Just a little anecdotal story, I was working with a lady at the leather shop last week for some new riding pants. We were taking care of my order while we waited for Ms. Wag to arrive. The woman who was helping me with my order heard me on the phone with Ms. Wag and commented, "I can tell you two haven't been together very long."
"What makes you say that?" I queried.
"Well, just the way you talk so sweetly to your wife." she replied.
I was kinda laughing inside because this conversation always ends the same no matter who I have it with. So I continued to play the game. "What did I say that makes you say that?" I asked her.
She said, "Oh, you called her Sugar-pie. It's only the couples who haven't been together very long who say that kind of thing to each other." I hear that quite often and it saddens me every time.
So I pressed her a little more. "How long do you think we've been together?" It was apparent she had an opinion on the matter and wanted to express it to me."
Oh, about three years, I'd say!" She smiled at me as if she had me cornered.
I have to admit, I actually laughed inside at her comment and body-language she used to shore it up. Mostly because I hear it all the time. "We've been together for nearly sixteen years!" I proudly announced to her!
Her reaction was the same classic reaction I've seen a gazillion times. Her eyes went wide, her jaw dropped and she gasped. "Sixteen years! I would have never guessed!!!"
"Nobody ever does!"
She finished with my order and when my wife arrived, we kissed, as we always do. The leather-designing merchant lady was duly impressed yet again. She fawned all over us. We had a great time in her shop.
What's really cool is, that's how we are with each other all the time without thinking about it. We are mistaken for newlyweds quite frequently. And we love it.
I think if you can engender the newlywed reaction from people 16 years after your wedding date, you can truly say you're in love. And the best thing about it? We're not acting, either. We really do fall more in love every day and we have no problem expressing it to each other.
To me, that's what a happy relationship is all about.
--Wag--
Thursday, March 31, 2005
What a marriage is NOT.
I've been married nearly 16 years. To the same woman, even! Our perspective on marriage, however, has changed radically in the past few years with the fortuitous opening of our minds on the realities of life as opposed to the dogmas of our upbringing. I'm fairly confident that Ms. Wag's views of marriage parallel my own but for the sake of discussion, these are strictly my own opinions.
First off, what is marriage? It's NOT a commitment of two people to each other, despite what the religions would have you believe. Commitment comes long before any marriage. What marriage IS is a contract between two people and a third party, usually the state government in this country. Sometimes, the third party is a religion or the religion and state are adjuncts to each other. In any case, the state and religion often work together, each for the interests of the other. And not necessarily for the benefit of the couple.
Marriage is the formation of a corporation. Once the corporation is formed, then it must follow certain rules. Granted, the majority of those rules don't come into play on a day-to-day basis. The huge majority of those rules don't come into play except for two very important occasions: Dissolution of the marriage through death or divorce and second, any business relating to children. Only one of those two circumstances really justify a marriage contract. Keep calling it a contract because that's exactly what it is, if you really think about it.
So what's the big deal? My opinion is that there is only ONE reason to get married. That is, if the couple decides to have children. For one thing, all of the benefits of marriage accruing to a couple with no kids can all be accomplished with a few simple legal documents. A will, a medical directive, a trust, etc. etc. Not too difficult to set that up. Indeed, a gay couple can derive all marital benefits (these days, at least) by some careful crafting of legal documentation. Costs more than a simple marriage in a cleric's office but hey; it can be done, and rather easily, too.
Children, on the other hand, derive a great number of benefits when their parents are married as opposed to not married. Granted, attorneys can put together docs to secure many of those same benefits with no marriage, however, it's FAR more expensive and complex and there are some holes which can't be plugged as easily, if at all, as it is when there is a marriage certificate on file at the recorder's office. Marriage automatically fills in all those gaps to ensure that a child has all the possible benefits of two parents in the home, an ongoing benefit upon dissolution of marriage and an assurance that care will be given if at all possible. Some of those benefits are lost if their parents aren't married.
