Why not include everyone!?
For heavens sakes, wouldn't it only be right to include everyone?
The following is a letter I just sent to President Obama, attached to this photograph:
Dear President Obama and Administration,
Mr. President, my best deduction leads me to believe that you have your hands tied by this unjust system we live in. I can understand how it could be possible that you're held hostage, much like the rest of us, in the bondage of this harmful system which is exploitative and degrading toward both people and the planet...
However, I want to take time and energy to send you a special note of encouragement. I want to encourage you to stand up against the establishment. Please. Stand up against the status quo.
I believe that all people deserve to be treated well. And so does this marvelous planet.
I encourage you to make every effort that you possibly can, without endangering your own welfare and that of your family, in order make it so we can live to see a day on this planet when ALL people will be treated well.
Mr. President, I believe that peace really is possible. A peace that includes everyone.
Sincerely,
Berd
Thanks very much to the kind stranger who did this photograph.
also see: olyblog.net/photos-2132010
Incluyende Todos!
I agree that he should stand up against the status quo:
ReplyDeleteStop the status quo of illegal immigration
Stop the status quo of legalized abortion
Stop the status quo of National Parks
Stop the status quo of TESC funding
Whenever someone says "status quo" these days, you instantly know they are part of a herd. Somewhere along the way the Left changed the meaning of "statu quo" to mean "things I don't like."
How about the status quo of systematic-structural-societal oppression, the tyranny of corporate economic and political domination, environmental degradation, structural hunger, the massive disparity in wealth between rich and poor...etc....
ReplyDeleteThe point was your embarassing use of the phrase "status quo", when, in fact, there are many things about the "status quo" you support.
ReplyDeleteYou even have reactionary or "status quo ante" ideas, such as support for an estuary versus a lake. You just aren't very sophisticated, Berd...sorry.
Change the status quo: Berd gets a real job.
ReplyDeleteWhat's your job?
ReplyDeleteOther than being the city's mascot, a picture perfect example of narcissism, and an irritant to everyone around you, what is your job?
ReplyDeleteHA! That's funny.
ReplyDeleteI didn't know that I was the city's mascot.
And I am NOT narcissistic, nor an irritant to everyone around me. In fact, most people like me!
My job is to make the world a better place for all people. I can't imagine what could be more important than that!
What's your job?
I'm still laughing at the beat-down you took at Olyblog.
ReplyDeleteYou're playing a character Berd...we get it.
Beat down at OlyBlog? Why would you laugh at someone for suffering a beat-down?
ReplyDeleteThat seems wrong to me. Like Schadenfreude.
Playing a character? Interesting idea. Aren't we all playing a character to a certain degree? What separates us as individuals. After all, we do have free will to a certain extent, don't we?
Personally, I work very hard to be myself - to be honest and true to the values and ideas I believe in (for example, the idea that it is not okay to hurt other people.)
Why won't you answer my question? What's your line of work?
"I work hard to be myself"
ReplyDeleteTruly a narcissist.
Go shave and then take a dozen pictures of yourself.
yuck
ReplyDeleteTHE RIGHT WORD
ReplyDelete-Egotism is a negative term that combines extreme self-preoccupation with a tendency to show off or attract attention.
-There is nothing neutral about conceit, which carries strong connotations of superiority and a failure to see oneself realistically (: he was so rich and powerful that conceit came easily).
-Vanity, on the other hand, is not based so much on feelings of superiority as it is on a love for oneself and a craving for the admiration of others (: his vanity drove him to cosmetic surgery).
-Narcissism and solipsism were once considered technical terms drawn from psychology and philosophy, respectively, but nowadays they are also in the general language.
-Narcissism means self-love and preoccupation with one's physical or mental attributes (: the beautiful young actress had a reputation for narcissism), while solipsism refers to someone who is completely wrapped up in his or her own concerns (: the solipsism of the theoretical mathematician).
THE RIGHT WORD
-If you take pride in yourself or your accomplishments, it means that you believe in your own worth, merit, or superiority—whether or not that belief is justified (: she took pride in her accomplishments).
-When your opinion of yourself is exaggerated, you're showing conceit, a word that combines pride with self-obsession.
-If you like to be noticed and admired for your appearance or achievements, you're revealing your vanity, and if you show off or boast about your accomplishments, you're likely to be accused of vainglory, a somewhat literary term for a self-important display of power, skill, or influence.
-Arrogance is an overbearing pride combined with disdain for others (: his arrogance led him to assume that everyone else would obey his orders), while egotism implies self-centeredness or an excessive preoccupation with yourself (: blinded by egotism to the suffering of others).
-While no one wants to be accused of arrogance or egotism, there's a lot to be said for self-esteem, which may suggest undue pride but is more often used to describe a healthy belief in oneself and respect for one's worth as a person (: she suffered from low self-esteem).
This definition really does not apply to me:
ReplyDeletenarcissism |ˈnärsəˌsizəm|
noun
excessive or erotic interest in oneself and one's physical appearance.
• Psychology extreme selfishness, with a grandiose view of one's own talents and a craving for admiration, as characterizing a personality type.
See note at egotism .
• Psychoanalysis self-centeredness arising from failure to distinguish the self from external objects, either in very young babies or as a feature of mental disorder.