REVISED REPOST: FEAR OF THE OTHER IS ALL THAT MOTIVATES THE EXTREMISTS!

The primary motivation of the right wing fringe in this country (and sadly, what remains of the Republican Party) is no different than what drives all fundamentalist groups throughout the world - IGNORANCE, HATE and FEAR, specifically, fear of the Other.

The driving mania behind a ludicrous economic philosophy that presumes that welfare and socialism for the wealthy is good for the country, while the same for working class citizens is bad, is rooted in a primal terror - of all races other than one's own, of femininity in general, and sensuality overall, of the young and elderly, of artists, of truly spiritual people and of any whose overt sexual orientation is other than heterosexual.

Who does that leave, obviously? Pseudo religious, pseudo-straight fanatics between the ages of 35 and 65, lacking in any real depths of sensuality, artistic sensibilities or true spirituality, latently riddled with castration anxiety and misogyny, who are full of paranoid rage and the hormonal balance of a pubescent boy. Oh... and Ann Coulter.

Ironically, but appropriately, most of the extremists are working class, and so have suffered mightily at the hands of the Republicans ever since the advent of Nixon's "Southern Strategy," followed up by Reagan's "trickle down" con, and whatever the Bushes' economic policies could be called besides, let's call it, "soak-the-poor theocracy."

Meanwhile, these "Tea Party" saps go out and shill for the rich like children who feel compelled to defend their own abusive, alcoholic fathers. Why? Because the crooks and liars in Washington and on Wall Street promise to alleviate the primitive fears of said pseudo-children by keeping progressives of any sort in check. As long as they vote to keep the rich free from regulations and taxes.

Folks, never underestimate how stupid irrational fear can make you!

TODAY'S PARENTAL QUOTE

"In these times of parental over-involvement, even an innocent playground fight becomes one more excuse to over-manage the kids and spout platitudes about parenting and appropriate behavior. But the truth is, you can’t shield your kid from the reality of a playground fight or the possibility of a minor injury."
Louise "Smartmom" Crawford

TONIGHT'S QUOTE

"I hope, had I known about it at the time I was serving, I would've had the courage to resign."
Richard Armitage (the second in command at the State Department under President Bush, in an interview to be aired Thursday, saying that had he known then what he knows now about the torture of detainees, the right thing to do would have been to resign)

LOL!

HAPPY TEABAGGING DAY, LUNATIC FRINGE!!

HERE'S WHERE THE EXPRESSION ACTUALLY CAME FROM... YOU SILLY BOYS!!!

TEABAG THIS!!!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/15/offshore-tax-havens-a-sta_n_186640.html

JUST A LITTLE TRUTH????

HOW ABOUT MIXING IN A LITTLE TRUTH?!

HANNITY SKEWERED BY ONE OF HIS OWN!

NEWS ITEM from last night, in which Sean Hannity was begrudging President Obama credit for resolving the Somali pirate hostage situation.
The headline read: Hannity's Own Guest Calls His Obama Attacks Excessive
"I've had this brain for thirty years. It hasn't done me any good!"
Lou Costello (as "Wilbur Grey" in "Abbott & Costello Meet Frankenstein")

LOFF56 HOLDS HIS GROUND

I'm not going to respond to this round, so...

Here's LOFF56:

"But I think you're missing the even bigger picture. The constitution and the laws of our country are but a part of what they violated. The damaged integrity of our nation goes way beyond the legality of their actions. I mean sure we could follow the letter of the law and prosecute them verbatim on their transgressions, but that doesn't in any way address the real crimes. There were just as many, if not more things that they did that were actually within the letter of the law and within their legitimate power that were, and this is an understatement, not in the spirit of our national character. How do we prosecute that? This is very similar to the way Wall Street screwed us over. Most, (albeit not all), the things that these banks did that caused this economic catastrophe were basically within the letter of the law. We can't legally prosecute them. It's an inherent problem with our legal system AND our constitution!!

There are other means of dealing with these guys besides the law, the Geneva Convention and the Constitution. The court of public opinion (arguably the highest court in the land) has already sentenced these guys to the 'political gas chamber.' To bring them into a real courtroom to defend their actions is like bringing a dead convict back to life so he can stand trial for a second murder he committed.

I do appreciate your concern though. There's a good point to be made about sending the wrong messages to criminals. And you're correct about what happened when Ford pardoned Nixon. But the other side of that coin is that we convicted Clinton, impeached him and made him a national embarrassment. But to what end... The whole thing was turned around so that he ended up looking like a victim of political sabotage, he's arguably more popular now then he was when he was president and his wife almost became the President. What message does that send? Cheat on your wife with an intern, then lie about it and good things will happen to you? Obviously the transgressions are not even closely comparable, but the point is that using the law as a means of punishment doesn't always have the desired effect.

