Monday, November 5, 2012

Deception and Humility

A recent video showed a reporter speaking to the pubic where he ascribed the policies of President Obama to Gov. Romney, and allowed the subjects to then vent their anger at Gov. Romney.

Two women, in particular, were so upset at the policy of "Gov. Romney" that one used the word "sociopath" to describe him while the other agreed.

The subjects were all then told that the policies ascribed to Gov. Romney were actually those of President Obama.  "I lied", the reporter said, confessing that the policies that they were describing were things already in practice by the sitting President.

One man said that he needed to re-think his position.  It was a breath of fresh air, but also a rarity.

The woman who erroneously called Gov. Romney a "sociopath", specifically for the policies raised, refused to change her view and her support for President Obama.  "Anyone" who would do such things "must be a sociopath" was her conclusion.

She will vote for a "sociopath" rather than admit she was wrong.

The "masses" do not use critical thinking.  They do not grasp history which would have taught them to learn from their mistakes.  They do things "my way" and are without regret.  They cling to a bumper sticker, while refusing to use logic.

They lack humility.

"If it don't fit, you must acquit" is easier than following an argument, and the lowest common denominator is sought.  Perhaps lowering the voting age to 16?  This is when a nation is ripe for demagoguery, rather than leadership.

Those who lie, that is, those who fabricate reality, do so for their own selfish reasoning.  They trouble co-workers and will steal, if and when it suits their own needs, and cause more problems than most of us know.

Yet, those who are caught lying, outright, are often reelected by the masses who are more dedicated to a party than to truth.  They do not know the danger.

40% of small businesses that go bankrupt do so due to shrinkage.

As I work with small businesses, I am able to show Human Resources that the thief tipped his hand early on when he lied about hours, inventory, and about other co-workers.  I give them a series of questions to ask in the interview process which are designed to catch the liar, because by catching the liar, we prevent hiring the thief.

Lying and stealing are kissing cousins.

Lying is counterfeit language, passed in the hopes of personal gain at the expense of another.  I have often written that liars hold the world in contempt, and will often, to their own demise, continue to lie.  Some will, quite foolishly, believe that by continuing to speak out, the liar shows that he or she must be telling the truth, why else would someone continue to speak out?  Why else would someone fail a polygraph and want to take another?

They do not understand human nature.

A habitual liar is someone who, at the earliest of ages, learned to be deceitful in order to gain advantage over others.

Some learned to lie to survive, however, due to abuse at the hands of the adults entrusted with his or her care.

The results, however, are the same.  Whether someone learned to lie to survive abuse, or just to gain personal advantage, the lying became habitual, and as easy as breathing.

The more success the liar experienced, the more arrogant the liar became.   The more arrogant, the more the liar will expect others to believe, and the more angry she will become when challenged.

Let's look at a fake example:

Let us say I am running for office in a borough in New York where there are pockets of Irish-Americans, Central Americans, and Native Americans, in my district.

When I gave my speech before the Irish, I told how my grandmother came over from the old country to signs that said, "Irish Need Not Apply" and that she was sold as an "indentured servant" to a wealthy family for her first years here.  I then said, "When I was last across the Pond, the emerald Isle welcomed me as a son never forgotten" much to the empathy of the audience. Yet, my feet had never left NY soil.

When I gave my speech before the Central Americans, I talked about a trip I took, to Central America, and visited the impoverished countries there, and said that Americans "needed to do more" for the Hispanic population, even though my feet had never left New York soil.  The crowd was close to tears as they thought of their families still suffering in poverty, while wealthy Americans were complaining about their taxes.

When I gave my speech before the Native Americans, I told them stories of my grandmother, who was passed over for promotions because she was of Native American heritage, and how proud of me she would have been, to know that her blood allowed me to move up on the list of promotions at my job, over others who may have tested higher than me.  The problem is that I do not have a drop of Native American blood, but I have received a warm response from the Native American crowd, who felt the same slight my "grandmother" felt, and desired the same promotion, not because of talent, but because of heritage, that I received.

I have now told three whopping lies for the purpose of my own gain.  4, or 8 years from now, I will be long forgotten by the public, who voted me in, but I will have benefited from not only the salary and pension, but the connections made while in office.  My son is given a job by the company I helped get chosen for the local government project, and the board of another company has asked me to have a seat with them, given all that I did for them while in office.

In my wake, I have left increased taxes, while I ran down the wealthy as the bad people, who now, pariahs of the community, have cut back on services, impacted the jobs of those who's support I gained through emotional exploitation and lies.

Even when seeing these lies exposed, the voters , to their own harm, elect the liars to office, excusing away what lies were caught.

