Saturday, July 5, 2014

Please stop regurgitating Internet Hatred without actually thinking about what you're sharing.


This, in my opinion, is utterly stupid.

Tuesday, September 17, 2013

An open letter to the Senate and Congress of the United States of America

Ladies and Gentlemen of the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate,

It is your duty to make decisions based on what is best for the People of these United States. You have failed. Your endless pandering to personal self interest and the interests of the corporations who have bought your votes must stop.
You are the largest Organization of Welfare Leeches in the country.
You have free medical care - excellent free medical care - yet you deny Americans access to even mediocre medical care at a reason price.
You have guaranteed retirement benefits, yet you constantly empower corporations to raid the retirement funds of the American people. You have allowed Social Security - which we pay for, out of our increasingly limited paychecks - to be used to finance everything except our retirements, and now you are intent on cutting our returns on our own investments in Social Security by claiming it is an entitlement we don't deserve. We OWN it. It's OUR money. Give it back.
You add reprehensible projects onto the tail end of programs that are desperately needed as a method of funneling money to your own districts without caring whether the projects you fund have any reasonable basis in need or usefulness.
You vote against assistance for the victims of one national disaster, then vote for assistance for your own neighborhood. Many of you voted against assistance for victims of Sandy and then asked for assistance for much lesser disasters. You lack the decency to even be ashamed of your self-serving greed.
You refuse to establish decent gun control measures, then whine for help when some nutter you enabled opens fire on your constituents. You don't care that 91% of the American public demanded that decent gun control measures be enacted, because your owners, the NRA said vote against it.
You don't care that our water supply is being contaminated, because your owners in the Oil and Gas industries tell you climate change is bogus.
One assumes that the college degrees you're all so proud of indicate intelligence, but quite frankly, your obvious inability to grasp basic facts indicates that those degrees are just one more thing you bought rather than earned.
Your utter refusal to look at the long range impact of your behavior is stupefying. You are poisoning your own children, your own grandchildren. You are destroying your own country for the immediate gratification of dollars into your campaign funds and the abuse of power sitting in that nice, upholstered chair allows you.
While some of you are actually trying to improve the terrible situation this country is now in, many of you are too busy conducting power plays to even understand that it You, personally, I am addressing. If you are sitting there thinking I'm talking to someone else, you are Wrong.
I'm talking to YOU.
Do you even know who your employers are? You are employed by the American People and you need to start doing as the American People Dictate, not as the PACS and Lobbyists bribe you to do.
We've had enough.
This is your notice, Congress, Senate. Do your damned jobs or get out of the way. Go sit on your obstructionist asses at home, where you will continue to collect your ridiculous retirement that you've done nothing to earn. We have a country that needs honest, caring leaders and you have proven that you are not that.

Sunday, December 30, 2012

Govt. Island: Winter Walk in the woods

Govt. Island: Winter Walk in the woods: Now that winter is officially with us that does not mean that there is little to see when you go to Government Island.  A cold day is a gr...

Saturday, November 10, 2012

Fear?

For some time now, I've been whining about how frightened Americans seem to be these days. My rants have mostly focused on how many of our freedoms people seem willing to sacrifice for "safety". I don't believe "safety" is possible. People want to be protected from terrorists, but the only way to be protected is not to be terrified. No one can prevent every possible bad thing from happening. The beltway snipers were terrorists, serial killers are terrorists, so are bullies and abusers - but no one seems to think of them that way. "Terrorists" -the word- means "foreigners" to an awful lot of people. Anyway, we're so afraid of terrorists that we've sacrificed our rights - freedom from illegal searches, unwarranted invasions on our privacy. Hell, we've even given up on the right to a speedy trial - or any trial - and all the government has to do to implement that denial is say 'terrorist'.

I think if people are willing to deny someone else the right to a speedy and fair trial, they should lose that right themselves. Not everyone should lose that right - just the people who want to take it away from others. Same with the "sanctity of marriage" group - they should forfeit the right to choose their own partners.

(Yes, I digressed a bit. I'm back on topic now...) When the shooter went wild on the Virginia Tech campus, parents went apeshit because the school didn't do enough to protect their children. Here's a news flash: They aren't children. They are old enough to vote, marry, die in war, and even to drink in some places (not Virginia). They are adults. Besides that, why would anyone expect that a murder over here would turn into a murderous spree across campus a few hours later? No one could predict that, so no one could know what to do to prevent it. Sure, after the fact, you can say they shoulda this or they shoulda that.

No one could know that some nutcase would open fire in a movie theater, and considering the volume of the Dark Knight and the amount of gunfire in that movie, who would be able to tell the difference between live fire and that playing on the screen? Theaters are soundproofed so that horrendously loud movie doesn't interfere with the horrendously loud movie playing screen right next door.