A couple without children does NOT gain enough benefit in a formal marriage to justify it. Sure, the woman gets a little greater measure of personal security but really, is a couple's relationship any greater or more secure because they have a paper with the signature of an preacher and/or the county clerk on it? Does a formalized marriage make a couple more committed to each other by some magical means? The answer based in reality is a simple, yet resounding NO.
Granted, a ceremony of devotion in front of friends and loved ones is an excellent idea. I think it's a great affirmation of love. I think people should do such a ceremony. But to get the law involved does nothing to make the relationship more loving or more devoted or to bring the couple closer together or for longer, etc.
And yeah, if I could dissuade people from marriage, I would. Except, of course, if they are going to have kids. If a couple wanted kids, I'd press for a marriage contract at all costs!
If I were to go back and do it again, knowing we weren't going to have kids, I wouldn't get married. If I lose my wife somehow, I won't remarry but I'll seek the same loving relationship I have with Ms. Wag in the arms of another woman. My wife would want it that way and if the tables were turned, I'd want it that way for her. Our relationship is secure, with or without that signature. We have it, because of our past upbringing, though I couldn't easily locate it at the moment! Funny, actually. I've never even verified that it's properly recorded. I really don't care, anyway. It's a meaningless document regardless. What is meaningful is that I love her and she loves me. We know who we're going home to every night and we have no fears of any jeopardy to our relationship which we feel would be secured more fully by having a marriage certificate on file with the state.
Love demands no such outside affirmation.
--Wag--
First off, what is marriage? It's NOT a commitment of two people to each other, despite what the religions would have you believe. Commitment comes long before any marriage. What marriage IS is a contract between two people and a third party, usually the state government in this country. Sometimes, the third party is a religion or the religion and state are adjuncts to each other. In any case, the state and religion often work together, each for the interests of the other. And not necessarily for the benefit of the couple.
Marriage is the formation of a corporation. Once the corporation is formed, then it must follow certain rules. Granted, the majority of those rules don't come into play on a day-to-day basis. The huge majority of those rules don't come into play except for two very important occasions: Dissolution of the marriage through death or divorce and second, any business relating to children. Only one of those two circumstances really justify a marriage contract. Keep calling it a contract because that's exactly what it is, if you really think about it.
So what's the big deal? My opinion is that there is only ONE reason to get married. That is, if the couple decides to have children. For one thing, all of the benefits of marriage accruing to a couple with no kids can all be accomplished with a few simple legal documents. A will, a medical directive, a trust, etc. etc. Not too difficult to set that up. Indeed, a gay couple can derive all marital benefits (these days, at least) by some careful crafting of legal documentation. Costs more than a simple marriage in a cleric's office but hey; it can be done, and rather easily, too.
Children, on the other hand, derive a great number of benefits when their parents are married as opposed to not married. Granted, attorneys can put together docs to secure many of those same benefits with no marriage, however, it's FAR more expensive and complex and there are some holes which can't be plugged as easily, if at all, as it is when there is a marriage certificate on file at the recorder's office. Marriage automatically fills in all those gaps to ensure that a child has all the possible benefits of two parents in the home, an ongoing benefit upon dissolution of marriage and an assurance that care will be given if at all possible. Some of those benefits are lost if their parents aren't married.
A couple without children does NOT gain enough benefit in a formal marriage to justify it. Sure, the woman gets a little greater measure of personal security but really, is a couple's relationship any greater or more secure because they have a paper with the signature of an preacher and/or the county clerk on it? Does a formalized marriage make a couple more committed to each other by some magical means? The answer based in reality is a simple, yet resounding NO.
Granted, a ceremony of devotion in front of friends and loved ones is an excellent idea. I think it's a great affirmation of love. I think people should do such a ceremony. But to get the law involved does nothing to make the relationship more loving or more devoted or to bring the couple closer together or for longer, etc.
And yeah, if I could dissuade people from marriage, I would. Except, of course, if they are going to have kids. If a couple wanted kids, I'd press for a marriage contract at all costs!