The 'wave out the back door' by the way, was more of a clever metaphor on Obama's part, the true extrication of the Bush administration and it's policies started with the mid-term election of '06 (maybe even before that) and swelled over the next two years culminating with the overwhelming election of Obama. That's two plus years of "confronting the violators" in my opinion. We've dealt with this tragedy, confronted it head on, put it to rest, bought the T-Shirt and the fat lady has sung. There's only so much 'confronting of the tragedy' we can do before it becomes a dangerous obsession.

I really feel that we are so on our way to good things to come that opening an old wound like that just so we can make sure it's healing properly is kind of a pointless distraction.

By the way, the fact that Bush and Cheney are enjoying their retirement in their cushy homes with their millions of dollars is really a red herring to me. Taking away their money or their freedom for that matter is so secondary to what's been taken away from them already, their influence and their legacy. As the saying goes, "You can't take it with you", (money and things that is). But, you can take your legacy with you. And both of them have nothing of the sort to speak of right now."

THE BOYS ARE BACK IN TOWN! LOFF56 ON "RICK'S BACK!" PL RESPONDS: "NO PARDONS FOR PSYCHOPATHS!"

HERE'S L56:

"For Rick's sake, regarding the debate that Pete and I had about character flaws. Personally, I didn't think the debate was about what's a flaw, what's not a flaw, who's got what flaw etc... but rather whether or not what we do (or more specifically what Obama doesn't do about Bush) is actually the result of a flaw or just a simple intellectual decision. My argument is that Pete, and other therapists alike, always run the risk of assessing an opinion that disagrees with their own as being a result of something inherently wrong with that individual as opposed to just being simply a different opinion. This is not a precise metaphor, but it's sort of like a lumberjack looking at a tree and imagining how many 2x4s he can get out of it, whereas you and I just see the tree for what it is - a tree.

Regarding the Obama-Bush dilemma at hand. One of the most poignant things at Obama's inauguration in my opinion was the deliberate staging of Obama walking the Bushes out the back of the Capital Building and to the helicopter. Obama then, instead of turning around to continue on with the festivities, stood on the steps for a good ten to fifteen minutes as he waited for the helicopter with the Bush family inside to take off. And it wasn't until the helicopter was a good distance into the horizon that Obama finally turned around and went on with the day. This was nearly a 30-45 minute event from start to finish that no other incoming president had ever done. No president has ever escorted the outgoing president out of the inauguration ceremony. And the way that Obama did it was so deliberate that to me it seemed that he subversively saying to America, "See folks, he's really gone. I saw to it that he left, and you can trust me that he will never be allowed to have any influence on our country ever again." I think Obama knew then and knows now how poisonous Bush was and is. And I think that if he truly thought that prosecuting him would be to the benefit of the country, he would do it.

If it were me in Obama's position, I wouldn't want to put Bush through that process and allow him once again to have the stage. I think what would happen is that Bush (and Cheney) would be brought up on charges which would give him the opportunity to have yet another forum to defend his actions, to espouse his poisonous policy and get the Rush Limbaughs of the world some more red meat to chew on. It would just further irritate the divide in this country that Bush created.

I think Obama's doing exactly what he should be doing with Bush, letting him and his ideology fade away into the history books. The Republican party is in such shambles right now because of this beheading, if you will, they have no choice but to reform and come back as something better. And even if we still disagree with them then, at least, (hopefully), they'll be improved. I say let him fade away. That's the worst punishment a politician can suffer anyway. Besides, I have no cathartic interest in seeing his dumb face on TV again."

PL:

My interest in seeing the Bush gang prosecuted for their crimes isn't for "cathartic" purposes, L56. And indeed, from the big picture perspective, which is the one I generally like to take, I agree that the dismembered and humiliated state of the GOP as a result of their malfeasance, hypocrisy and incompetence over the last eight years is one measure of cause and effect "justice" for some of the perpetrators in question.

However, my genuine concern, here, is for the U.S. Constitution and the measure of consistent and fair application of the laws in our country. Part of the reason the Dick Cheney's of this country, and the actual Dick Cheney, felt they could get away with the crimes they committed over the last 8 years is directly related to the fact that Dick's crony, "Dick" Nixon, was recklessly pardoned by Gerald Ford, supposedly for the sake of ending our "national nightmare." Well, unfortunately, Watergate wasn't a dream, and neither is violating the Constitution and the Geneva Convention or committing war crimes.

To arbitrarily dismiss legally the heinous and undermining actions of our leaders is to send what kind of message? What are you really proposing, guys?

It's not as if anyone is even claiming that these guys are somehow being accused unfairly, or will be tried or sentenced inappropriately, which could be a justification for a pardon. Your position on this, L56, and Rick's, and Obama's, seems to simply be - "We don't want to deal with it because it's too distracting or distasteful. Let's just move on."

What better outcome could a psychopath hope for?! "After I shoot-up and rob your town, if you just let me leave, you can go back to sleep in peace." Really? If I were a prospective criminal, or a Somali pirate, that would sure encourage me.

Odd that Obama understood that "distracting" ourselves by taking out those pirates had to be done to send the right message, but he seems not to get that the crooks, liars and killers in our own highest echelons of government and finance have to be likewise taken out to send the right message.

