Rumsfeld Redefines “Success”

Click on my latest political cartoon, the top one on the left side of this page, called “Success Redefined.” Always, the first victim of war is truth…. At various times, Secretary Rumsfeld has worked hard to redefine the terms, “torture,” “insurgency,” “victory,” “winning,” “enemy,” “mission accomplished,” “terrorism” and other words of war to make them fit his needs. 

Unfortunately, he's also having a hard time figuring out who and what we're fighting, and fighting for. Whose freedom? Whose liberty? Whose democracy? Whose rights? As defined by whom? Mr. Rumsfeld could use some thoughtful coursework in linguistics and ethics. 

The sad thing is that all violence is about fear, terror, hatred–call it whatever you will. As the Buddha once said, “the end of hatred is not hatred, but love.” The 60's hippies used to say “fighting for peace is like fucking for chastity.” It just can't be done. There is no way to peace: peace is the way. 

A just cause cannot justify an unjust (violent) means. We will all suffer some grave injustice in this imperfect new century, but we needn't add to its sum. It's a different way of seeing, yes. But John Lennon took that leap way back in the 60's. Isn't it about time to try to imagine all the world living life in peace? They may say you're a dreamer, but you won't be the only one….

Please write responses to epharmon@adelphia.net . Thank you for your caring and loyalty to the quality of human life everywhere.

 

 

 

 

The Ballad of Harrie and Bushie

The Ballad of Harrie and Bushie

(Various verses, based on Frankie and Johnny, gleaned from the ‘net…. ) 

 

 

Bushie and Harrie were pardners

Oh lordy, how they cleared brush

They swore to be true to each other

Then Bushie gave her the brush

He was her man

But he done her wrong

 

Harrie’s a nice southern lady

Bright as a shiny new dime

Always did good in her law school

Harrie she worked overtime

She's a big-hearted gal

She couldn’t do no wrong

 

Bushie said Harrie’s my pit bull

Good dog in big size six shoes

Harrie did all Bushie asked her

Now she’s left singin’ the blues

Bushie was her man

But he done her wrong

 

Bushie told Harrie he picked her

Now Harrie, she wanted it bad

All of her life she’d been lonely

All of her nights had been sad

Harrie knew her man

He wouldn’t do her no wrong

 

Well Harrie, she knew her business

Worked all her life to make good

But Limbaugh and Kristol they nixed it

They wanted their boys from the hood

They didn’t want Bushie’s gal

They said he got it all wrong

 

Now Bushie he looked at Roe v. Wade

Then o’er on his back Bushie rolled

He put his right hand on the Bible

Swore now he would do what he’s told

Oh, he’s a new man

And he's doing her wrong

 

Bushie told Harrie, I’m leavin’

I’ve stood by your side for too long

Don’t you wait up for me, honey

‘Cuz early next mornin’ I’m gone

I know I was your man

But now I’m doin’ you wrong

 

Poor Harrie she took care of Bushie

Worked nights ‘til quarter to three

Now Harrie's alone in her office

Playin’ Nearer My God to Thee.

He was her man

But he done her wrong

 

I couldn’t tell you no story

I wouldn’t tell you no lie

Ol’ Georgy Porgy ain’t studyin’ no justice

He just wants his puddin’ and pie

He's done kissed that girl

And now he’s makin her cry

 

Now women, this is my story

This is the point of my song

That mean sorry Bushie’s a cold-hearted man

To do his poor pardner so wrong

Yeah, he done that gal wrong

Will he do us all wrong?

 

 

(I agree with President Bush that Harriet Miers has had a distinguished legal career against high odds, and is an admirable, caring woman whose experience and character would have uniquely and valuably contributed to the court and the nation. She should have had a chance to present her case to the nation during the hearings. If President Bush believed that the nomination was his prerogative, and if he felt Miers was right for the court, he owed it to all of us and to her to stand by his convictions, and to stand by his friend….

 

Let me know if you hear of any other good stanzas? epharmon@adelphia.net

 

 

 

 

Do You Know This Man?

Click on my latest posting, a quiz/drawing/political cartoon called “Soldier,” on the left side of this blog…. So what do you think?

epharmon@adelphia.net

Thanks, eppy

 

 

 

Lead Me On, Oh Great Commander in Chief. But Whither?

My favorite new show, Commander in Chief, shows promise for extending West Wing’s visionary qualities, and then some. Too bad Commander also bodes equivalent stumbles along the same dark lines of its predecessor—too much emphasis upon the quick use of military force to resolve diplomatic crises.

 

Military force doesn’t solve problems, it creates them. Will Geena Davis, aka President Mackenzie, learn this while in office? Will Commander showcase the long list of options any nation has to throw at problems, other than the show and/or use of force? Will Commander de-emphasize testosterone-filled approaches, and demonstrate instead the range of strengths any leader, male or female, can find in more “feminine” approaches? The show's producers will be glad to know that I'm awaiting their answers in great suspense….

 

And what if Geena does experience a direct provocation by another government? Why not try really clever media coverage…. What if the American public insists on revenge and retaliation? Try education, forbearance, charity…. What if Americans die? Try rituals of national mourning for fallen martyrs, or any one of the other thousand approaches to diplomacy…. What if there’s a terrorist attack by a known force? Try investigations, and high-level meetings….

 

And keep on trying. Peace and democracy aren’t missions that can be accomplished. They’re missions that never end. You can’t end a war against an abstract noun. Besides, there will always be one more bomb-throwing terrorist to provide an excuse for one more retaliation. I hope Geena teaches us that sometimes you just have to endure a certain amount of injustice—but you almost never have to add to it.

 

What if a woman who is convicted of adultery is about to be buried to her neck in the sand and then stoned to death? Geena could have focused overwhelming international attention on that country’s leaders, and then shipped in thousands of well-paid, white-clad, unarmed international forces of young innocent collegiate pacifists, silent disapproving witnesses to evil deeds, all willing to die for their ideals—just as our current youthful military volunteers are willing to die for theirs.

 

What a moral message this would send! What culture could continue to kill unarmed, disapproving children while an international press looked on? Maybe the poor adulterer would die, but maybe no other adulterers would, the next time. Geena's point would be made, her lesson taught, her stance clarified, her insistence noted. Conversations would be started. Maybe minds would even be changed.

