In Greek mythology, the word Psyche describes a mortal woman who married Eros, the god of love and the son of Aphrodite, the goddess of love. The Greeks were masters of stories that told of love and tragedy. In modern Psychology, the same word refers to one's soul, self and mind. The term Psyche would then be applied to describe one's behavior.
It would appear that the psyche of the majority of we Americans is such that we would rather tolerate an existence that is not beneficial to us and in fact may be detrimental to us rather than initiate steps to change the status quo. Expressed another way, we act like sheep being led to slaughter. Only when the situation strikes a chord that is construed by us as totally unacceptable, do we then rise up as one and attempt to initiate change.
In 1939 -1940, it was the belief by the military of Japan that all Americans were "soft", "not likely to resist", that led them to strike us at Pearl Harbor. They thought we would sue for peace rather than retaliate. At the time, our government had promised its citizens that we would not "go to war". Meanwhile, through the "Lend Lease Act", we were supplying England with the means by which they hoped to defend themselves against Hitler's Nazis.
The raid on Pearl Harbor, 7 December 1941 was the "straw that broke the camel's back" and President Franklin Roosevelt declared war on not just Japan, but Germany as well.
We were not really prepared to go to war against anyone. Our military strength was not ready in terms of numbers of men nor of equipment. It was only a stroke of luck that our aircraft carriers were not in port on 7 December. We had to "start from scratch".
Again when the boys and girls in Harrisburg chose to vote a hefty raise for themselves did it strike a chord with us Pennsylvanians and we responded by voting a number of the politicians out of office.
It is unfortunate that we seem unable or unwilling to take steps that would prevent, or at least lessen the blow, of the next disaster that waits in the wings to strike. I am not referring to a potential disaster!! I am talking about one that will cause much weeping and gnashing of teeth starting next year with the real bombshell coming in 2012!!!
It has been reported in the newspapers, presented on TV news shows, and talked about numerous times in town meetings. I am referring to the huge increase in school / property taxes!!! I have noted it in previous blogs. The current estimate for the increase is 25 to 30 %!!
There is a means by which we can rectify the situation. We have the power to change the course of Pennsylvania history. What are we waiting for? A "Fairy Godmother" will not materialize out of nowhere with her magic wand. The politicians, of their own volition, will not take the steps necessary to initiate the change. We the people must take charge of our own destiny, our own lives, our own homesteads, and rise up with one voice, one vote and dictate our demands or else!!!
Or else what? Or else we will stampede the polls on election day in numbers heretofore unknown in an "off year" election and rid ourselves of those politicians who have demonstrated, by their lack of performance, failure to listen to their constituants.
By that same measure, local school boards do not appear to grasp the enormity of the situation and continue to spend monies as though there was no tomorrow.
To whom can we look for leadership in our quest to lead us out of the present situation? This writer has no reservations in recommending just one person to fill that position. All other contenders either have not the insight nor the foresight to qualify. The one person to whom I refer is Sam Rohrer, the Constitutional Republican!!! To learn more about him I strongly recommend two web sights: www.PTCC.US and www.samrohrer.org . If at all possible, take the opportunity to attend one of Sam's Town Hall meetings. See his web site for one scheduled near you. It will be an eye opener. He is cut from a different cloth than just about any other politician known to this writer.
While my words of praise may sound trite, I challenge you to listen to him, check on his political performance, meet him, present questions to him, and judge for yourselves. Do not use "inductive reasoning" to discount his worthiness!!! (see the blog "Why Should I Vote" posted 23 JAN 10)
This writer has been surprised and disapointed in the comment from a number of folks to whom he has spoken about Sam Rohrer and the School / Property Tax Elimination Act. Their comment generally stated was that, "It will never happen". Do you know why it would "never happen"? There is just one answer. It would never happen because each of us who does nothing will only add to the number of "do nothings" untill NOTHING happens. The situation would only remain the same.
Food will never reach our mouth unless we lift the fork or spoon. We will never achieve the most insignificant task unless we take whatever steps necessary to make it happen. We should all thank the Good Lord that he left nothing to chance in our design. Did you ever think what a chore it would be if we had to control our own heartbeats or our own breathing for all situations? Would we be able to choose the correct rate for each when our bodies needed more oxygen? Would we remember to slow down the rate of each when it was time to retire for the night? Would we be able to speed them up in an instant when faced with an emergent situation?