So, a few months ago, several scientific studies were correlated to pinpoint this whole fear thing. Mostly the research has to do with conservatives vs. liberals, but I think those are the wrong labels. Some people have a bigger right amygdala - which monitors fear, and others have a larger anterior cingulate cortex, which monitors ambiguity. If your amygdala is larger, you are more frightened. If your anterior cingulate cortex is bigger, you are better at handling ambiguity. People who are afraid need more controls, people who aren't bothered by uncertainty need fewer controls.

The studies explain that amygdalites (I made that up, it's shorthand for "people with larger amygdalas) are more concerned with self-preservation: what is best for ME (and mine), whereas cingulates (shorthand for people with larger anterior cingulate cortexes) are more focused on what is best for all, even if that means that the result isn't necessarily in their own personal best interest.

Cingulates pass out free water in a drought, while amygdalites hide their water rather than share it. Those who sell it for four times the usual price are probably people with relatively equal amygdala / cingulate sizing. They get the water to people who need it, but make sure they also benefit from the distribution. Yes, I do know that those sharing the water benefit, but that is more cerebral / spiritual than tangible. 

Politically, cingulates are more likely to say 'let's move forward, do things differently' and amygdalites are more likely to say 'let's go back to how it used to be'.

Innovators and traditionalists. Since not all change is good, and humans are mostly wired to maintain status quo, tradition is pretty strong stuff. But not all tradition is good, and if we didn't change the status quo, quite frankly, we'd all be cavemen. Innovation is vital. Without it, no one would be voting at all - at the very least we'd have small tribes run by the meanest dude in town. 'How it used to be'  sucked.

None of the studies discussed whether people can affect the size of their amygdalas and anterior cingulate cortexes. Can we, by practicing creativity exercises and adapting to change, enlarge our anterior cingulate cortex? By giving in to fear or worry, can we cause the right amygdala to grow?

I do know that if you fear something - heights, for example - you can learn to overcome that or you can let it take over. You can climb one rung higher on a ladder daily, until you reach the roof, or you can cling to the handrail and descend the stairs with trepidation. I know that if you don't push back against fear, fear pushes in on you.

Fear is that nightmare room where the walls close in on you. It's scary to do new things and to push yourself to do things you fear, but doing so expands the space you have to live in. Expanding your own world makes the world bigger for everyone else too. I'm not suggesting everyone throw all caution to the wind, just that we all try to do something new each day, even something tiny, so that none of feel the need to constrain others simply because we're afraid of change.

Monday, October 15, 2012

It is time to Reclaim America for the American People

I'm frightened by the number of Americans who don't see what is going on in the Republican Party. They manipulate emotions by pressing heavily on their pet buzzword "socialist". Yet what they are offering is to remove our individual freedoms: the right to vote, the right to have a legally recognized partnership with any consenting adult, the right to choose when and whether you will have children, the right of access to unbiased reporting uncontrolled by the government.

In the name of Corporate Personhood, they've destroyed our banking system by allowing banks to get into credit, and creditors to jack up interest rates over late payments that have nothing to do with the creditor. They allowed sub-prime loans and finance institutions ran wild giving interest only loans to people who did not understand what they were being sold.

In the false name of Voter Fraud, they are stripping 'undesirable' Americans of the right to vote. Undesirable, because those Americans aren't predominately Republican. What makes people think it will stop there? Once they get away with denying one demographic, they'll simply move on to add another and another, until once again it is only rich, white males who are allowed to vote.

In the name of Sanctity of Marriage, they - and many Americans - wish to deny same sex unions the same privileges that man/woman unions receive under the law. What gives anyone the right to say who can marry whom? Didn't we do away with that with Loving vs. Virginia? Are we really willing to go backwards in some weird belief that if Bob and Larry get the same tax breaks Mike and Lisa get, the sky will fall on us?  I wish people would think that forward a bit. How would any of us like it if the government said you can't marry that person because your eyes are different colors or your religion is different, or your ancestors came from different countries? You can't marry at all, because you're not one of Us, you're not good enough.

I can't believe there is a woman in the country who thinks anyone else should have the right to tell her she MUST have children, even if she can't possibly feed them, even if she was raped by her father, even if she is likely to die if she carries a child to term. Yet there apparently are women who believe those things, I can tell because they are supporting the very men who have made those comments in this election. I can tell because every Republican woman in the country did not walk away from the Republican Party. I know they find Democrats abhorrent, but they don't have to become Dems. If we can have a Tea Party, we can have a SHE Party.