 

We don’t have to do away with our military forces. We can still use them to defend our country from those who would invade our shores or climb with their guns through our windows (I haven’t seen much of this lately, but it could happen…) We can still call up our national guard for times of natural catastrophes.

 

A new, improved Commander in Chief would have a few long-simmering unsolvable conflicts aggravatingly popping up throughout the show’s lifespan. We could watch these conflicts wend their ponderous and circuitous diplomatic ways through the series, in alarming fits and infuriating starts, week after week, year upon year—and each time, see Geena turn down the easy options of violence. We could grow to love the wisdom and expertise of her trusted diplomats, who have already spent half their lives preparing to tackle just such thorny problems, and who will spend the rest of their lives patiently addressing them, instead of mucking them up with ever more violence, leading, of course, to ever more hatred… and violence…and more hatred…and more violence.

 

I don’t want to see any more episodes in which Geena impresses me with fast, decisive, tough and completely hokey short-sighted violent “solutions” which only postpone and ultimately exacerbate the original problems (remember Iraq?) I want to see her impress me with her wisdom, vision, and forbearance. I want to see deliberate, consensus-building, thoughtful international answers bearing the weight of the whole world behind them.

 

I’d like to see well-written episodes dealing with moments of national hysteria over provocations, complete with their inexorable drumbeats in favor of retaliation, revenge and war, and then I want to see Geena demonstrate some of the myriad, no, infinite alternatives to loutish thuggery. Isn’t that what leadership is? Or is it really all about one's readiness to whip out one's six-guns and shoot ‘em up? I don’t think so. C’mon, TV producers, make my day….

 

I’d like to see Geena diplomatically rebuild a couple of really shaky international relationships, offer aid to one of our so-called enemies in their moment of need, implement fair trade rules for globalization…. I want to see her lead, and become even more visionary than she already is.

 

Some day, when Congress gets around to legislating a cabinet-level Department of Peace (H.R 3760 and S. 1756), I look forward to seeing the show belatedly renamed “Commander in Peace.”

 

Some day perhaps we’ll see Geena back again, a full-lipped, swivel-hipped Indian-style crone, still leading her tribe patiently and diplomatically past each new day's conflict toward the greater safety, prosperity and contentment that await us all on the other side.

 

 

 

What Went Down In the Miers Nomination, and What's Up Next in the Hearings?

Bush’s advisors must have momentarily forgotten that their boy-king doesn’t read the newspapers; probably Bush overlooked how desperate right-wingers were to nominate their very own reactionary Supreme being. His advisors also apparently lost track of who it was that first inserted into Bush’s stump speeches all that stuff about nominating a Scalia/Thomas-lookalike. Bush aspired to highest office with hardly a clue about how to thoughtfully select a Supreme Court nominee. With little previous interest in the fine details of constitutional law, he lacked the legal sophistication to distinguish a Scalia from a William O. Douglas.

 

Upon gaining the presidency, however, Bush quickly turned to his small inner circle for the necessary crash courses on foreign policy (Rice) and law (Miers), just as he once turned to his boyhood hero, Cheney, for instruction on how to select a running mate. It’s very likely that, just as Bush learned everything he needed to know (we hope) about geo-strategy from Rice, he has Harriet Miers to thank for his insights into the workings of the Supreme Court.

 

So, based on recent evidence, what did Miers teach George W. Bush?

 

That selection of a Supreme Court justice is a uniquely personal presidential prerogative, as well as a weighty responsibility…

 

…And that someone with the very specific qualities of say, a John Roberts—someone not a partisan ideologue, who loves the law, who is well-trained, accomplished and respected, moderate in temperament and above reproach in his personal life—would be an admirable choice.

 

Miers would also have taught Bush that conservative presidents can reasonably appoint conservative justices, that litmus tests aren’t appropriate, that candidates don’t have to answer questions about their personal and political opinions, and that good justices set aside their own biases, and seek, with each new case, to determine the current law of the land.

 

Bush might also have learned from Miers that, for every thorny case before the Supreme Court, a reasonable legal argument could be made on either side, and that a wise justice resists radically changing accepted law, but rather leaves major legal shifts in direction up to elected lawmakers. If Bush took in the highlights of the Roberts’ proceedings, he no doubt enjoyed hearing distinguished colleagues from both parties echo and affirm his own newly-acquired legal convictions.

 

No minority candidate with anything like Roberts’ sterling qualities appeared on the shortlists, so Bush must have gratefully embraced the idea that Miers would be a good compromise—for the same reasons he believed Roberts to be a sound nominee. Bush probably thought he was cleverly cutting a Gordian knot in  nominating Miers—a woman who (he imagined) would distress no one. Bush’s advisors erroneously had assumed Bush had shortlisted Miers as a professional courtesy, and would not forget where his bread was buttered.

 

Yet Bush has always elevated his most-trusted teachers—Rice, Cheney, and now Miers—because each has taken advantage of their considerable opportunities not only to shape their belatedly conscientious pupil’s thinking, but to successfully persuade his eager blank-slate brain of the soundness of their ideas. Considering our president’s infamous youthful lack of intellectual curiosity and indifference to exploring alternative viewpoints, it’s doubtful he realizes even now that his newly-received pearls of wisdom may in fact be debatable matters of opinion, rather than revealed truth.

 

It’s curious that presidents can be elected with no rigorous public hearings at all (one cannot count elaborately orchestrated debates), yet these same presidents are the very ones given the heavy responsibility of wisely nominating lifetime Supreme Court justices who must jump through elaborate hoops to get themselves confirmed.

 

During the upcoming hearings, Democrats will pacify their constituencies by expressing grave concern over Miers’conservatism, when in truth they’ll be kissing the very ground beneath her feet in gratitude that they weren’t handed a Scalia/Thomas clone. Democrats may even, with some reason, harbor just the teensy-weensiest outside hope that Miers will turn out to be a malleable stealth centrist.

 

It’s both admirable and tragicomic that President Bush so often accidentally buys into the public storylines his cronies elaborately create as cover stories to paper over their less admirable ulterior motives. With respect to Iraq, for instance, Bush actually convinced himself for awhile that his war really was all about democracy, rather than oil, giving his polpals fits as he briefly tried to run the occupation with that primary goal in mind. Now he's gone and gummed up his Supreme Court nominations by equally stupidly buying into the foolish pretense that he was actually supposed to nominate a fair judge.