I do not imagine that there are many of us who are adults and still depend on our mothers to take care of us. That means that we have to do our own thinking. If we fail to make the right choices, we have only ourselves to blame. Let's "put on our thinking caps" and make the only "right" decision not only for us but for our neighbors, our relatives, our friends and all those who already have nothing and with whom we may find ourselves in the not too distant future. 2012 is "just around the corner"!!!
Semper Fidelis
Nurse John
Friday, February 26, 2010
Sunday, February 21, 2010
"Threw down the gauntlet"
A "Gauntlet" is a glove that is made of metal or stiff leather and was worn in medieval times by the knights. Knights were men who usually were in the employ of the king. They acted in the role of part of a private army. They wore full suits of armor to protect themselves as they fought on behalf of the king. They are usually portrayed as riding a horse which was also protected by metal around its head and chest.
This writer is not certain when the custom originated but if a knight wanted to challenge another to "do battle", he removed one of his gauntlets and threw it to the ground in front of the one he wanted to challenge. If the one who was challenged picked up the gauntlet, it signified he accepted the challenge. Usually, a very strict code was followed that specified the time, place, and weapons to be used.
The battle usually began by the combatants riding their horses toward one another at full gallop. Each had a lance that he kept pointed at his opponent and attempted to at the very least, unseat his opponent. If successful, his opponent fell off his horse and hit the ground. It is difficult to imagine how anyone wearing a full suit of armor, and falling to the ground from his horse, was not seriously injured.
If the one who fell was able to rise from the ground and continue to defend himself, the battle continued. The other was not required to dismount and could continue to attempt to strike the one who had fallen with whatever weapon he had, e.g. broadsword, mace, ax, etc.
Again, it is difficult to believe that the one who had fallen would have a reasonable chance to overcome the obvious advantage the other had, being mounted. If you have seen such battles being shown in a movie, the one who had fallen, if the "hero", always managed to win!!!
In our case, Robert Gleason, the chairman of the State Republican Committee, has figuratively "thrown down the gauntlet" by ignoring the reasonable requests sent to him that asked for an "open primary" election. The requests were based on the fact that by his endorsement of one candidate for the governorship of our State over another, he has willfully assumed the stance of a dictator. He has not followed the will of the people (us) and is essentially forcing us to accept the candidate of his choice rather than ours.
We could not accept his challenge without a reply and so have "picked up the gauntlet"!! Given the climate of politics nationally, it would appear that Mr. Gleason, to some degree, has Masochistic tendencies or his neurons are not synapsing as they should. This writer certainly plans to provide Mr. Gleason with as much pain or embarassment as his Masochistic tendencies can stand. As far as his neurons are concerned, this writer knows of no specific cure for his problem other than to recommend he see a Gastroenterologist who specializes in assessment of and appropraite intervention to rectify the situation.
As far as the recommendation noted above, this writer does not intentionally infer any sarcasm but makes the recommendation based on documentation that anyone who's feet "smell" and who's nose "runs" must therefore be built backwards. Given that observation, it then follows that their neurons must reside in a different location than other folks. It is then hoped that Mr. Gleason will be able to identify a professional who will be able to intervene and provide the necessary care that will result in his recuperation and return to the mainstream of society.
In the meantime, Mr Sam Rohrer's followers who began as a squad, have grown exponentially to a platoon, then a company, a regiment, a brigade, a division, a corps, and finally an army!!! We have an army every individual of which has the resolve to achieve victory. It is therefore that this writer extends the invitation to Mr. Gleason, after receiving the appropriate intervention for his problem, to join our ranks in order to provide the most ethical decision making process for the people of our State. That decision being to choose the one who the people (us) want to represent us in the political arena.
Let the games begin!!!
Semper Fidelis
Nurse John
This writer is not certain when the custom originated but if a knight wanted to challenge another to "do battle", he removed one of his gauntlets and threw it to the ground in front of the one he wanted to challenge. If the one who was challenged picked up the gauntlet, it signified he accepted the challenge. Usually, a very strict code was followed that specified the time, place, and weapons to be used.