It is time to stand up and protect our rights. We are guaranteed freedom of speech so that we cannot be punished for disagreeing with the government. Freedom of the Press, so that our reporters can make certain we know what the government is up to. Do you see either of those?
Much of the media is owned by conglomerates that only allow their version of the news.  When  our elected representatives removed the restrictions that prevented Media conglomerates, they deprived us of multiple viewpoints. When the Bush campaign restricted access to campaign appearances to their chosen few, they denied us freedom of speech. You can disagree with the candidate, but not here. When Bush allowed only approved reported to cover his wars, he denied freedom of the press.

It is time that the American public recognized reality. We have allowed too many rights to be eroded. We no longer have a right to a reasonable expectation of privacy.The government doesn't even need to show probably cause, all they have to do is play the 'suspected terrorist' card and they can do whatever they want.  Even something as innocent as forgetting to carry your driver's license can get you placed in the suspect file.

Terrorism and Socialism - those are the strings the puppet masters pull and America dances. Yet hardly anyone seems to be afraid of the true threat - the incessant erosion of our rights. We have:
  • The right to speak freely, whether the government likes it or not, whether anyone likes it or not.
  • The right to truth from the media, without government interference or controll.
  • The right to bear arms. Nothing in that says we shouldn't register those arms or that we should each have enough guns to start our own army. And the right to bear arms isn't the same as the right to use those arms to manipulate others. 
  • The right to chose our own religion or absence thereof. Even Muslims and Satanists and Mormons.
  • The right to a speedy trial. Not the right to a speedy trial unless the government decided you might have terrorist connections.
  • The right to a trial by jury. Not the right to a trial by jury unless the government decided you might be connected to terrorism.
The Constitution also clearly states that just because a specific right isn't mentioned, that does not     mean the right does not exist. If one person in this country has the right to choose their     marriage partner, all persons have that right regardless of how upsetting any other person     might find it.
Starting today, evaluate what the politicians tell you. Fact check the advertisements -all of them, not just the ones on the "other side". Demand truth and transparency from the candidates and the government and if you don't get it, vote against them.

I'm talking to the 37% who don't think they are part of the 47% Romney disparaged. If you have ever had a student loan, a tax refund, an SBA loan, flown on an airplane, traveled on an interstate highway, been protected by an American soldier,or any one of hundreds of other things we take for granted every single day then you have benefitted from government programs. We are ALL the 47% of Americans that Romney denigrates. His defense of that speech was that he was just telling his rich patrons what they wanted to hear. Why does anyone think he's not doing exactly the same thing to the American public?

The argument against Obama seems to be that he hasn't fixed the economy yet. Improvements don't matter - people want back everything they lost and more, and they want it yesterday. Only, how many individuals have managed to fix their own personal financial woes? Why not? Oh, did you say 'it takes time'? And a little cooperation from banks and creditors? Yes it does, for us. For the President it also takes cooperation from Congress and the Senate, and that has been sadly lacking.  So go elect representatives who will put aside partisan bickering and work together to find solutions. You know, people who care about the citizens of this country, not just about getting richer.

Wednesday, September 26, 2012

Depth Perception

When I was a little girl,perhaps 8 or 9 years old, I drew a picture of a bridge over a river. There was something wrong with the picture, but I couldn't figure out what was wrong. I asked my mother and she said "There's nothing wrong with it! It's beautiful" That made me angry. I thought my mother was lying to me.

Many years later, I came across that picture and immediately knew the perspective was off on the bridge. Again, I was annoyed with my mother for not telling me the truth when I asked her all those years ago. Now, it happens that my mother was blind in one eye and had double vision in the other. I 'knew' that, but I didn't grasp what it meant.

Cross your eyes. That's how the world looked to my mother. Now imagine that you're seeing that out of only one eye. Do you know what happens? It's flat. Depth perception requires stereo vision. My mother saw the world as two flat images overlapping one another. She couldn't see that the perspective on the bridge was off because she had no depth perception.

She spent her life seeing two of everything and aiming at the space in between them. If she looked at you, she saw one to the left and one to the right and if she wanted to touch you she had to aim at the space between the two images.

 I'm working on a book. Like the bridge in that drawing, it is off and I don't know how. I keep looking at it, I know it's off, I can feel it. I just can't pinpoint the problem. The information is good, the process works, so it must be the presentation. Except it isn't the presentation or, if it is, I can't find the thing that is causing the presentation to fail.

There was a good 20 years between drawing that picture and seeing it again to recognize the problem. Another 10+ years passed before I understood that depth perception required two properly functioning eyes. Yes, it took me over 40 years to understand how the world actually looked to my mother.

It still amazes me, taking my vision for granted, that she managed to move so smoothly through a world where everything she saw was where she didn't see it. She literally lived her life 'reading between the lines'.

 I'm hoping it doesn't take me as long to see what is in the book, and to see where it isn't. I'm trying to read between the lines to find what ought to be there and bring it forward.