 

Bush used to submit more humbly to his advisors’ supposed expertise. These days, Bush is apparently contemplating the possibility that he may after all have some small capabilities and experience, and is, indeed, in fact, the president, entrustable tentatively with a few independent decisions. I hope Bush shrugs off all his discredited advisors soon; just as he once picked up several useful approaches from West Wing reruns, I hope during his lame-duck years, Geena Davis will rub some of her moxie off on him, and make him surprise us and himself by going with his gut, jumping right on in—sans old advisors—to do a few things for his fellow citizens, just because they’re the right thing to do.

 

Will Miers be able to handle the tricks and traps that crafty old senators will throw at her with the intention of engineering a nomination do-over? If she’s Supreme Court material, she'll prove herself no slouch by winning over the American public, despite Republican machinations. In fact, the only scenario I can see for the GOP pulling out this big bad ol' disaster to their diehard constituents' complete satisfaction, would be for them to take a contract out on a couple of the current court liberals. Their fates rest….

 

During the upcoming hearings, the GOP will be constrained from coming right out and saying what they really wanted to do, which was to put in place an ideologue whom they could trust to consistently seek out whatever constitutional pretexts were necessary to legally lead the country back to the stone age. They’ll be forced instead to mumble lip-service courtesies to Bush’s candidate, even while scheming to blow her out of the water and replace her with some right wing nut. Democratic senators will also be squirming as they assume the distasteful duty of backhandedly persuading everyone to confirm an avowedly conservative nominee.

 

I hope Miers gets a fighting chance during the hearings to have the American public eating out of her hand before Christmastime. I also hope she gets a new haircut. (I’m not being sexist. John Warner needs one too.)

Stressed, Tired? Overworked? Hate Working?

Some lucky people just love their work. Or they always seem to love to work. Not me. I used to greatly resent the long hours I spent earning a living almost as much as I resisted my long daily list of “Things I Have To Do.”

 

It's not that I'm lazy. I just always thought that working interfered with getting on with my life, learning, and doing what I was supposed to be doing. Now I know that work usually offers just exactly the particular living, lessons, and opportunities I need. And now, more often, I enjoy all the kinds of work I do.  

 

Caveat: I’m now more often able to do work that appeals to me, but I haven’t always been so fortunate.

 

Here’s what I’ve learned about work that has helped me move from (generally) resenting and resisting it, to enjoying it:

 

I’ve learned that putting “work” and “play” into two opposing mental categories (play = good, work = bad) doesn’t reflect reality very well, because so-called “work” can often be very involving, and so-called fun/leisure activities can be quite boring. It all depends on where you're coming from, mentally, as you do the activity.

 

Marketers have pushed hard to convince us of this imaginary dichotomy (work = bad, fun = good) in order to sell us their long list of “leisure” goods and pastimes, such as tourism, food and drink, hobbies, toys and so on. Eventually, consumers started accepting as truth the notion that work is something anyone should want to escape from (to a car! to the boat! to the islands! to drink a Coke!) The idea of working in a cubicle all day started to seem pretty tough after a lifetime of exposure to a barrage of anti-work commercials advocating instant getaways–even though in actuality, cubicles are designed for concentration and privacy and personal creativity, and working in one might just possibly offer something far more interesting than a possibly dull day spent lying on a dock tanning somewhere. It all depends on how you're conditioned to look at it.

 

Some people love gardening (for instance) and spend all their leisure time at it. Others hate it but spend just as much time at it, because it's their job. Both people do the same activities, but because they're coming from different places mentally, gardening is fun to one and work to the other.

 

Mark Twain once attempted to define work as “what a body has to do,” which definition accurately distinguished work from play by focusing solely on where the do-er is coming from. If s/he is coming from a feeling of duty and responsibility, no matter the activity, it becomes “work.” If s/he feels at choice, if the activity feels optional,  the activity becomes play, rest, or relaxation.

 

From a long-term perspective, everyone is always at choice all the time, in everything we do. No one has to do anything at all. On any given day, we can choose to just up and quit and kind of fade away, or die. All we do, all our lives, is make choices, about when and how to die, and about how to spend all the hours we choose to live, in between being born and dying.

 

We need do nothing. Sudden illnesses and accidents prove this frequently, as presidents and slaves take to their beds and the world still goes on. Consider the lilies of the field: they neither toil nor spin, yet Solomon in all his glory was never arrayed as one of these. 

 

However, most people have pretty big life-agendas, so most people stay busy.

 

My husband once pointed out to me that my long list of “Things I Have To Do Today” was in reality a list of all the things I very much wanted to do. Say what?! Like, I want to mow the lawn? Clean the toilet? Pick up the dry cleaning? Yet if someone put a gun to my head and told me that, from now on, I could no longer have clean clothes or bathrooms or a tidy-looking lawn, I’d freak. I want those things in my life. (Actually, someday I’d rather have something more ecologically-sound surrounding me than a lawn, but that’s another story….)

 

What if someone somewhere suddenly walked into my life and prevented me from taking care of my family or friends or possessions, from working, or learning, or exercising, or making any of the myriad choices I currently indulge in as I decide how to spend the few precious hours that make up my life? I’d be pretty mad, despite the fact that he would have effectively relieved me of my daily task list….

 

Last week our local YMCA closed for cleaning. I fretted and whined all week about not being allowed to do my usual workout routine. Hmmm. Usually I complain all week about having to do my usual workout routine. What is fun and what is work depends entirely on where I'm coming from at the moment.

 

Like everyone else, I occasionally get hyper about not doing more of the things on my life list of “Things I Want to Do Before I Die.” But such suffering is mild compared with what I endure when I forget that all the things on my daily “to do” list aren’t merely odious duties and responsibilities that I must somehow grit my teeth and hold my nose and get nobly past; they are exactly the very things I’ve chosen to do, from among all the options I’m currently aware of having, that I most want done.

 

Maybe it would be nice to be wildly wealthy and pay for lots of others to do more of my work. But then I’d have to expend a lot of time and energy managing their help and my money, and I don’t much relish those tasks either. Besides, if the lessons I most need to learn as an individual involve being wealthy, God will help me get there. And until then, he'll have other lessons for me to learn, in other ways….

