When I think of the travesty this country has brought upon Iraq my blood boils. True, it was ruled by a despot, but that fact alone does not warrant the US invasion and Hussein's removal.
No, it wasn't for humanitarian reasons that we invaded his country. It was not for the feared WMD either. That was just a ruse used by Bush and his henchmen to muster the testosterone of congress to authorize the invasion. It was not al Quaida, either. Hussein feared having them in his country and ruthlessly kept them out. Why, then, did we attack them?
OIL. Plain and simple. My own theory is that the Oil gods saw the demand coming and wanted to insure their access and what better way than capturing Iraq's extensive oil fields. They could justify it by ramping up Hussein's own cruelness, turning him into a Hitlerian ogre. The American public would buy it. They buy anything if it is sold to them with advertising. Look how they've deified Princess Dianna and the Kennedys.
The Nazis taught a lie, too, by repeating it widely and using credible talking heads to do it. The lie got bigger and bigger and soon to go against the lie became treason. Sounds like what has happened in this country. You held anti-American values, bordering on treason, if you didn't go along with the rabid Bush handlers in the White House with their jingoistic speeches. George Bush, with his own dark tunnel vision, was a Bible believer who accepted, as faith, that he was God's own warrior on earth. He led the bloody crusade. Charles Manson thought that, too.
That's too bad for the thousands of young men and women that have died and have been maimed in Iraq because of that misguided faith. If there is honor in war it is for them. Misguided as they were by a terrible leader, they did what was asked of them. They truly deserve respect and every benefit we can bestow upon them including the GI bill now going through congress. That the President threatens to veto it is so symbolic of his treachery. Die forAmerica, right or wrong, but don't cost America any money. The phrase, compassionate Republican, has become a joke. The blood on George Bush's hands and the hands of the political party that let him use them is indelible.
We've spent so much money in Iraq now that we could have made every Iraqi citizen a millionaire probably. Often I take the figures bandied about by people who total up the war's burgeoning costs and try to figure how many modest houses we could build for the poor in this country, or how many new doctors and clinics we could build in poverty stricken ghettos, or how many people we could send to college, but then I realize that it doesn't matter because this administration would never do that anyway. If they didn't spend it in war then they'd spend it some other way in order to line the pockets of their corporate supporters. You see, it takes money to get money with this Republican administration.
Is war ever justified? Of course. Was this war justified? Absolutely not. If Bush wanted a war I wish it would have been against the likes of Myamar or Zimbabwe or Somalia or North Korea. Liberating the people of those countries would indeed have been a humanitarian effort, one justified and worthy of dying for. But it would never happen. No oil, perhaps?
Eventually this country will get over the presidency of George Bush, but it will take a long time to heal the open wounds and it will take a leader of courage because the carnage must go on a while until we can set straight his bloody errors. This country has not always been moral, and no country can really be 100% moral, but at least, in past times, morality was our high standard, we always knew what was moral even if we didn't always attain it. Under George Bush and the Republican congress that standard was lowered considerably. What do we stand for now? The foxes had the run of the chicken house. The title of the Cole Porter song comes to mind: Anything Goes.
No, it wasn't for humanitarian reasons that we invaded his country. It was not for the feared WMD either. That was just a ruse used by Bush and his henchmen to muster the testosterone of congress to authorize the invasion. It was not al Quaida, either. Hussein feared having them in his country and ruthlessly kept them out. Why, then, did we attack them?
OIL. Plain and simple. My own theory is that the Oil gods saw the demand coming and wanted to insure their access and what better way than capturing Iraq's extensive oil fields. They could justify it by ramping up Hussein's own cruelness, turning him into a Hitlerian ogre. The American public would buy it. They buy anything if it is sold to them with advertising. Look how they've deified Princess Dianna and the Kennedys.
The Nazis taught a lie, too, by repeating it widely and using credible talking heads to do it. The lie got bigger and bigger and soon to go against the lie became treason. Sounds like what has happened in this country. You held anti-American values, bordering on treason, if you didn't go along with the rabid Bush handlers in the White House with their jingoistic speeches. George Bush, with his own dark tunnel vision, was a Bible believer who accepted, as faith, that he was God's own warrior on earth. He led the bloody crusade. Charles Manson thought that, too.