Furthermore, anyone with even a minimal knowledge of human psychology knows that in order to heal from a tragedy, loss or assault of any kind, one has to face the violations head on, which often must include confronting the violators with more than just a wave as they walk out the "back door."

Again, this isn't the "big picture" perspective, but in the "small picture," where we need laws and limits on behavior until we become an enlightened society, we do ourselves a great disservice by being penny-wise and pound foolish with justice.

Glad you boys are back!

RICK'S BACK! PL RESPONDS.

It's been a while since we heard from him, so on behalf of those of you in his fan base, welcome back, Rick! I'll respond at the end, but to kick it off...

Here's Rick:

"As usual, I am trying to figure out the dance you and L56 are having. For us simpletons, can you, and L56, provide the readers with what you each think you have as a character flaw? And then, comment on each others representation of that very character flaw. This makes the examples much easier to wrap our hands around as opposed to the extreme examples that pervade this stream.

With regards to Obama not pursuing Bush + his officials, your take on that doesn't include the politics involved as well as the overall good that would bring. Ford had to pardon Nixon. Can you imagine what that would have done to our country if he didn't? The people responded loudly + clearly to the establishment, a Nixon was inevitable.

Like Ford, Obama is faced with bigger fish to fry. Some may be from the previous administration, but this, as you indicated, has been brewing for decades. A Bush was inevitable and so too was this mess. I just didn't think it would happen so soon! History tells us that this economic mess coupled with unethical people making the decisions(I'm thinking capt. of industry + lawmakers not Obama) is a recipe for a permanent downturn in our country. However, the U.S. has seen this before over the past 2 centuries, yet it continues to bounce back, somehow, to lead the world. Although I have little use for the Clinton Presidency because I thought he was capable of being one of the greatest presidents, what good did it do to impeach him + put him on trial?

The system allows for these individuals and these absurd actions and decisions that continue to plaque many ruling nations. The US is no different. Obama's energy should be spent on how we can prevent this from happening again. By prosecuting the transgressors of yesterday, doesn't address the real issue. That is not to say they shouldn't be prosecuted, but in times like these, looking back, in my opinion (Oh no! My own character flaw? ha-ha) doesn't serve the best interest of our country, its people and our president.

I never did get a response from your readers about my using the same tactics on my students as you use on your patients. I was surprised that you put a spin on it to say that I was calling your readers out. In reality, I was trying to find consistency in thought. If the readers agreed that they felt it necessary and constructive to have the teachers of their children call them "stupid", "idiots," etc. then there is consistency and I respect them, and you, for your honesty. I totally disagree with that approach, but at least it is honest. If they said, as I know most of the parents that I deal with would, it is ludicrous to treat my son/daughter that way, I agree.

Why do you think no one responded?"

PL:

Well, taking the first thing first, it would be quite a project to begin listing what I know are my flaws, Rick, but suffice it to say that anything that I do that is damaging to myself, someone else or the environment is a manifestation of a flaw in my character. (This is what I said in my dialogue with Loff56 last week, by the way.)

Taking the last thing next, I think you misunderstood a bit when we had the dialogue about telling someone that they're "stupid." I don't, as a matter of course, whether in my role as therapist or otherwise, off-handedly call people stupid. I do take into consideration a variety of factors before delivering that kind of punch, and I certainly wouldn't say that it is a regular tool I use as a therapist or teacher, nor would I advise any other therapist or teacher to wantonly do so. But there is a time and place for every kind of intervention, I have found, again, as long as it is not damaging anyone.

Finally, taking the middle subject last - on Obama and the crimes of the Bush administration, I am reprinting below a piece I wrote on this subject a bit ago that responds to your comments.

Thanks, Rick. Good to have you back!

Here's my piece:

BUSH & CO ARE NOW OUR RESPONSIBILITY

Well, this is a difficult one - I frequently tell my patients who have been wounded in their childhoods (which is all of them) that facing the wounds inflicted by one's parents, and the rage and pain that comes with them, does not necessarily mean confronting said parents in present time. Healing is a personal, inner process from which healthy behavior will follow, but confronting your old tormentors isn't always a practical or valuable thing. What's more important now is that you're not allowing yourself to be injured by them, or anyone else, any longer.

What's difficult for me about applying this approach to the national scene, however, or the collective as it were, is that very often by not confronting the damage done by perpetrators in positions of political, business, religious or other institutional leadership, we can inadvertently set the stage for further acting out and damage.

Bob Herbert made this point in the NY Times, in an op-ed piece, at the end of 2008, entitled: "ADD UP THE DAMAGE."
Herbert starts out by saying: "When Mr. Bush officially takes his leave in three weeks (in reality, he checked out long ago), most Americans will be content to sigh good riddance. I disagree. I don’t think he should be allowed to slip quietly out of town. There should be a great hue and cry, a loud, collective angry howl, demonstrations with signs and bullhorns and fiery speeches, over the damage he’s done to this country."