 

Where we “come from,” mentally and emotionally, as we’re doing work, whatever the tasks, is what makes all the difference. I’ve happily retitled all my daily lists to reflect their more appropriate and accurate reality: now they’re “Things I Want To Do Today,” instead of “Things I Have To Do Today” lists. I work hard to remember, these days, to shift my mind from “I have to” or “I need to” or “I must,” to “I want to.”

 

Along these same lines, whenever my list is long (and it always is) but my schedule flexible (true more often these days than in the past) I’ve learned to ask, given a moment of transition from one task to another, “What do I want to do next?” instead of “What do I have to do next?” The results of this tiny little shift really knocked me out at first. I could hardly believe what a difference this small distinction makes, and I certainly didn’t know the power of this shift until I tried it.

 

To my great surprise, I found that whenever I genuinely asked that question—“What do I want to do next?”—and took a moment to listen/wait for the answer, I always found that the answer was already on my mental list of things I “needed” to do. Surprising. And amazing. Because I had always thought that if I asked such a question honestly, my subconscious mind would leap to answer me with “lie on a Hawaiian beach!” or “take a trailride down a mountainside!” or some such. But no. Not at all.

 

Checking out what I want to do before I begin the next activity always makes the next, “chosen” task much more fun, and certainly lighter. Furthermore, when I get an answer and follow up on it, I often find out that my new day's re-ordered schedule is much more efficient than my merely logical brain could ever have designed. My inspirations are always much cleverer than I am.

 

A related insight about work came to me not long ago while I was pondering the traditional meanings of a religious term, “God’s will.”

 

I used to think that whatever God’s will for me was, it must be something completely different than my own will for me. Probably, in fact, God’s will for me was in direct opposition to my own, me being a miserable sinner and all, with all kinds of disgusting impulses, and him being perfect. Surely our wills would be in complete opposition, considering the devil whispering in my ear and all. God’s will, as I imagined it, had to be something harder, different, and more self-sacrificial than any of my own very-dear-to-my-heart, most-secret wishes. Doubtless, I thought, God wants me to give all that stuff up, give everything I have to the poor, and come follow him to Africa or somewhere, leaving all I love behind.

 

So of course, for a long time, I resisted even asking God The Question (“What is your will for me?”) Being pretty willful already, well, I had plans, and didn’t need anyone adding to my list or crossing out my stuff, particularly not God. I was quite confident that none of his answers would agree with any of mine anyway, so I just didn't ask, hoping he wouldn't notice my modest  omission.

 

Surprise. When I finally did work up the guts to actually ask the question (and now I do it more often, day-to-day, and sometimes even moment-to-moment) I always get the same answer. God wants me to be happy. And he wants me to share my happiness with others. That's it.

 

And the specifics? He helps me with those, too. To my utter amazement and astonishment, I’ve learned that God’s will for me, whether over the long term, or from day to day, is always exactly whatever, on the deepest and highest level, I most want for me, too, at that time. He wants me to do, right now, whatever it is I most want to do right now. Sometimes what I really want to do is so perfect I've reppressed it, but God always dredges it up for me. S/he  just works that way, better than magic.

 

The specific work God recommends of course varies from time to time (and no, I don’t hear voices)—but on the most general level, his will and my will are always the same–to do something, in some small way, that is caring, accepting, supportive, kind, useful. That's the only thing that ever makes me happy, or anyone else, for that matter. And I do so want to be happy.

 

Mother Theresa once said there are no great acts of love, only small acts of great love.

 

Often the urge to “do something helpful” takes the form of caring gently for myself. Hey, I’m God’s beloved child too, even though I sometimes forget that. More often, I’m prompted to continue my efforts for others in some small way. All I ever need to do is to remember to ask the question/s—either one of them—“What do I want to do now?” and/or “What is your will for me?” because when I do, I am lifted back into my overriding purpose, and am more able to hold it in the back of my mind as I work or play or whatever you want to call it, feeling well-supported in my task, and receiving the help I need to get that task accomplished peacefully and well.

 

Staying in the present moment helps a lot too, especially when the present task seems daunting.

 

In the past, no matter what activity I was engaged in, I spent a lot of time fussing that I really should be doing something else. When I rushed through my half-assed approach to mowing the lawn, I would fret that I hadn’t yet had time to read the newspaper and keep up with current events. Later, as I hurriedly scanned the paper, I worried about doing the laundry. Hastily sorting the laundry, I entertained nagging doubts about not getting in my workout. Yet, running down the road later, I obsessed about neglecting my husband. Alone with him at last, I found myself pining for time to myself, but when I was finally alone, I felt lonely and anti-social and wondered if my life was too self-absorbed. So I’d volunteer, and spend my volunteer hours mulling about not having time left over to use my talents or have a creative life….

 

And so on and on, in a stupid endless cycle of never being here and now, never living in the present, but always focusing on how I hadn't been or done “enough” in the past, or else hurrying to have, do or be “more” in the future. Funny, but no one ever worries or frets about anything when they’re focused on their work in the present–only when they’re mulling about, in the past and future, which don’t even exist….

 

In the past, as I rushed to finish the items on my “Have To Do” lists, I often dismissed any possibility of doing anything as well as I could. I mean, why even try, with so many limitations, with so little time and energy to put into any given task, and so many other things to worry about? After all, I reasoned, the results of giving “my best effort” in such a constrained situation would only be embarrassing. So I wouldn't even try. And thus I rarely earned the very real satisfaction that comes with a job well-done, along with its many other rewards. 

 

I've since learned that, even given only a few minutes, one can do one’s best, strive for excellence, focus on one task at a time, stay fully present, pay full attention to each detail, and work hard to appreciate and accept “what is” in that moment. 

 

Alternatively, one can spend those same few minutes rushing around and fretting. In both these instances, the results and the experience of working for those two minutes are totally different. The difference lies always in where I'm coming from–what purpose I’ve given myself, my atttitude toward excellence, and whether or not I recognize that I'm doing something I want to do–or not.

 

I still often fall into these foolish work patterns (old habits die hard) but I’m also gradually retraining my brain to recall and apply my new insights more often, as new challenges arise.

 

I’m also finally learning to “chip away” at goals or tasks, to take very small steps, and to be persistent in sticking with each of them.

