It seems hypocritical to me that the GOP were all over Bill for his sexual philandering, but have kept mum about Trump’s. They should be consistent. Either don’t let it bother them when any body does it, or be bothered when anyone, regardless of party, does it. They don’t attack him for his multiple marriages, his cheating on at least two wives, children by multiple mothers, etc. But you know they’d attack anyone else who did that. What’s wrong with them?
Regarding Melania Trump’s speech at the 2016 Republican National Convention: I’m not mad at her personally.
Do I think there was plagiarism?
Do I think it’s her fault?
I’m not mad at her personally — I think, honestly, she probably didn’t write her speech. (Even thought she said she did, but she did say she got a little help.) The speech writers probably interviewed her and then wrote the speech for her. I’ve read some articles about why they like to parade out the wife. They are the “humanizers” of their husbands.
There was no doubt some incredibly poor vetting of the speech and I’m really surprised that I haven’t heard of speech writers being fired instantly.
I jokingly wrote to a Facebook friend: “rhaps the Rick rolling speech writers are secret Democratic spies sent to derail the RNC!!!! LOL. Which, actually, I hope is kind of the case.” However, I must say that I thought her delivery of the speech was pretty good.
Ultimately, this is what gets me though. If she was the wife of a Democratic nominee, the Republicans would be all over her for the nude photos, the lack of morals, her obvious lack of depth. They’d be all over her for being raised in a Communist country and possibly being a Communist spy. They’d be looking into Ivanka Trump for the same reason. If the Donald was a Democrat, the Republicans would be having a field day with him — his financial troubles, his bankruptcies, his three marriages, and the fact that his children have different mothers. Isn’t that what they complain about minorities doing? Having children with different partners? It’s so all hypocritical to me.
Be encouraged just to be with your pain—do not try to rid yourself of it—and allow kindness and compassion to surround it. Paraphrased from: http://tinybuddha.com/blog/self-compassion-learning-to-be-nicer-to-ourselves/
Yes. Hard to do. But worthy of the effort of trying. If you have compassion and acceptance for others, then you deserve that for yourself. You do not see yourself the same way that others see you. Others no doubt see you as wonderful and worthy. You probably do not see yourself that way. I know I don’t. It is hard to accept one’s own worth and essential worth sometimes.
But work and meaning and goal and purpose take us (take ME) somewhere meaningful. It is difficult to see ourselves as necessary, but we of course ARE NECESSARY.
I know that you can think of at least one person that you are necessary for. My person has always been my son: for the past 18 years I have been necessary for him. He has needed me in a very fundamental way. What has often motivated me to be good, healthy, well-adjusted is knowing that he needs a parent who embodies all those qualities. I am therefore HIGHLY MOTIVATED TO BE ALL THOSE THINGS. 🙂
I think the key to having a purpose in life is finding a reason to be your best self.
This is a thought based off of a very recent conversation I had. I.e. just a few minutes ago.
About people thinking they can just diss you or threaten you or ruin your life because you are not real to them. They forget that there are real people on the other end of the conversations.
So as a result people think “oh so-and-so was a bitch/asshole and said something stupid, ignorant and pissy. So we are going to ruin their lives completely.”
Well NO. is that a real way to be with someone? There’s a PERSON on the other end who is saying whatever and you have to mind whether they are saying what you THINK they are saying or maybe something else that you are just getting plain wrong about them
You could always just ask kindly, “hey what do you mean by that???”
Hey give people some benefit of the doubt okay??
So here is an example of what I am talking about (personally) I pissed off some people online and they decided to be immature about it and threatened to call my church about it, saying they would tell my church they should not accept me as a member any more. OMG. How immature. I’ve been with this church for 15 years. People in it can love me or hate me. People could call up and tell the minister or staff what a shit person I am based on my online behavior and whether they agree with me or not. BUT…in the end please judge me on whether yo u think I have been an honorable person or not, an ethical person or not. Judge me for being myself.
I don’t think you have to be “in love” to have a good marriage, but love and care and solid friendship are, in my mind, essential. If I were to define “in love” I might say that euphoric, ecstatic feeling that one has when one is with someone for whom one feels in love with; one can also have that same feeling for a beloved pet or activity (have personally felt this in love feeling for people, pets, activities). I currently have this in love feeling for my son and my pets.
I’ve seen many good marriages between people who love each other, are friends, but have also done what I think of as “coming to terms with each other.” Where they see each other as a couple and as part of a larger family, but they have also come into their own as individuals and don’t need that special togetherness or “coupleness”.
Just reminding people that it’s not us that elects the president… It’s the Electoral College. A president can win the popular vote but can lose the election. Last time that happened was the Bush – Gore election of 2000. Gore won the popular vote, but the Electoral College chooses the president.