Well, I agree with Bob, but I actually think more needs to be done than howling in order for the collective consciousness to heal from the crimes of our leaders. When Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon for the high crimes that led to his resignation, the country was not able to heal its collective wounds from being so betrayed by a leader in high office. If George Bush, Dick Cheney and many others who committed very high crimes indeed, including war crimes and crimes against humanity, are allowed to go off unaccountable except to the annals of history, our collective psyches will not be able to heal. I do truly feel that for Barack Obama to bring the nation together in the way he is inclined to, he must see to it that his Justice Department holds the previous administration accountable for the damage it has inflicted.

Here's a bit more from Bob Herbert:

"The catalog of Mr. Bushes' transgressions against the nation’s interests — sins of commission and omission — would keep Mr. Bush in a confessional for the rest of his life. Don’t hold your breath. He’s hardly the contrite sort. He told ABC’s Charlie Gibson: 'I don’t spend a lot of time really worrying about short-term history. I guess I don’t worry about long-term history, either, since I’m not going to be around to read it."

Well, Mr. Bush, we actually cannot leave you to a history you won't be interested in or around to read. You are now our responsibility.

"TEA PARTIES FOREVER"

Hot off the press by PAUL KRUGMAN, Nobel Prize-winning economist:

"This is a column about Republicans — and I’m not sure I should even be writing it.

Today’s G.O.P. is, after all, very much a minority party. It retains some limited ability to obstruct the Democrats, but has no ability to make or even significantly shape policy.

Beyond that, Republicans have become embarrassing to watch. And it doesn’t feel right to make fun of crazy people. Better, perhaps, to focus on the real policy debates, which are all among Democrats.

But here’s the thing: the G.O.P. looked as crazy 10 or 15 years ago as it does now. That didn’t stop Republicans from taking control of both Congress and the White House. And they could return to power if the Democrats stumble. So it behooves us to look closely at the state of what is, after all, one of our nation’s two great political parties.

One way to get a good sense of the current state of the G.O.P., and also to see how little has really changed, is to look at the “tea parties” that have been held in a number of places already, and will be held across the country on Wednesday. These parties — antitaxation demonstrations that are supposed to evoke the memory of the Boston Tea Party and the American Revolution — have been the subject of considerable mockery, and rightly so.

But everything that critics mock about these parties has long been standard practice within the Republican Party.

Thus, President Obama is being called a “socialist” who seeks to destroy capitalism. Why? Because he wants to raise the tax rate on the highest-income Americans back to, um, about 10 percentage points less than it was for most of the Reagan administration. Bizarre.

But the charge of socialism is being thrown around only because “liberal” doesn’t seem to carry the punch it used to. And if you go back just a few years, you find top Republican figures making equally bizarre claims about what liberals were up to. Remember when Karl Rove declared that liberals wanted to offer “therapy and understanding” to the 9/11 terrorists?

Then there are the claims made at some recent tea-party events that Mr. Obama wasn’t born in America, which follow on earlier claims that he is a secret Muslim. Crazy stuff — but nowhere near as crazy as the claims, during the last Democratic administration, that the Clintons were murderers, claims that were supported by a campaign of innuendo on the part of big-league conservative media outlets and figures, especially Rush Limbaugh.

Speaking of Mr. Limbaugh: the most impressive thing about his role right now is the fealty he is able to demand from the rest of the right. The abject apologies he has extracted from Republican politicians who briefly dared to criticize him have been right out of Stalinist show trials. But while it’s new to have a talk-radio host in that role, ferocious party discipline has been the norm since the 1990s, when Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, became known as “The Hammer” in part because of the way he took political retribution on opponents.

Going back to those tea parties, Mr. DeLay, a fierce opponent of the theory of evolution — he famously suggested that the teaching of evolution led to the Columbine school massacre — also foreshadowed the denunciations of evolution that have emerged at some of the parties.

Last but not least: it turns out that the tea parties don’t represent a spontaneous outpouring of public sentiment. They’re AstroTurf (fake grass roots) events, manufactured by the usual suspects. In particular, a key role is being played by FreedomWorks, an organization run by Richard Armey, the former House majority leader, and supported by the usual group of right-wing billionaires. And the parties are, of course, being promoted heavily by Fox News.

But that’s nothing new, and AstroTurf has worked well for Republicans in the past. The most notable example was the “spontaneous” riot back in 2000 — actually orchestrated by G.O.P. strategists — that shut down the presidential vote recount in Florida’s Miami-Dade County.

So what’s the implication of the fact that Republicans are refusing to grow up, the fact that they are still behaving the same way they did when history seemed to be on their side? I’d say that it’s good for Democrats, at least in the short run — but it’s bad for the country.

For now, the Obama administration gains a substantial advantage from the fact that it has no credible opposition, especially on economic policy, where the Republicans seem particularly clueless.

But as I said, the G.O.P. remains one of America’s great parties, and events could still put that party back in power. We can only hope that Republicans have moved on by the time that happens."