That's too bad for the thousands of young men and women that have died and have been maimed in Iraq because of that misguided faith. If there is honor in war it is for them. Misguided as they were by a terrible leader, they did what was asked of them. They truly deserve respect and every benefit we can bestow upon them including the GI bill now going through congress. That the President threatens to veto it is so symbolic of his treachery. Die forAmerica, right or wrong, but don't cost America any money. The phrase, compassionate Republican, has become a joke. The blood on George Bush's hands and the hands of the political party that let him use them is indelible.
We've spent so much money in Iraq now that we could have made every Iraqi citizen a millionaire probably. Often I take the figures bandied about by people who total up the war's burgeoning costs and try to figure how many modest houses we could build for the poor in this country, or how many new doctors and clinics we could build in poverty stricken ghettos, or how many people we could send to college, but then I realize that it doesn't matter because this administration would never do that anyway. If they didn't spend it in war then they'd spend it some other way in order to line the pockets of their corporate supporters. You see, it takes money to get money with this Republican administration.
Is war ever justified? Of course. Was this war justified? Absolutely not. If Bush wanted a war I wish it would have been against the likes of Myamar or Zimbabwe or Somalia or North Korea. Liberating the people of those countries would indeed have been a humanitarian effort, one justified and worthy of dying for. But it would never happen. No oil, perhaps?
Eventually this country will get over the presidency of George Bush, but it will take a long time to heal the open wounds and it will take a leader of courage because the carnage must go on a while until we can set straight his bloody errors. This country has not always been moral, and no country can really be 100% moral, but at least, in past times, morality was our high standard, we always knew what was moral even if we didn't always attain it. Under George Bush and the Republican congress that standard was lowered considerably. What do we stand for now? The foxes had the run of the chicken house. The title of the Cole Porter song comes to mind: Anything Goes.
Thursday, May 8, 2008
What are they thinking?
I don't know about you, but I wonder what is going on in Senator Clinton's mind right now.
"Should I run or should I quit?"
Is she runs on there's the danger that she can lose the respect of Dems who view her race as hopeless and therefore detrimental to the cause. Then again, the struggle between her and Obama does keep the spotlight off McCain.
Maybe if she continues trying, the focus of attention will be on her and Obama and not on Obama's gaffs such as his relationship with Rev. Wright. The longer the race goes on the less time the Repubs can mount their usual scum-slinging campaign against the winner, which does look to be Obama.
Repubs are good about attacking the person--as the job on Kerry showed--but not so good at attacking ideas. What are the Repubs to do, go after Clinton and Obama at the same time? In order for their type of attack to work, it has to be focused on an individual. Afterall, they can't just attack Dems because there are too many of them who just aren't bad people and no doubt crossed party lines to support George W. in his first race for pres. No, they are probably struggling to hold tightly the leash that restrains their attack dogs--such as the Swift Boat assasins--in preparation for the final winner.
Frankly, I can understand Wright's ranting about an unfair society, and if I had suffered simply because of my race, I might be ranting as well. What I can't understand is McCain's relationship with Hagee. Who'd want those nuts on their side, anyway.
Bill
"Should I run or should I quit?"
Is she runs on there's the danger that she can lose the respect of Dems who view her race as hopeless and therefore detrimental to the cause. Then again, the struggle between her and Obama does keep the spotlight off McCain.
Maybe if she continues trying, the focus of attention will be on her and Obama and not on Obama's gaffs such as his relationship with Rev. Wright. The longer the race goes on the less time the Repubs can mount their usual scum-slinging campaign against the winner, which does look to be Obama.
Repubs are good about attacking the person--as the job on Kerry showed--but not so good at attacking ideas. What are the Repubs to do, go after Clinton and Obama at the same time? In order for their type of attack to work, it has to be focused on an individual. Afterall, they can't just attack Dems because there are too many of them who just aren't bad people and no doubt crossed party lines to support George W. in his first race for pres. No, they are probably struggling to hold tightly the leash that restrains their attack dogs--such as the Swift Boat assasins--in preparation for the final winner.
Frankly, I can understand Wright's ranting about an unfair society, and if I had suffered simply because of my race, I might be ranting as well. What I can't understand is McCain's relationship with Hagee. Who'd want those nuts on their side, anyway.
Bill
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)