The battle usually began by the combatants riding their horses toward one another at full gallop. Each had a lance that he kept pointed at his opponent and attempted to at the very least, unseat his opponent. If successful, his opponent fell off his horse and hit the ground. It is difficult to imagine how anyone wearing a full suit of armor, and falling to the ground from his horse, was not seriously injured.
If the one who fell was able to rise from the ground and continue to defend himself, the battle continued. The other was not required to dismount and could continue to attempt to strike the one who had fallen with whatever weapon he had, e.g. broadsword, mace, ax, etc.
Again, it is difficult to believe that the one who had fallen would have a reasonable chance to overcome the obvious advantage the other had, being mounted. If you have seen such battles being shown in a movie, the one who had fallen, if the "hero", always managed to win!!!
In our case, Robert Gleason, the chairman of the State Republican Committee, has figuratively "thrown down the gauntlet" by ignoring the reasonable requests sent to him that asked for an "open primary" election. The requests were based on the fact that by his endorsement of one candidate for the governorship of our State over another, he has willfully assumed the stance of a dictator. He has not followed the will of the people (us) and is essentially forcing us to accept the candidate of his choice rather than ours.
We could not accept his challenge without a reply and so have "picked up the gauntlet"!! Given the climate of politics nationally, it would appear that Mr. Gleason, to some degree, has Masochistic tendencies or his neurons are not synapsing as they should. This writer certainly plans to provide Mr. Gleason with as much pain or embarassment as his Masochistic tendencies can stand. As far as his neurons are concerned, this writer knows of no specific cure for his problem other than to recommend he see a Gastroenterologist who specializes in assessment of and appropraite intervention to rectify the situation.
As far as the recommendation noted above, this writer does not intentionally infer any sarcasm but makes the recommendation based on documentation that anyone who's feet "smell" and who's nose "runs" must therefore be built backwards. Given that observation, it then follows that their neurons must reside in a different location than other folks. It is then hoped that Mr. Gleason will be able to identify a professional who will be able to intervene and provide the necessary care that will result in his recuperation and return to the mainstream of society.
In the meantime, Mr Sam Rohrer's followers who began as a squad, have grown exponentially to a platoon, then a company, a regiment, a brigade, a division, a corps, and finally an army!!! We have an army every individual of which has the resolve to achieve victory. It is therefore that this writer extends the invitation to Mr. Gleason, after receiving the appropriate intervention for his problem, to join our ranks in order to provide the most ethical decision making process for the people of our State. That decision being to choose the one who the people (us) want to represent us in the political arena.
Let the games begin!!!
Semper Fidelis
Nurse John
Sunday, February 14, 2010
The Real McCoy
The general understanding of the phrase "The Real McCoy" is: The best quality; Not a fake; the genuine article; etc. The phrase can be used to describe a person or an object. If one has the option of buying an object, and money is of no consideration, it is assumed one would choose "The Real McCoy". The reason you would choose it rather than any other is that one can be assured one would "get their money's worth". The item will: operate without problems; give the longest service; look the best; etc. When used to describe a person, it would convey the thought that the person was: of enviable qualities; could be trusted in their speech and actions; not pretentious; etc.
With the knowledge of the meaning of the phrase, should one be offered the opportunity to have an example of "The Real McCoy", would they "jump at the chance"? This writer certainly believes they would. Or would one look more closely to determine if there may just be some hidden catch to the offer? There are some who may not be able to distinguish the "wanna-be" from "The Real McCoy". Neither would they spend what time and / or effort may be required to tell the difference. Oh well!! They will just have to put up with the "wanna-be" object or person and the poor service either will assuredly demonstrate if it or they were chosen rather than "The Real McCoy".
Unfortunately, there are a significant number of folks who, given the current financial climate, are not able to afford an object that is "The Real McCoy" and so are forced to make do with a "wanna-be". But what if we could have "The Real McCoy" with no reduction to our meager finances? How about being able to have "The Real McCoy" and, after getting it, are able to increase our financial status because we got "The Real McCoy" and not a "wanna-be? How can that be?