"THE EMPTY NEST"

THIS is beautiful, really beautiful, from THE LOVE WE MAKE blog:

"About a week ago, a pretty light brown bird (a friend of mine thought it might be a Mockingbird) made her nest on our fire escape. I can see it from where I sit while at my computer. Like most nests, it is made of small brown twigs loosely put together in concentric circles and in it lay two, seemly perfect, small brilliant white eggs. I felt honored she picked our fire escape in which to give birth to new life.

A few days later, while sitting at my computer, I heard a loud noise which sounded like something heavy was dropped and then very large wings flapping, when I looked out I saw a large black bird hanging on the side of that very fire escape struggling to get her beak into the unprotected nest. Before I could move, I saw her lift her head and right inside her beak was one of those perfect white eggs. She held her head up- like a perfect picture, the contrast of the bright white egg against her raven blue-black gleaming head was striking, she looked enormous compared to the egg she held between her long black beak and in an instant she turned her head and flew off with it, just like that...it was gone.

A few minutes later, the mother arrived back to the nest only to find one remaining egg. She circled the nest a few times, bobbing her head in a bit, before sitting down to brood. I felt sad, a thief had kidnapped one of her precious eggs, even worse, feasted on it.

It brought up so many feelings for me, besides being the mother of two children, I also had two miscarriages, which I deeply mourned. I felt that familiar feeling creeping up in me, the feeling of mourning the loss of what might have been.

Everyday after that I watched the Mama bird sit on her solitary egg, now less frequently leaving to forage for food. Three more days passed and still she sat diligently waiting, brooding.

I started to become obsessed with the impending event, every day feeling more like an expectant parent myself, starting to anticipate the excitement of new life.

Upon awakening today I noticed some other bird flying around the fire escape. I quickly opened the blinds and there it was... an empty nest. I then saw Mama bird land, look around, circle the nest, and when it finally seemed to register that her last egg had been stolen, she flew off, this time for good. I stood there horrified at first, and when it all sank in, I cried.

In my opinion, the birth of a new life is, without question, the closest thing to heaven we have here on earth. There is something so awesome, so powerful and so deeply moving about giving birth to new life, it is certainly one of the more miraculous things we humans ever get to experience and witness.

So I have to ask myself today; What is the deeper message in this for me?

Is it about life, loss, endings, missed opportunities, the ruthlessness of nature?

Only a moment passes before I realize it's impossible NOT to see it...after all, the empty nest is now sitting right outside my window."

SOMETHING TO CELEBRATE - THE DEFEAT OF THE FLINTSTONES!!!

This is a headline, in THE WASHINGTON MONTHLY, to really make a sane adult cheer: DOBSON POINTS TO CULTURE WAR DEFEAT

Yep! The infamous champion of intolerance and hypocrisy, James Dobson, delivered a farewell speech to the Focus on the Family staff, and conceded that the culture war he helped start hasn't turned out well. Indeed, Dobson almost sounded resigned to defeat.

Here's the rest of the story from the article:

"James Dobson, 72, who resigned recently as head of Focus on the Family -- one of the largest Christian groups in the country - and once denounced the Harry Potter books as witchcraft, acknowledged the dramatic reversal for the religious Right in a farewell speech to staff.

'We tried to defend the unborn child, the dignity of the family, but it was a holding action,' Dobson said. 'We are awash in evil and the battle is still to be waged. We are right now in the most discouraging period of that long conflict. Humanly speaking, we can say we have lost all those battles.'

That said, whether Dobson and his cohorts give up now or not, his assessment about their lack of success is nevertheless accurate. The culture war is all but over, and far-right evangelicals have precious little to show for their efforts. After about three decades of fighting, the culture warriors are hard pressed to point to any progress at all.

Anti-gay animus is not only waning, four states now allow gay marriage. Abortion is still legal and a majority of Americans are still pro-choice. School prayer isn't even on the political world's radar screen anymore. Pornography is not only a multi-billion industry; it's more accessible than ever. The single fasting growing segment of the American spiritual landscape is non-believers and those with no religious identification.

In 1998, President Clinton's approval rating went up after getting caught in a sex scandal, and in 2008, the first admitted adulterer to ever run for president sought and won the Republican Party's presidential nomination.

Not only does the Republican Party establishment largely ignore its theocratic wing, but there are growing fissures in evangelical Christian communities, with a growing number of evangelicals, especially younger ones, rejecting the Dobson agenda and political worldview.

Dobson isn't giving up, and I suspect the religious right movement will keep pushing its misguided agenda. But humanly speaking, this crowd has not only lost all their battles, they should probably stop trying to win."SEE YA!!

MORE ON THE EFFECTS OF NARCISSISM!!

On the first of April, I wrote a piece entitled "I WARNED YOU: NARCISSISM RUINS COUNTRIES," spinning off an article on Slate.com, "But Enough About You …What is narcissistic personality disorder, and why does everyone seem to have it?" by Emily Yoffe.

The news is chock full of stories about how rampant narcissism has ravaged everything from our financial lives to our love lives, and how impulsive, soulless acquisitiveness and immediate gratification have replaced integrity, creative productiveness and a genuine sense of self.