 

Sometimes when I feel overwhelmed by all that I want to do (and even when I recognize that I’m the one who’s chosen to do all this stuff) I'll somehow manage to remember to mentally push away the whole big (scary) picture—the long impossibly hard list of undone things—and instead select and focus on just one small piece of one thing, and start “chipping away” at it. When I totally focus on that one small step, staying in the present, paying attention to detail, doing the best job I’m capable of doing at that moment (which is, admittedly, sometimes crap, but then, sometimes crap is my best), then I can accept and appreciate my own small contributions, whatever they are, along with my own fallibility and mistakes, and keep on chipping away at the next task.

 

I’m also getting better about not rushing, pushing or hurrying through work, although I still try to work efficiently and quickly. Again, the differences between these two approaches may seem like very fine distinctions, but the two are really quite different. Again, it’s just a matter of “coming from” a different place, mentally.

 

Whenever I hurry/rush/push, I just feel bad, because each of these words imply negative self-judgments (“You’re not good enough! You’re moving too slowly! You ought to think faster!” etc.) On the other hand, working quickly or efficiently has the different, more positive connotation of focusing firmly upon effecting my task well, without stress or carelessness. I can work quickly and still attend thoughtfully to the task at hand—something I cannot do when I’m rushing past the present moment toward some vague future urgency.

 

I learned another helpful work-related tip when training for a marathon: the process of getting there, of doing the actual work itself, that leads up to the goal, is almost always far more satisfying than the final achievement of the goal itself. True, I loved the day of the marathon; it was fun, exciting, exhilarating. But when I looked back afterward, what I really loved most of all was the training, all the good and bad and in-between workouts I got through during the months leading up to the marathon.

 

So—as all the wise sages know and express, but as I somehow was very slow to “get” on any personal level for such a long time–happiness is not something you find at the end of a journey, but rather, contained within the journey itself. Of course it’s fun to achieve success, but after a brief moment or a day or at most a week of exhilaration, such happiness wears off, and you just move on to the next challenge. Nearly all the fun, all the meaning, the involvement, all the interest lies in the long trip itself, not in the destination. So nowadays, once I’ve decided on a goal, I let go of it, stop thinking about it, and instead focus my attention on chipping away at that day’s or that moment’s work.

 

Another other good thing I've learned about a steady focus on “process” (rather than on the end-point) is that the final product, the result, usually turns out to be better too….

 

From my husband's example, I've learned that persistence in the face of huge challenges and overwhelming obstacles is not necessarily, as I was raised to believe, a foolish consistency–something maddening and frustrating, to be avoided at all costs. Difficulties had always been signals for me that, whatever my chosen task, it was now clear that it was inappropriate from the start, and so was no longer worth pursuing.

 

No.

 

My husband loves challenges. When he gets one, he lowers his head threateningly, snorts loudly, bellows, and paws the ground thunderously with a glint of fierce joy in his eyes (well, metaphorically speaking, anyway.) He loves it when someone tells him he can’t do something. It makes him laugh. His whole body visibly shifts, readying for action. He loves it when a task is impossible, because for him, impossible takes just a little longer. Challenges energize and focus him, probably because his past persistence has been so well-reinforced by his past successes (and yes, he’s had some failures too, has had to finally give up a time or two, too.) But overall, the harder and more challenging the work, the more he enjoys it. All this came as an amazing revelation to me who grew up with the attitude that if something was difficult, obviously I had picked the wrong task for my talents, and needed to drop it and choose something else to do.

 

My husband has also taught me by example that a good way to work harmoniously with others is to work hard to make them successful, and also, to help them with what is most important to them (which, to my surprise, is not the same for everyone, and rarely what I would want most, but instead, varies greatly from person to person.) Observing his experience with this, I’ve noticed that most of the many people he has taken the time to understand, help, and support, later have come through for him when he needed them the most.

 

He’s also taught me something about myself that is probably generalizable to most people—that I’m happiest when I stay busy. I used to rush through my long lists of tasks in order to get a moment to relax and escape from them (and I still enjoy napping and reading.) But for the most part, these days, I try to stay busy and productive. I find staying busy works best all around for me in a lot of different ways.

 

I'm also learning not to worry about what I leave undone. Even when I try my best to follow all the above “rules,” some important things just don’t get done. But a lot of other things do. And I’m learning to be OK with that kind of imperfect result. Because the depressing fact is, well, ummm, I’m human. (How embarassing.) Which means I’ll never do anything perfectly or to my complete satisfaction, and that’s OK, as long as I know I did my (often meager) best at the time (an important condition!) To err is human (to my surprise), and I’ve recently decided to humbly give up the good fight and join the human race. Learning to be more accepting of others’ imperfections has helped me become a lot easier on myself.

 

Regular exercise is never selfish. In fact, it’s the most unselfish way you can spend time in your life, along with ingesting wisely, getting a good night’s sleep, and prayer—because you are more able to help both others and yourself when you feel good.

 

The most tiring thing in the world is the stress of constant judgment, whether it’s directed toward yourself or toward others. Whenever I'm feeling very resistant—about myself, others, or the way the world is, no matter how routine my work of the moment may be, I'm soon exhausted. So one key to peace of mind and relaxation at work (and at play, if I must continue to make such distinctions) is to find new ways to let go of my resistance to others, to myself, and to the way things are in this best of all possible worlds. When I can find my acceptance again, I always return to every task with renewed appreciation for it and for everything and everyone, including myself.

 

Here’s what else I’ve learned about feeling tired when working: I rest or do something else, briefly, when I can, or at least take a moment to take three long deep slow breaths. I also try to avoid rushing through the present moment in my hurry to get to anticipated rest/reward/relaxation/escape, or to different tasks. Mr. Tortoise was right. Mr. Hare was wrong, remember? He collapsed in exhaustion and never got the job done? A steady work pace offers me a much more productive and peaceful routine than rushing-and-resting-and-rushing-and-resting.

 

I enjoy my life so much more these days as I’ve gained control over my various addictions. Alcohol, caffeine, nicotine, drugs, and food addictions gradually increase body tension and inevitably work against anyone's ability to enjoy work.

 

Transitions between tasks often challenge me. I'm too tempted to want to hold onto the excitement of my last accomplishment. Although it's always wise to step back and admire my own small achievements and pat myself on the back before moving on, I mostly need to keep moving on. I read somewhere recently that someone has a computer screensaver that says, “What’s Next???” in bold letters. Whoever he is, he has learned to keep on moving, to go on and take the next step, no matter how small. The present always holds new gifts, very different from the gifts of the past. (That’s why they call it “the present….”)