Remember, the "wanna-be" does not give as good service as "The Real McCoy"!! So, it stands to reason that if we had "The Real McCoy" instead of a "wanna-be", we would get better service!! Better service = saving $. Saving $ = increased financial status!!! Still not convinced? What if one could have "The Real McCoy" for nothing? That's right, "nuttin, zip, zilch, zero, squat, etc.!!! No, this writer has not "gone off the deep end".
Keep reading, you'll understand what I'm talking about in just a minute.
On Friday, 12 FEB, the State Republican party held a gala affair at the Harrisburg Hilton Hotel. Sam Rohrer had a debate with Tom Corbett, both of whom are candidates for the Governorship of our State. What was most interesting during the debate were the number of times that Tom Corbett made a comment relative to a statement made by Sam Rohrer and one, regarding a principal held by Sam. Tom's comments went something like this:"I agree with you Sam", and "I'm like you Sam".
AS soon as I heard of Tom's comments to Sam, I immediately thought of the phrase, "The Real McCoy". Now, in this writer's mind, it appears that Tom Corbett "would like to be like Sam Rohrer", given his comments. Gee, that sure sounds similar to what a "wanna-be" would say to "The Real McCoy". This writer has nothing personal against Mr Corbett, but his comments say volumes about Sam Rohrer. Why would Tom want to be "like Sam"? Could it be because, in Tom's mind, Sam is "The Real McCoy"? If so, what does Tom think of himself?
After eight years of what could only be described as dysfunctional leadership, we surely do not need nor want a "wanna-be" at the helm of our State to steer an erratic course. We want and need a captain with exceptional piloting skills who will lay a course that will: get us through foul weather safely; steer clear of shoals; take into account changes in current or wind direction; etc.
There is only one "Real McCoy" who has stated the legs of the course he will follow to get us to port safely. All other applicants for the position of Captain may be able to serve as crew but, there can and must be just one Captain. The only applicant who qualifies for that position is Sam Rohrer.
This writer does not believe any of us would look forward to descending into the briny deep to Davy Jones' locker. Make no mistake about it. If we fail to support the only qualified applicant, "The Real McCoy, Sam Rohrer for the position as our Captain, we will surely join the creatures of the deep. See www.samrohrer.org to learn more of our choice for Captain
Semper Fidelis
Nurse John
With the knowledge of the meaning of the phrase, should one be offered the opportunity to have an example of "The Real McCoy", would they "jump at the chance"? This writer certainly believes they would. Or would one look more closely to determine if there may just be some hidden catch to the offer? There are some who may not be able to distinguish the "wanna-be" from "The Real McCoy". Neither would they spend what time and / or effort may be required to tell the difference. Oh well!! They will just have to put up with the "wanna-be" object or person and the poor service either will assuredly demonstrate if it or they were chosen rather than "The Real McCoy".
Unfortunately, there are a significant number of folks who, given the current financial climate, are not able to afford an object that is "The Real McCoy" and so are forced to make do with a "wanna-be". But what if we could have "The Real McCoy" with no reduction to our meager finances? How about being able to have "The Real McCoy" and, after getting it, are able to increase our financial status because we got "The Real McCoy" and not a "wanna-be? How can that be?
Remember, the "wanna-be" does not give as good service as "The Real McCoy"!! So, it stands to reason that if we had "The Real McCoy" instead of a "wanna-be", we would get better service!! Better service = saving $. Saving $ = increased financial status!!! Still not convinced? What if one could have "The Real McCoy" for nothing? That's right, "nuttin, zip, zilch, zero, squat, etc.!!! No, this writer has not "gone off the deep end".
Keep reading, you'll understand what I'm talking about in just a minute.
On Friday, 12 FEB, the State Republican party held a gala affair at the Harrisburg Hilton Hotel. Sam Rohrer had a debate with Tom Corbett, both of whom are candidates for the Governorship of our State. What was most interesting during the debate were the number of times that Tom Corbett made a comment relative to a statement made by Sam Rohrer and one, regarding a principal held by Sam. Tom's comments went something like this:"I agree with you Sam", and "I'm like you Sam".
AS soon as I heard of Tom's comments to Sam, I immediately thought of the phrase, "The Real McCoy". Now, in this writer's mind, it appears that Tom Corbett "would like to be like Sam Rohrer", given his comments. Gee, that sure sounds similar to what a "wanna-be" would say to "The Real McCoy". This writer has nothing personal against Mr Corbett, but his comments say volumes about Sam Rohrer. Why would Tom want to be "like Sam"? Could it be because, in Tom's mind, Sam is "The Real McCoy"? If so, what does Tom think of himself?