Even though the aggregate national popular vote is calculated by state officials, media organizations, and the Federal Election Commission, the people only indirectly elect the president, as the national popular vote is not the basis for electing the president or vice president. The President and Vice President of the United States are elected by the Electoral College, which consists of 538 presidential electors from the fifty states and Washington, D.C.. Presidential electors are selected on a state-by-state basis, as determined by the laws of each state.
My thought (or mantra) for today: “I am motivated to love, be loved, express love, and discover love.”
Yesterday over lunch I had a small conflict with a friend where I commented to her that I felt like I was irritating her a lot lately and that she was criticizing me. I know what was irritating her: the fact that at lunch, I tend to micro-manage what’s going on. I’m mother henning, I’m herding them. It irritates her. I don’t blame her for being irritated. I’m completely aware of what I’m doing.
So yesterday, we had a large group of people and we had to have two separate tables, and so I was trying to make sure everyone knew we had two tables and get everyone seated. Also, while we were waiting, the hostess kept asking us not to congregate in front of her hostess stand. So at one point I made motions for everyone to move away from the stand and my friend got really upset with all my motioning. I think she thought it was directly aimed at her, which of course it was not.
There was another lunch that we all had where one person was upset at where she was sitting, she changed places a couple of times, was still upset with her location, and I think I made some kind of comment to her along the lines of needing to “make do” with her seating arrangement….and my friend who has been irritated with me talked very firmly with about just letting people be. I guess she’s right….I probably should just let people be.
So what does this have to do with LOVE? I think I need to consider that LOVE might mean a better acceptance of people’s behavior, issues, quirks, dynamics, etc. That loving a person or a group of people doesn’t mean mother henning them. Or being brutally honest with them. That I should back off of micro-managing group dynamics.
“The nature of the Universe is Love.” Do you agree or disagree? What do you think is the nature of the Universe? Does the Universe even have a “nature”?
the basic or inherent features of something, especially when seen as characteristic of it.
“helping them to realize the nature of their problems”
synonyms: essence, inherent/basic/essential qualities, inherent/basic/essential features
A friend wrote back to me on this and said: “No. Love is a human construction. To say the universe is love is to mangle the definition of “love” beyond all recognition. The universe is everything, it is vastness, it is beyond our capacity to describe, and it was not created for our benefit. I wouldn’t presume to limit the universe by describing it with a word as insipid as “love.”
Interesting comment. I don’t think of love as being insipid. Love is not dull, boring or lacking in flavor! Love can be all things: it can be exciting, savory, spicy, active, refreshing, motivating, etc.
Another friend responded to this quote: “I believe that nature has a balance. If it is all love then how would we know what love actually is?” To which I replied: “So, we need to know hate in order to love?”
My friend LB jumped in with “NOOOOO hate is wrong!” I think she didn’t pick up on the “balance” part! To know love, one must also know hate. We know the light because we know the darkness. We are known just as much by what we hate as much as what we love. She was thinking Biblically, that the Bible tells us to love — but to me that’s more New Testament. The Old Testament has a lot of hate and anger and all the darker emotions in it.
Final Thoughts from my friends:
- TLB wrote: The nature of the Universe is evolution.
- RS wrote: [The nature of the Universe is] Constant change.
- SE wrote: “It is humans that seek balance and need balance.“
“We can only be what we give ourselves the power to be. “
— Native American Proverb.
Give yourself some power today. And tomorrow. And every day for the rest of your entire life. You have power whether you realize it or not. Don’t give it away. Let it fill you. Be the power and let the power be you.
If you think, “easier said than done” that’s fine. Just keep telling yourself this. Sooner or later you’ll believe it! You’ll become this power. It’s the power of your being shining through to express itself.
Yesterday at Wildflower UU Church, our ministerial intern Erin Walter delivered a sermon entitled “Art and Soul: Spiritual Enrichment through the Arts”. She asked the following questions: “How will the arts help you heal? How will they empower you? How will art fuel the revolution?”
How does creativity and passion fuel your life? How does it focus your life? I ask these questions of myself! How can art heal me? Fulfill me? Every single day I struggle with these questions. In fact, how can anything heal me? It doesn’t have to be ART. It could be anything that I pick to focus my attention and soul on.
She really didn’t touch on what she meant by “the revolution” though. Revolutionize society or the self or both? When I hear the phrase “the revolution” I think of political revolutions in history like the Cuban Revolution or the Bolshevik Revolution. But I don’t think Erin meant that. But I don’t know what she meant by it.
Suddenly I am thinking about how people are damaged and why they are damaged and why they need healing. I wonder about people who aren’t damaged or don’t think they are damaged. Or they don’t need healing of any sort. Who are these people? What are they like? Are they dull? Egotistical? Narcissistic?
Anyways, I’ve included the doodle I did during the service and it includes a phrase she said that really struck me.