In his op-ed piece in today's NY Times, for example, Frank Rich wrote: "In the bubble decade, making money as an end in itself boomed as a calling among students at elite universities like Harvard, siphoning off gifted undergraduates who might otherwise have been scientists, teachers, doctors, entrepreneurs, artists or inventors. The Harvard Crimson reported that in the class of 2007, 58 percent of the men and 43 percent of the women entering the work force took jobs in the finance and consulting industries."

Also in the Times is an article about a sad trend in dating services that's really booming: "At first glance, the Web site SeekingArrangement.com seems like any other dating site, but Seeking Arrangement is a down-and-dirty marketplace where older moneyed men and cute young women engage in brutally frank transactions. They’re not searching for longtime soul mates; they want no-strings-attached 'arrangements' that trade in society’s most valued currencies: wealth, youth and beauty. - connecting 'Sugar Daddies' and 'Sugar Babies."

And of course, we've all heard the stories (The New York Post was all over it!) about how scores of professional New York women stripped of their six-figure jobs on Wall Street are now working at upscale Manhattan strip joints. Former Wall Streeters, fashion executives and real-estate agents are pole dancing and stripping for as much as $1,500 a night. What a perfectly appropriate professional segue that is, huh?

Yes, all you baby boomer parents who overindulged your children (and still are), read your 401K's and weep as the hopelessly orally fixated children you created drain your savings and use their sexuality to get more and more stuff to stuff their bottomless egos with.

You did this, parents.

Every time you treated your sons and daughters like princes and princesses (costumes and all!), every time you gave up your sex life with your spouse to allow your children into your bed, and thereby sexualized (inadvertently or not) your kids as a result, every time you made your kids the center of the Universe in their own personal fairy tales, you were creating the narcissistic, impulse-ridden, discipline-deprived hedge fund criminals and high class hookers who perhaps could have been making the innovations, inventing the technologies, or creating beauty in our country instead.

Here's more from Frank Rich:

"On Wall Street over the past decade, money came first, last and in between. There was no 'thing' being made at all unless you count the slicing and dicing of debt into financial 'products,' the incomprehensible derivatives that helped bring down the economy, costing some five million Americans their jobs (so far) and countless more their 401(k)’s."

How much more damage is yet to come? How much more damage will parents do to their children, the "prisoners of childhood" once written about by Alice Miller in her landmark book, DRAMA OF THE GIFTED CHILD, about how parents create narcissistic children, gutted of any true self esteem by the vicarious needs of their insecure, immature parents?

Here's Alice Miller:

Quite often I have been faced with people who were praised and admired for their talents and their achievements. According to prevailing attitudes, these people - the pride and joy of their parents - should have had a strong and stable sense of self-assurance. But the case is exactly the opposite. They are plagued by anxiety or deep feelings of guilt and shame."

Indeed. And what is the quick fix sought after by these kids to ameliorate those negative feelings? More stuff.

So, folks, now that your "gifted children" have stolen your stuff, maybe you'll finally work on getting a life of your own?

TODAY'S BONUS QUOTE

“Nations, like stars, are entitled to eclipse. All is well, provided the light returns and the eclipse does not become endless night. Dawn and resurrection are synonymous. The reappearance of the light is the same as the survival of the soul.”
Victor Hugo

TODAY'S QUOTE

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. This we do know: a world that begins to witness the rebirth of trust among nations can find its way to a peace that is neither partial nor punitive."
Dwight D. EisenhowerNow, that's a Republican

FOLLOW-UP NOTE TO "YOU CAN'T MAKE THIS STUFF UP! REPUBLICANS CAN'T SAY 'KO?"

BETTY'S SORRY!!

YEP. According to DALLASNEWS.COM, Texas Rep. Betty Brown apologized this morning for saying Asians should simplify their names.

OOOOOHHHHH... Well, since you apologize, Betty, then you wouldn't mind acknowledging that you did so only after the Texas Democratic Party instructed you to apologize following a letter sent to you by New York City Councilman John C. Liu calling for either your apology or resignation.

Said Liu: "It's outrageous and insulting for you to suggest it would 'behoove' us to adopt another name, to give up our birthright and a part of our own identity, in order to exercise our right to vote."

Aayyy, Mr. Liu, she's sorry, eh? Thanks, Betty!

A VERSION OF HISTORY, BY "DADLOFF"

I loved "Superman" comics when I was a kid. He was a hero, a superhero, who was honest, loyal, righteous and committed to the "American Way," plus he was strong, white, handsome and never had sex! What a guy! What a role model for an eight year old, growing up in the suburbs.
Alas, by the time I hit adolescence, I'd grown out of my illusions of Superman and his perfectly good and right actions against only the purest of evil villains, bad guys who could never be right and never have any redeeming value, and I'd really grown out of his chasteness and unrequited love for Lois Lane (OH MY GOD! Was Superman a closet queen?!).
What I didn't realize at the time was that Superman could have been the Republican wet dream, their fantasy of who their ideal leader was, of who they were. I understand. Those comics presented a very orderly, black and white, good and evil world without nuance, without subtlety, without having to think about it.
I understand. When you're a child, that kind of picture is enticing.