After eight years of what could only be described as dysfunctional leadership, we surely do not need nor want a "wanna-be" at the helm of our State to steer an erratic course. We want and need a captain with exceptional piloting skills who will lay a course that will: get us through foul weather safely; steer clear of shoals; take into account changes in current or wind direction; etc.
There is only one "Real McCoy" who has stated the legs of the course he will follow to get us to port safely. All other applicants for the position of Captain may be able to serve as crew but, there can and must be just one Captain. The only applicant who qualifies for that position is Sam Rohrer.
This writer does not believe any of us would look forward to descending into the briny deep to Davy Jones' locker. Make no mistake about it. If we fail to support the only qualified applicant, "The Real McCoy, Sam Rohrer for the position as our Captain, we will surely join the creatures of the deep. See www.samrohrer.org to learn more of our choice for Captain
Semper Fidelis
Nurse John
Friday, February 5, 2010
Eeny, Meeny, forget Miny or Moe
The "nonsense" words in this week's blog's title have a history dating back to the mid 18oo's. The phrase was and is used by children to determine who should be"it" or who should go first in a game. When faced with making a decision among a number of choices, the phrase is sometimes used to arrive at the one choice that will selected. Notice that this method of arriving at a decision is most often used by children, not adults. The reason adults do not rely on this method is because they supposedly are able to utilize their ability to reason.
Well, you sure could have fooled me!! There have been countless times witnessed by this writer when a co-worker, friend, neighbor, or family member seemed to have great difficulty when, faced with a situation that required in depth thought processing, were not able to arrive at a reasonable decision. Of course, depending on the circumstances, one may simply not have an adequate knowledge base on which to draw thereby hampering their scope of reasoning abilities.
Another reason that some folks seem unable to arrive at a reasonable answer to a given situation is that they are prone to demonstrate the "knee jerk" syndrome or the "shoot from the hip" response. In other words, they respond to some stimulus with little or no forethought. Very often, folks with this type of response discover that their decision does not result in a positive outcome. There have been a number of phrases that speak to this phenomenon e.g.: "Put mind in gear before putting mouth in motion; Think before you act".
There are some within our society who are expected to react in a "split second" to a situation but at the same time, act with accuracy and appropriately. They are those folks who function within the world of emergency medicine. Whether they work outside a medical facility or within, they must have a large body of knowledge regarding the human body and its functions in order to respond in a manner that will have positive results for whomever and in whatever condition. There is no room for error.
So then, how do we explain the actions, or lack thereof, of our politicians who must certainly be aware of our rather dismal situation but yet seem bent on not responding in an appropriate manner to our plight? Do they consciously or unconsciously employ the "Knee jerk" or "Shoot from the hip" response? Or do they simply lack a sufficient body of knowledge in order to arrive at a solution to the problem? It may even be supposed that they resort to using the "Eeny, Meeny, Miny and Moe" technique to solve what to them, seems an unfathomable situation!!
But wait a minute!! They are not children. They are adults. At least, they have existed within our society for the required number of years to qualify for the position they hold. But just what other qualifications are they expected to posses in order to function appropriately on our behalf? If any of the readers of this blog know of a specific list of qualifications by which an applicant for a position within the political arena must demonstrate an acceptable level of knowledge/understanding, please, please let this writer know where it may be found.
It is generally known that for any position within any organization that provides a product or service, an applicant for any position within that organization must demonstrate a measurable level of understanding of the responsibilities for that position in order to be hired. If he or she fails to demonstrate the expected level of skills, they are simply culled from the list of applicants. If they manage to demonstrate the expected level of skills, they are usually put "on probation" for some period in order to convince the employer they are able to function at an acceptable or superior level within that position. If they fail to "measure up" to expectations, they may be given a "warning" and their probationary period extended. If, after a second
review of their abilities/achievements they are again found to be wanting, they are then sacked.