 

Whenever I’m working, it helps me to remember what the purpose of all my busy-ness is. What is my overriding goal in life, in general, as well as my goal for each specific task I do? The only goal that will ever be satisfying to me or to anyone is always the same one, although it has many faces and many names. Some call it God, others call it peace or truth. Sometimes it’s called service, or kindness, or love, or healing, or joy, or oneness or giving. All are exactly the same goal, shining in all its many different facets. Whenever I’m clear about my purpose as I begin each task, that task goes well and easily. Whenever I lose sight of my goal, or have some other goal in mind, then things don’t go so well.

 

And what if my current task seems somehow beneath me, unworthy, uninteresting, or radically different from what I would prefer to be doing?

 

Our culture puts a lot of importance on choice in career, vocation, avocation, i.e., in what we spend our time doing. And since we change a lot as we grow older, and learn more about ourselves, and for all the other reasons it’s so hard to change directions in life, we often feel stuck in work that doesn’t feel right for us.

 

It is indeed a wonderful thing to be able to do what your heart is pulling you toward. But when I feel I can’t choose that for now, when I feel compelled to work at something which isn’t anywhere near my first choice of activities, I can always make it more interesting, more worthwhile, and more involving by investing my love and time and best efforts and attitudes in it.

 

My favorite example of this approach is the very nice plumpish lady who runs the bus station in our town. When I first entered her mostly-empty station, I thought about how I’d hate such a boring, scary sort of job. But each time I go there, she is so efficient and kind, so courteous and warm to the regulars who come and go, so helpful and thoughtful with each newly confused customer…. The whole place simply shines with her attention. Her beautiful plants adorn each sunny window. She does her job as well as anyone could do it, and she enjoys her day because she extends her quiet, unassuming and gentle kind of love and intelligence and effort to every person who walks in the door. Since she recently (uncomplainingly) lost a leg to diabetes, she has found new resourceful ways to make the necessary adaptations to continue her cheerful work.

 

We’re given the tasks before us for a reason. It’s impossible to be in the wrong place or at the wrong time, for the universe always offers us exactly the lessons we need to learn right now (and when we don’t use the present opportunity to learn them, well then, the universe will offer them to us again, and soon, in another form. So we might as well get on with it.)

 

I try to remember to jump in when something not-my-favorite just has to get done. I try to use the moment to learn, grow, and do my best no matter what it is I have before me, trusting that other doors will open, and other challenges will appear after I’ve learned to do this job well. What I’m doing right now is what I most need to be doing, as long as I’m doing it the best I can. I cannot be but in the right place at the right time. There are no accidents.

 

It also helps to remind myself that I’m not punching a temporal time-clock anymore. With my newfound perspective of having all of eternity to get things right (however “eternity” may look—no one knows) these days I relax more, feel less rushed and hurried. (But I’d still rather learn to be happy sooner, and to share my happiness sooner, so I still try to get on with it.)

 

It’s also relaxing to remember that mistakes are OK with God, and with everyone else too, no matter what others say or act like, because they've made them too, and will make more of them. And the higher up the career ladder they go, the bigger their new mistakes will be, and the more they'll make. Messing up big-time is what being human is all about—that, and learning from our mistakes, and moving on to our next (usually harder) lessons. I see nothing in nature or in the nature of God (although I see much in formal religion) that condemns anyone for their mistakes, and I see great rewards inherent in learning from them, and moving on.

 

I’m dearly loved by God exactly as I am. He made me exactly as I am because that’s the way he meant for me to be—fallible. As the saying goes, God don’t make no junk. With this eternal—and eternally “forgiven”—perspective in mind, I’m much less likely to rush around trying to make up for my far-less-than-perfect past or worry about some vague future. If it’s enough for God that I relax and focus on the task at hand, it’s enough for me, too.

 

God never ever gives up on anyone. The life he gives us is about just-keep-on-truckin’, and he gives us all the time and help we'll need (if we ask him) to do whatever he wants us to do. God never goes away mad, although we often do. He just keeps on waiting around until we come back around to him.

 

My family teases me because I've always been one to keep on making (and raving on and on about) all these great astounding new spiritual discoveries that revolutionize my life—but really, they’re always just the same old rehashed ones, reappearing over and over in different guises. It’s just that I forget about them for awhile, and then I get excited about them when they come up again, all reinforced and seemingly brand shiny-new. God has been so very patient with my comings and goings.

 

I sometimes think dogs are the special creation that God gave us, to teach us what unconditional love really means. God always greets me upon my return to him in just the same way my darling joyous little spaniel Tally greets me when I come home–even when I’ve just stepped on his tail coming hurriedly in the door, and oops, I forgot to feed him, and drat, I’m late, so he’s suffered the indignity and disgrace of having to pee on the floor. What the hell, he says, hey, you’re the greatest! Wow! I sure love you! YAY you’re HOME! With God and his children, it’s always all about “what’s next?” and never about whatever happened before we came home again.

 

Trying to use your special talents if you can (and we all have some) is always a good idea. What are they? They’re all those abilities you’ve always taken for granted, all the abilities you devalued, the ones you were certain couldn’t be all that wonderful because they were always somehow just there, without much effort on your part. People always told you that you were good at them, and to be sure, most other people weren’t so often good at them. All those overlooked  and under-appreciated gifts you tended to denigrate and blow off? Yes, them. They're your talents. You have them.

 

Whenever I’ve developed and used my talents in service to some small slice of humanity, in some small way, it has always been so very satisfying. My gifts were given me for a very special (often unfathomable) reason. So were yours. And someday, looking back, we'll both know why.

 

On the other hand, no one, ever, ever (ever) who ever achieved anything remarkable, whether it be in a career or in any other field of endeavor–whether the work involved special talents or no particular aptitude at all–no one has ever achieved any level of success without a whole lot of struggle, many difficult tradeoffs, very long hours, and a lot of hard hard work. Just because a person has talent, just because they have a real interest, or really really want to do or be or have something, or just because they’re a whiz-kid and a natural wunderkind, doesn’t mean they still won’t have to overcome incredible challenges to reach success in their chosen field or in their chosen goals. This applies to whatever anyone wants most, whether it’s a successful marriage, a career, a lifestyle, an education, spiritual growth, whatever. A lot of life is about tradeoffs, and we'll someday know what was important to us, when we look back at our lives and see where we put our time….