So, in that vein, below is an entry by "Dadloff," exactly as it was written... including the "stud" missiles!

Dadloff:

"bush was told by all his advisors plus the wmd inspectors from the UN that there were wmds in the posession of saddam and these inspectors were kicked out of iraq with out completing their mission. also, saddam killed 100,000 of his own people with poison gas. remember also that iraq sent stud missles into israel. I suppose these were not wmds. this was a case of the president acting with the information he had at hand from the most reliable sources. was this what we are calling a flaw or was this doing what was in the best interest of our country? remember, because of our actions overseas, we have not been attacked again on our soil. I guess this also was a fluke. saddam was destined to be another hitler. he started off by attacking kuwait, just like hitler did by attacking poland.
"I suppose you don't believe that the islamic terroists do not want to destroy the US and israel. I believe they do and they need to be stopped with whatever means it takes. I also believe that we need to stop countries like iran and north korea from getting nuclear arms, again with whatever means it takes. these countries are a real threat to us and the rest of the world.
"a little bit of history as I know it. the great depression started in 1929, I know, because I was raised during the depression. everyone credits roosevelt with getting us out of the depression with all the programs he started. when ww2 started in 1939, we were still in the midst of the depression. world war II brought us out of it because most of the men between the ages of 18 and 40 were off to war and the rest of the men and a lot of our women were working in factories producing war materials. when the war was over, all these men and women were not needed for wartime jobs, so they went back to doing the work necessary for everyday living. this is what got us out of the depression. this is a recession we are in and history tells us that these recessions come and go on almost a regular basis. but republicans want to blame dems and dems want to blame repubs. raising taxes and reckless spending is not going to solve the problem. putting people back to work and buying american will solve the problem, as well as solving the problems of banks, auto dealers and credit car companies giving out all these easy to get credit loans to anyone who asks for them.
"some more history: korea would not be a threat today if truman had allowed McArthur to stop china from sending in troops and war planes across the border. korea would have been one nation instead of two. the korean war started under trumans watch, by the way. vietnam was a war that started under kennedys watch and johnson saw to it that we had 600,000 troops there only to lose the war. kennedy did a great thing by stopping the soviets from putting missles in cuba, but he blew it when he promised to help with the bay of pigs and then changed his mind and let all those cubans down. reagan won the cold war and caused the soviet union to break up. bush #1 kicked saddam out of kuwait. clinton did nothing about the bombing of the barracks that killed american soldiers, nor did he do anything with the bombing of the cole or the first bombing of the world trade center. he was too busy getting blown in the oval office and smoking flavored cigars. bush #2 may have made a mistake invading iraq, but he did so based on the information he had on hand at the time. but, even so, we may have done the world a favor. obama is now increasing the number of soldiers we have in afganistan, I hope it doesn't turn out to be another situation like johnson created in vietnam. one other point: israel bombed the shit out of the gaza strip. now obama wants to send 60 or 70 million dollars to rebuild something israel destroyed. let israel pay to restore what they destroyed if they really want to show they want peace in that area of the world. someone once said that war is hell and you will find that most people that were or are involved in war would agree. but sometimes there is no other way. if and when we do have to take that road, we all must get behind the gov and the soldiers who have to make the sacrifice. wars should be protested before we get into them, not when we are already involved. our soldiers need our support not our protests. this only gives strength to our enemies.
"as a foot note, I must add this: whether I am a rep or a dem, does not matter. if I like or dislike a president for what ever reason, no matter what, I will always respect the office of the president of the USA. this is from a senior citizen who lived thru wars from ww2 thru and hopefully this one, and thru a depression and a number of recessions. I have lived thru presidents from roosevelt thru obama and I have faith in my country and will always be proud to be an American."

THIS IS SO CATHARTIC, I'M PRINTING THE WHOLE THING!!!

"G.O.P.: R.I.P"

By STEVEN WEBER

"So there it stands: a naked, pigeon-chested old man, random strands of white hair on its boney shoulders; its swollen-knuckled hands clasped over its dead genitals, looking at once forlorn and menacing, shivering with self-loathing and xenophobia, raging pathetically at its timely and appropriate defeat at the hands of Reason.

Ladies and gentlemen: The Republican Party.

With every passing day, the people who stubbornly, maddeningly cling to an obsolete ideal and who stand in the way of the cultural advancement of this country, this America, spew the base reality of their caustic ideology into the air.

The Republican Party is like a dying tyrant, mad with syphilis, ironically like that very Stalin they would accuse their enemies of associating with. How else to account for their desperation to resurrect the wraith of Joseph McCarthy; the hammy and baffling utterances from high level party officials like Boehner and McConnell; the blatant desire on their part to let the country fail out of sheer resentment; the wanton sedition of Conservative shit-stirrers ranging from the quasi Madame Defarge Michele Bachmann to the porcine, pill-popping porcine propagandist Rush Limbaugh?