Unfortunately, within the world of politics however the steps of: "hiring", probationary period; being fully accepted; or being sacked are lacking or at least different than in the "real world" of employment. We may think that we "hire" the political applicant but other than making a mark on a voting form or pulling a lever, do we have any input into the "hiring" process? After being "hired", are we able to look in on our new "employee" to determine if they "measure up" to our expectations? It seems that the only way we are able to obtain even a glimpse of the "employee" is when some article appears in a newspaper that mentions his/her name. Other than that, we remain oblivious to their daily routine. Do they show up on time for work each day? Do they show up at all each day? Are they required to "report" to anyone on some schedule? Does anyone at their location check to see if they are accomplishing anything?
For now, the answers to the above questions will be unanswered. This writer will attempt to ferret out some details on the routine(s) of a newly "hired" political employee and provide some insight so as to allay or alert the reader(s) of the effort. Until then,
Semper Fidelis
Nurse John
Well, you sure could have fooled me!! There have been countless times witnessed by this writer when a co-worker, friend, neighbor, or family member seemed to have great difficulty when, faced with a situation that required in depth thought processing, were not able to arrive at a reasonable decision. Of course, depending on the circumstances, one may simply not have an adequate knowledge base on which to draw thereby hampering their scope of reasoning abilities.
Another reason that some folks seem unable to arrive at a reasonable answer to a given situation is that they are prone to demonstrate the "knee jerk" syndrome or the "shoot from the hip" response. In other words, they respond to some stimulus with little or no forethought. Very often, folks with this type of response discover that their decision does not result in a positive outcome. There have been a number of phrases that speak to this phenomenon e.g.: "Put mind in gear before putting mouth in motion; Think before you act".
There are some within our society who are expected to react in a "split second" to a situation but at the same time, act with accuracy and appropriately. They are those folks who function within the world of emergency medicine. Whether they work outside a medical facility or within, they must have a large body of knowledge regarding the human body and its functions in order to respond in a manner that will have positive results for whomever and in whatever condition. There is no room for error.
So then, how do we explain the actions, or lack thereof, of our politicians who must certainly be aware of our rather dismal situation but yet seem bent on not responding in an appropriate manner to our plight? Do they consciously or unconsciously employ the "Knee jerk" or "Shoot from the hip" response? Or do they simply lack a sufficient body of knowledge in order to arrive at a solution to the problem? It may even be supposed that they resort to using the "Eeny, Meeny, Miny and Moe" technique to solve what to them, seems an unfathomable situation!!
But wait a minute!! They are not children. They are adults. At least, they have existed within our society for the required number of years to qualify for the position they hold. But just what other qualifications are they expected to posses in order to function appropriately on our behalf? If any of the readers of this blog know of a specific list of qualifications by which an applicant for a position within the political arena must demonstrate an acceptable level of knowledge/understanding, please, please let this writer know where it may be found.
It is generally known that for any position within any organization that provides a product or service, an applicant for any position within that organization must demonstrate a measurable level of understanding of the responsibilities for that position in order to be hired. If he or she fails to demonstrate the expected level of skills, they are simply culled from the list of applicants. If they manage to demonstrate the expected level of skills, they are usually put "on probation" for some period in order to convince the employer they are able to function at an acceptable or superior level within that position. If they fail to "measure up" to expectations, they may be given a "warning" and their probationary period extended. If, after a second
review of their abilities/achievements they are again found to be wanting, they are then sacked.
Unfortunately, within the world of politics however the steps of: "hiring", probationary period; being fully accepted; or being sacked are lacking or at least different than in the "real world" of employment. We may think that we "hire" the political applicant but other than making a mark on a voting form or pulling a lever, do we have any input into the "hiring" process? After being "hired", are we able to look in on our new "employee" to determine if they "measure up" to our expectations? It seems that the only way we are able to obtain even a glimpse of the "employee" is when some article appears in a newspaper that mentions his/her name. Other than that, we remain oblivious to their daily routine. Do they show up on time for work each day? Do they show up at all each day? Are they required to "report" to anyone on some schedule? Does anyone at their location check to see if they are accomplishing anything?
For now, the answers to the above questions will be unanswered. This writer will attempt to ferret out some details on the routine(s) of a newly "hired" political employee and provide some insight so as to allay or alert the reader(s) of the effort. Until then,
Semper Fidelis
Nurse John
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)