Notes on Change.

I'd like to make just a few observations.

We've all seen the "Only Change is Constant" bumper stickers.  And yes, change is constantly occurring.  But I think our perception that "everything" changes is part of our downfall.  Not everything changes, but most things change considerably over the course of time which leads us to believe that literally our whole world is adjusting and adapting.  Please see a small sample of things that do not change, despite being adjusted slightly:

1. If you have a boyfriend who is a crappy boyfriend.  Changing his status in your life, from boyfriend to baby daddy, is not going to change the adjective before his title.  Let's have some self-respect, ladies.

2. If you are in a particularly glum stage in your life changing your status to find support within your online social network is not going to change the fact that your actual lifestyle needs an adjustment.  Get off your behind and go do something to make a change, don't just wait for it to inevitably fall on your head and give you another excuse to be a victim of circumstance.

3. Changing the nouns used in your insult does not change the fact that it is a fact-less claim.  Calling me a "racist" one day and "small minded" the next still doesn't provide me with any, either quantitative or qualitative, corroborating evidence.

4. Changing the skin color of your President doesn't change the way politicians, and the whole political landscape, operate.  If only it were that easy.

 That is all.



 

If it looks like a duck...

...and it walks like a bailout, and it talks like a bailout.  Don't put a cow costume on it and think that I'm stupid enough to think it's a "Jobs Plan". 

And while we're on the subject... the "Buffett Rule," really?  Let's have everyone who's making more than a million dollars sacrifice more of their income in order to support a culture of give-aways that is enabling millions of people to be lazy, do-nothing, moochers. 

Let's use this amazing research tool that gives us billions of pieces of information at the touch of a button and do some research.  It is an absolute myth, an urban legend, a wives tale, call it what you will, but rich people paying the least amount of tax is a populist's lie.  And look, when you move past the emotional fear-mongering and marketing ploy to make you believe that you're being subjugated by millionaires, there is actually quantitative evidence to prove it.  It's something that those on the government waybill would like to believe because it gives their victimhood credibility.  But it's a lie.  Read 'em and weep.

Now, go get your own job, make your own damn money, and save it. 

How to Be a Psychopath

There is news about the 2012 Presidential election everywhere you turn.  And, true to form, the media is tearing apart every single one of the candidates bit by bit so even the slightest gaffe becomes a faux pas of galactic proportions.

Everyday I receive a "Today's Top Stories" e-mail from PwC's central office and on 6September the "Must Read" at the bottom (which is always the best one because it's the story that's the most light-hearted and usually just for fun) was titled One in 25 business leaders 'could be a psychopath'.  Here's a snippet that explains the headline:

As many as one in 25 company bosses could be a psychopath, according to a new study.
Psychopaths are defined by their lack of moral instincts, but many are able to hide this by a natural ability to charm and manipulate both their seniors and subordinates.
While some psychopaths are outwardly aggressive and destructive, factors like a happy upbringing can help others to mimic colleagues and fit in at work.
The capacity of the 'successful psychopath' to identify and outwardly display the qualities corporate leaders admire helps them climb the career ladder quickly despite being poor managers.
This makes it virtually impossible to tell the difference between a psychopath and a genuinely good boss, leading psychologists said in a BBC Horizon programme to be screened on Wednesday.


Essentially, psychopaths are excellent at emulating what they see as model behavior and convincing everyone around them that they are genuinely great leaders with a resume to back it up.  I got to thinking, "Hmm, I wonder if there are any major politcal figures I can think of who look and talk the part but have a really hard time walking the part?" 

And then I stumbled on this gem in the Wall Street Journal (which I love, by the way).  How to Look and Act Like a Leader explains how adopting an "executive persona" can help you advance yourself through the business ranks.   

So, is WSJ trying to breed psychopaths?

No, I decided, they're not.  What they're doing it trying to help people who have genuine abilities to be more aware of what they are non-verbally communicating to the rest of the world.

However, how many politicians are there that have no abilities what so ever but a slew of advisors providing them with all of the answers so they can play the politician?  So they look the part?

I know, I sound like a conspiracy theorist.  But I think it's important to point out that people with a flawless image... they might not be real people.  Apparently studies have proved they could just be psychopaths who are excellent at picking out the best qualities in people and emulating them.  And now I get to the point where I tell you why I've written the worlds longest introduction to get down to my actual point.

I like my politicians with a few mistakes.  I like them to occasionally pronounce something wrong when they're a little nervous, I like for them to forget the microphone is on when they're swearing, I like to think that they, too, cannot eat spaghetti without getting sauce on their last clean white shirt.  I want a real person to be our President.  I want someone who is extraordinary at what they do, but still an actual human being underneath it all.  I don't want someone to be the Great Pretender.

I haven't chosen who I'll be voting for yet.  In fact, I haven't even seen the most recent debate yet (we have to load them on YouTube to watch them).  But when I do make a decision and decide to plaster their name, with all sorts of positive connotations, all over my blog, you can bet it will be because I feel like I can trust them with my rights and freedoms, and at the same time believe that they'd be the kind of person I  could sit and have a laugh with over coffee.

It's so easy to pretend.  With our online communities giving us a buffer and all the tools to be our own personal PR team, is it too much to ask for a President who doesn't prove the statistic?