 

Similarly, just because something apparently costs me an unreasonable number of hours or days or years of struggle to achieve, doesn’t mean I’ve chosen the wrong goal or career, or whatever. It only means that I am toughing through all the necessary work it takes to grow into an ever-more useful and happy person, meeting challenges, enduring a thousand failures and mistakes and kicks in the face—just like all the great leaders who have ever lived. Study Lincoln sometime if you want to read a long history of disastrous and heartbreaking failures, right up until the time he became President (and sadly, even after that.) Our greatest leaders aren't perfect. What they are is willing.

 

I’m trying to learn to persevere, for when I do, I find plenty of opportunities for renewed humility and the new wisdom that accompanies each temporary setback, along with the reinforcement that comes with renewed purpose and commitment. Perseverence through difficulties will help me become that much more productive and effective and useful and marketable than I ever was before. God never closes a door without opening a window.

 

I haven’t yet learned to apply all this stuff consistently, or in all situations, and I never will (at least not in this lifetime….) But I'm chipping away at it, and am much enjoying this joyous and rewarding lifetime process. I’ve come a long way toward becoming a happier, more productive, and less stressed-out worker.

 

This particular missive, howevr, has gone on way too long, and I've missed my workout and I'm late in making dinner and I'm stressed out and tired.

 

But happy. So herein endeth my tale.

 

 

Hurricane Katrina – A Convenient Scapegoat Arrives Just in Time to Rescue President Bush

I’m frustrated. And not just by the tragedy that past political indifference has exacerbated in New Orleans, or by the obvious fact that the U.S. is as ill-prepared for serious trouble at home as it is anywhere else in the world, or even by the fact that–well before Katrina–the U.S. economy was, if not on the verge of disaster from gross mismanagement, then at best, going to hell in a hand basket.

 

I’m frustrated because I thought all of President Bush’s chickens were finally coming home to roost.

 

All that money his Republican cronies made off of 9/11 fears, all the profligate sums paid into their friendly war machine’s gaping, indiscriminate maw—on technology and bodyguards and spying and weapons and occupations and war and all the other security approaches that shore up every engine of war profitability and make us all less secure, all that expensive marching off to all corners of the earth to push people around and tell them what to do—I thought all that bad business had finally caught up with them.

 

They’ve soaked the poor and given gobs to the rich. They’ve neglected the environment. They’ve failed to create good jobs. They’ve exacerbated the energy crisis. They’ve propped up favored industries and neglected others. They’ve endangered our economy by irritating people all over the world, who finally wearily resist buying American whenever they can, and take their vacations elsewhere.

 

For once, I thought, all their stupid policies were going to land squarely on their own doorstep.

 

Then along came Hurricane Katrina.

 

And now all of sudden, none of it is anybody’s fault. Our administration’s hands are tied—by Katrina.

 

Without a doubt, Katrina has added immeasurably to the many enormous problems that the U.S. already had before the storm turned her wrathful face upon our citizens.

 

But along with her destruction, Katrina has provided President Bush and his Republican pals the perfect blanket excuse for every failure that was about to be firmly laid to their door.

 

The budget deficit? Unimaginable government overspending? Blame it on Katrina.

 

Our ill-conceived war going badly? Sorry—must divert our efforts to Katrina

 

Dysfunctional international relationships? Too distracted by Katrina.

 

Health care collapsing? Gotta spend the money on Katrina.

 

Lack of energy reform and high heating oil and rising gas prices everywhere? Katrina.

 

Global environmental catastrophes and dangers at every hand? Katrina.

 

Crumbling national infrastructure? Katrina.

 

Underfunded education? Katrina.

 

Terrorism? WMDs and weapons proliferation? Katrina. (Say what?!)

 

Stock market tumbling, real estate buckling, economy faltering? Katrina.

 

For years, the Republican administration has neglected domestic problems and aggravated international ones. Now it’s too late to do anything about any of them.

 

Because, you know. Nature’s power and unpredictability and all that. Shrug shrug. Wink wink. Because…. You know.  

 

Katrina.

Complexity, Democracy and War: Are We Learning Yet?

I’ve always admired President Bush’s best qualities. He courageously takes on huge responsibilities, works hard and does his best. Beneath his learned-from-Reagan pseudo-cockiness lies a real humility about his own abilities. George Bush cares deeply and perseveres courageously, despite setbacks.

 

Mr. Bush ran for office, not because he had a high impression of himself, but because he is a man of strong convictions and ideals (with gaping gaps, but that’s a different, also human, story.) One of his convictions is that God wants him to lead this country.

 

Another Bush conviction is that democracy is a good thing. Which is a hard one for him, since he’s not sure what democracy means, and his most trusted advisors, allies and supporters care far less about democracy than about power, money, and control.

 

President Bush also works really hard to learn. But it’s hard to learn when you’re convinced  you’re a dummy, and that it's in your country’s best interest for you to close your eyes and hold your ears (and nose) and trust “wiser” advisors—while those same advisors are doing their best to make sure you don’t ever figure out what’s going on.

 

Someone once said, “War is God’s way of teaching Americans geography.” The war in Iraq has also been God’s way of teaching George W. Bush complexity. He came into office a black-and-white kinda guy, and now finally “gets” that things aren’t always as simple and straightforward as he thought they were. He’s not unintelligent, but he does have a lot to unlearn.

 

He’s finally seeing the costly failures and mistakes of his administration’s policies, despite the heavy screen provided by Rumsfeld, Rove, Rice—the protective coterie whom Cheney long ago hand-picked to guard his prized boy-king.

 

Bush is finally noticing, if only in peripheral vision, the whole big tragic stinking wasteful mess that his cronies have created in the Middle East. And he’s finally asking hard questions of his inner circle, and even better, stepping outside of that circle for advice. He’s actually talking directly with—and even asking questions of—a wide range of players from all sides of the political spectrum who have lived in and/or studied the Middle East all their lives.