One need not to go back further than the 1930's to know what the end of socialism is:  a disincentive for hard work and success.  In the bumper stick cry of "Who will save the children?" the answer is "the government!" in spite of the very in workings of a bureacracy which is designed to only support itself.  In the "name of the people" one group must be demonized if the other is to be 'saved' in the "redistribution" of wealth.  Stalin knew it well, so in the name of the people, for the best interests "of all" millions were starved to death, deliberately, to feed "the people."

When something is done to benefit the "people", one must be part of the "people" in order to benefit.  If you are not part of the "people", it will be you who will have what is lawfully yours, taken away from you.

Black and hispanic students are not the future workforce of America.
Students who work hard are the future workforce of America, in spite of the depth of pigment in their skin.

To "help the poor", socialism believes in punishing the wealthy.  To get a society to turn on a particular group, they must first be demonized.

See Jews circa 1930, Germany.

See wealthy, circa 2012, France.

Europe has sown the wind and wanted no borders, yet now scream at the jobs they are losing to immigrants.  France's "tolerance" for muslims has now led them to actual Islamic towns where French citizens do not dare enter.

If Hollywood has taught us anything, it is that when a young woman must choose between two suitors, the wealthy one is the bad guy, while the one who does not work but is true to his own self, is the good one.

Worker:  good
Landowner:  evil

Redefining "marriage", after 6,000 years of history, is right out of the page of Goebells' propaganda on how to change an argument, and demonize people of faith, while divorce attorneys stand at the waiting, licking their chops at all the money they'll make.  They're the only ones who'll benefit.

Freedom means responsibility.  Freedom is frightening, too.

I don't want my neighbor's behavior to take down my property values, so I keep elected anyone who promises to slap more laws on him, until I reach the point where I cannot do anything on my own property due to the magnitude of laws I live under.

How did people live before they needed a government approval to cut someone's hair?

Deception changes arguments, and avoids giving real answers.  We continue to elect liars, even when caught, to defend our party loyalty, rather than maintain loyalty to the truth.

"Read my lips, no new taxes!" is no different than "I swear to God on my mother's grave."  "Read my lips" is added to emphasize, but it actually weakens the statement.

"A peaceful religion is hijacked!" said the son, with little thought to not only history, but the violence condoned in the religion's teaching.

Transparency and unemployment?  Raising the debt ceiling is unconscionable, President Obama said when he was Senator Obama.
Closed door health care hearings is transparent?

Deception and humility are not relatives, nor even friends.

"Hope and Change" was a slogan that made many people happy 4 years ago, but now has left many without hope, and, as sadly jested, without change.

7 comments:

Confused said...

I had a hard time following this article. Who told the lies? A reporter? What was the purpose of the project? Were the lies of both parties exposed or was there a bias towards one? Who gave the speech and trains human resource, Romney or the reporter. Sorry.

Anonymous said...

Government Istitutional Indoctrination breeds drones not critical thinkers.

Lis said...

A recent video showed a reporter speaking to the pubic where he ascribed the policies of President Obama to Gov. Romney, and allowed the subjects to then vent their anger at Gov. Romney.

Two women, in particular, were so upset at the policy of "Gov. Romney" that one used the word "sociopath" to describe him while the other agreed.

The subjects were all then told that the policies ascribed to Gov. Romney were actually those of President Obama. "I lied", the reporter said, confessing that the policies that they were describing were things already in practice by the sitting President.
----

Ha ha! That is awesome! What a great way to show up people who are making their judgments based on their own prejudices rather than studying the issues.

Anonymous said...

This is a brilliant piece. Thank you.

Apple said...

Can you print this and distribute it to every polling place by morning?

Anonymous said...

The problem as I see it is that those people who rightfully wanted change have actually experienced change occurring and now they are resisting it as humans tend to do. So they instinctively want to run BACK to what is familiar. It may have been BAD but at least it was a bad they recognize. A bad that they know well how to conform to. The devil you know is better than the devil you don't know... and all that jazz.

Familiarity is often mistaken for security. Change takes courage, the willingness to experience the unknown for a greater goal and the masses are not conditioned for that....

Anonymous said...

The only change I see is Obama lowering the bar on what is good and right, so more people can pass under it. This is poor leadership.

The truth is the same yesterday, today, and forever. What is good and right will never change. They call it the rock of ages.

You can pass a child in school who cannot read. But that won't make him able to read.

You can let a criminal go free on a crime, but that doesn't make him not guilty of that crime.

You can legalize marijuana, but that doesn't make it right to smoke it.

You can legalize abortion, but that doesn't make it a happy affair.

Obama is a wordsmith, a lawyer. He has no interest in the truth.

Woe to the lawyers and the scribes.

It is a dark day that he has been relected, because it means The Lie is winning - in this world.

But Christ's kingdom is not of this world.