It is an all out assault on reason, on progress, on truth. What is the difference between the Republican Party and, say, the Taliban? A rogue by any other name would smell as rank. Their frantic accusations all churned out in a futile effort to explain their current pariah status is as pathetic and draconian as stoning a woman in the street.

I feel I must apologize for my own particularly febrile anger. It's unseemly and ugly. But finally, the enemy is clearly outlined. We can see it for what it is and what it always has been. It exists not in myth but in a reality which has plagued humanity for millennia: utter, hateful ignorance born from a fear of truth, indeed a fear of life itself; a mad and impotent pursuit of some long-forgotten ecstasy having spawned generations of paranoid power addicts who chase the past at the expense of the future, cloaking their real intentions in perfumed patriotism and the seductive swoon of religion.

It's so fitting that we are living in an age where beheadings, torture, piracy and now unbridled power mongering are all common place. Perhaps that element of humanity is going back into hibernation and is snapping at any and everything before its eyes finally close. In our lifetime the choice has never been so stark.

Don't be intimidated by that naked, pigeon-chested old man. His party's over."

TODAY'S GENIUS QUOTE

“It is worthy of remark that a belief constantly inculcated during the early years of life, while the brain is impressible, appears to acquire almost the nature of an instinct; and the very essence of an instinct is that it is followed independently of reason.”
Charles Darwin

LOFF56 STILL SPARRING, SO...

[For the original exchange between L56 and I, and for my piece on Obama's "rigid character structure," scroll down a bit.]

I'll address your questions/criticisms/comments, L56, in the context of your submission:

L56:

"Hmmm... OK...
I have to say I find your answer both a cop-out and over-simplistic.
You've touched on two extremes of what one can hold an opinion about. These extremes make your argument too obvious. Of course taste doesn't warrant a judgment of character, and of course believing that genocide, rape etc... is ok is obviously a sign of something awry in the individual."

PL:

Thanks for the diplomatic opening - "a cop-out AND simplistic." Well, L56, I actually am trying to make my argument obvious. I'm not trying to be clever or couch what I'm saying. Remember my favorite 8 words - "We hold these truths to be self-evident..."

L56:

"What about things in between?
I see that you're defining a benchmark or dividing line as being something that's harmful to other people. But even an opinion of taste can be harmful to a degree. A vegetarian makes a very good argument that eating a hamburger (rare or well done) can be harmful to your health. Do you have a character flaw because you like hamburgers? As well, our decision to enter into World War II was a decision that was very harmful to a large number of our soldiers who went to war. But did our country have a character flaw because we wanted to stop a madman from eliminating every Jew on the planet?"

PL:

Yes, eating hamburgers is potentially harmful to our health, and going to war certainly is, and as such represent flaws in the current state of the human psyche. There are surely ways of obtaining protein for our bodies that don't include killing animals, and Hitler was a gross manifestation for all of us of some major flaws in our collective mentality, flaws that we are still grappling with today - nationalism, racism, xenophobia. These aren't "qualities," they're disabilities. If you continue to take things out of the bigger context, L56, where we're all one and mirrors for each other, then you will always be able to justify things like war with "simplistic" arguments from the schoolyard of childhood like: "They attacked us first!" or "They're evil!"

L56:

"Furthermore, where is the line between having a character flaw and being misinformed or uneducated? A lot of people have opinions that are based on the information at hand, which is not always complete. They make judgment calls that are arguably morally sound based on that information despite the fact that they may ultimately be wrong. Do these people have character flaws? They're making good judgments based on what they know. Isn't everyone misinformed to varying degrees? How is it possible for anyone to know absolutely everything? Hopefully we're all striving for more and more knowledge. But knowledge is endless, we'll always be just a little bit in the dark doing the best we can with the information we have."

PL:

Children and "baby souls," for example, who can be easily misled, shouldn't be judged for their ignorance. For that matter, no one should be judged for anything. Nonetheless, ignorance is a flaw, and yes, I would agree that it is an ongoing "imperfection" in all of us, at different levels. Perhaps part of your disgruntledness with me here, L56, is that you think I am judging our flaws. I am not. I am making an assessment of them, and again, being flawed is inherent in being human. However, some amount of some people's ignorance is deliberate and intentional, and not everyone is "striving for more and more knowledge," which brings me back to Obama and my original point. I am confident that he is able to re-evaluate his positions and change course when necessary, unlike his predecessor, because he accepts that he is flawed. So do I. My pointing out what I perceive to be his character structure is not a judgment of him.

L56:

"I'm not suggesting that there aren't people out there that are just plain off their friggin' rocker. But I am suggesting that more often than the therapist wishes to admit, an opinion is just an opinion."

PL:

Here, I must agree with you - there are definitely people out there who are crazy, more than most of us want to admit, and yes, my point exactly is that "an opinion is just an opinion." And nothing more.

Thanks, L56.
 

blogger templates 3 columns | Make Money Online