 

No doubt he’s amazed by what he’s learning. He probably thinks all the fascinating detail he’s finding out about is all new to everyone else, too. I mean, like, revelatory, man. I mean, like, who knew? If all this stuff was common knowledge, surely a president would have heard about it? He probably hasn’t the slightest clue that most of the nation’s intellectuals and scholars have been screaming all this “new” stuff at him for decades, but could never get through his filters.

 

None of that matters anymore. What matters now is that a very powerful president is finally “getting” some things he didn’t know before. It matters that he wants to understand, and that he wants to help. It matters, in short, that he’s grown up.

 

He’s reaching out now, finally, not in panic, not in guilt, but as calmly and courageously as he has taken all his other actions, no matter how misguided. I admire his caring and courage tremendously, because he has a lot to answer for. For now though, he has a hard job, and he’s trying to do it well. But to do it, he’ll have to overcome a lot of opposition from within his own ranks.

 

President Bush does have one small advantage over his nervous homeboys and girls. Surprise–he almost forgot–he's the president. He can do and say whatever he wants. (That is, unless some threatened, demoted or demented ex-lackey takes a notion to silence or blackmail him. We hope not.)

 

To Mr. Bush’s credit, Hussein is safely behind bars (though god knows what to do with him next.) And Mr. Bush finally seems to get that the U.S. will have to stand in line to buy oil like everyone else. And that throwing money and might at Iraqi ghosts won’t stop WMDs or decrease terrorism….

 

So now—how to pull his soldiers out of Iraq? (Yes, George Bush does cry at night for the soldiers and their families, and maybe even for Iraqis too.)

 

And before he can do that, how to fix Iraq? (Yes, Colin Powell did make it clear before he left who was about to break it.)

 

And then there’s that democracy thing. George W. Bush really really likes democracy.

 

So President Bush is very busy these days trying to figure out what real democracy might look like in Iraq, while his cronies are busy committing hari-kari over their formerly-malleable President’s newly uncontrollable idealism and apparent abandonment of their precious dreams of gold and empire.

 

Maybe someday President Bush will even notice that his own beloved U.S. isn’t a democracy anymore (although it’s a more reasonable facsimile thereof than some countries.) Maybe someday George Bush will even try to do something about fixing that problem.

 

But until then, first things first. It’s enough that our struggling president, looking squarely at Iraq’s anguish, is trying to figure out what democracy means, at all.

 

It’s a start.

 

 

 

Bush Wake Up Call – A Short Suess-like Rhyme by Eppy

Bush Wake Up Call

 

 

You’ll have to shout louder;

            I don’t want to know.

Experts and eggheady wonks,

            Will you go?

 

I really can’t hear you.

            I’m waiting to sup.

I don’t care to listen.

            My mind is made up.

 

I long ago tuned out

            All facts that don’t fit.

Your smartypants theories

            Don’t matter a whit.

 

You’ll have to yell louder.

            Sorry, I’m noddin’.

I’m just not impressed.

Enter, bin Laden.

 

 

I wrote this a year ago and forgot about it…. Too bad it's still just as relevant today…..

 

 

 

 

Alternately Stuffing and Starving Our Kids: A Very American Dilemma

I often see articles about new ways to stuff our kids with the many required daily servings of nutritionally different foods. Just as often, I read articles about our increasingly obese, bulimic, and anorexic children. We’re raising fat children obsessed with thinness. This is a very American problem.

 

Pressured by the food industry, we promulgate impossible-to-use nutritional guidelines advising ridiculous daily diets, as if we can’t be trusted to eat a little bit of  banana one day and some apple slices the next? A little meat or cheese or soy once or twice a week and a changing daily vegetable? A handful of nuts and grains here and there? Tell us that we need a healthful variety of foods weekly or monthly and we’ll offer our families inexpensive, logistically possible, non-fattening meals.

 

Our poor confused young mothers think if they don’t offer their kids snacks on demand, they’re child abusers. Why do we let opportunistic advertisers badger us into confusing a reasonable demand for a little food-discipline and postponement of gratification, with starvation and cruelty?

 

In my childhood home, we were offered as much as we cared to eat, three times a day, of a healthful, balanced meal, along with as many snacks as we might want in between meals—so long as those snacks were apples or whole-wheat bread (both so available as to be boringly unappealing; we ate them only when we were really hungry. Well. Duh?) Did we get enough to eat? Hmmmm. I do recall a time or two arriving at the next meal absolutely voracious, polishing off whatever was on my plate, and asking for more. This was a problem? My parents raised four slim, healthy, active daughters.

 

My father’s rather original hypothesis was that our long evolution as hunter-gatherers generated babies and children who were hard-wired to distinguish early and instantly which foods were unsafe–by attentively watching others eat. Armed with this theory, my parents made a good show of enthusiastically exclaiming, smiling, and smacking their lips delightedly over healthful food. They also led the family in joyful, admiring cheers whenever one of us bravely ate her required three teensy bites of unfamiliar food.  Nowadays parents only give their children attention for not eating. This makes sense?

 

My parents offered no sweets or desserts except on birthdays and holidays, so their hungry girls learned to enjoy all kinds of veggies, fruits, meats, nuts, and grains, along with a diversity of ethnic foods. Although I  learned (after I left home) to put my foot down over eating obvious body parts like eyeballs and tentacles, I still gobble up with gusto anything disguised and unnamed.

 

Raising my own young family, I breast-fed on demand and offered watered-down juice and ground-up baby food from my plate. I worked hard to keep my daughters cheerfully occupied while gradually stretching out times between meals. I didn’t offer quick carbs or sweets, so sugar crashes weren’t a problem–and even then, there was always that ubiquitous apple….  We limited ourselves to a few hours of public television a day, so food advertising was not a problem. I am proud to have raised two slim daughters.

 

We’re a nation of fat people for good reason: we don’t trust our own common sense, but instead let ourselves be over-influenced by those who stand to gain from our choosing unwise and unhealthful approaches. Our children are doubly victimized: by our bad examples, and by media temptations and modern fears which preclude their free play outdoors. Sensible media regulation, along with a solid public media campaign re-introducing such old-fashioned concepts as gluttony and common sense might make a dent in our national waistline. Until then, we are certainly the laughing stock of the rest of the world, which sees Americans as pigs greedily ruining our own health while ignoring the malnutrition and starvation of others. Or at least, they would be laughing, if the whole thing weren’t just so damned tragic.