If I were to go back and do it again, knowing we weren't going to have kids, I wouldn't get married. If I lose my wife somehow, I won't remarry but I'll seek the same loving relationship I have with Ms. Wag in the arms of another woman. My wife would want it that way and if the tables were turned, I'd want it that way for her. Our relationship is secure, with or without that signature. We have it, because of our past upbringing, though I couldn't easily locate it at the moment! Funny, actually. I've never even verified that it's properly recorded. I really don't care, anyway. It's a meaningless document regardless. What is meaningful is that I love her and she loves me. We know who we're going home to every night and we have no fears of any jeopardy to our relationship which we feel would be secured more fully by having a marriage certificate on file with the state.
Love demands no such outside affirmation.
--Wag--
Tuesday, March 29, 2005
A study in . . . whatever!
Today, a very dear friend of mine sent me the following web link: http://popvssoda.com/countystats/total-county.html
His comment: "Who does this kinda thing?"
I responded thusly:
Usually, university students do stuff like this. It used to be quite the project to collate such information but with the advent of software analysis tools, this kind of thing is merely a data entry problem these days. In other words, yours and my out-of-the-box Excel and Access software can both do this kind of mapping quite easily.
It should also be mentioned that most of the truly useful statistical information we rely on from day to day is generated by just this kind of university study and analysis. Not this particular one, of course; they do put out a lot of trash studies, too! Need I mention the study which was conducted several years ago which demonstrated the effect of cow belching and farting on the ozone layer?
As to the value of it, consider this little anecdote. When I was 16, between my junior and senior year, my family was uprooted by my father and we moved to Missouri. We had lived and had been raised in Northeastern Arizona. Note an inaccuracy in the map: We had grown up calling it "pop." Missouri, on the other hand, was in the habit of calling it "soda." Now you wouldn't think this would be a major issue. It certainly never occurred to us. But the minute someone heard one of us order a "pop" we dang near GOT popped upside the head.
This kind of information could be very useful in determining the best course of action in a given situation, even for such a seemingly innocuous study. By the same token, an inaccuracy such as the one I mentioned above, could prove disastrous. Our not knowing about it certainly proved as such!
--Wag--
His comment: "Who does this kinda thing?"
I responded thusly:
Usually, university students do stuff like this. It used to be quite the project to collate such information but with the advent of software analysis tools, this kind of thing is merely a data entry problem these days. In other words, yours and my out-of-the-box Excel and Access software can both do this kind of mapping quite easily.
It should also be mentioned that most of the truly useful statistical information we rely on from day to day is generated by just this kind of university study and analysis. Not this particular one, of course; they do put out a lot of trash studies, too! Need I mention the study which was conducted several years ago which demonstrated the effect of cow belching and farting on the ozone layer?
As to the value of it, consider this little anecdote. When I was 16, between my junior and senior year, my family was uprooted by my father and we moved to Missouri. We had lived and had been raised in Northeastern Arizona. Note an inaccuracy in the map: We had grown up calling it "pop." Missouri, on the other hand, was in the habit of calling it "soda." Now you wouldn't think this would be a major issue. It certainly never occurred to us. But the minute someone heard one of us order a "pop" we dang near GOT popped upside the head.
This kind of information could be very useful in determining the best course of action in a given situation, even for such a seemingly innocuous study. By the same token, an inaccuracy such as the one I mentioned above, could prove disastrous. Our not knowing about it certainly proved as such!
--Wag--
Tuesday, March 15, 2005
An old story told a new way.
Chapter One.
A cowboy rode into town, dusty from long, hot weeks on the Arizona trails. It had been so long since he'd had a drink, he couldn't remember the taste of whiskey but he rode up at the first, and only, saloon in town and tied his horse to the hitchin' rail. The water barrel on the shaded porch looked cool and inviting and while his horse drank, he paused for a moment to consider.
He looked around. The sun was shining brightly. It always did. But for some reason, the town had a dark pall to it. A somber mood. He couldn't put his finger on it at first but after a moment, it occurred to him that it was the people. Not that there were many of them. This town was a leftover from the happy, riotous days of the gold rush and the cattle drives. Those days were long gone and the people looked it. Naw, there was more to it than that. An additional shadow he couldn't quite figure out. Should he just move on?
Nope. That whiskey was callin' his name. The batwing doors squeaked gently as he walked through them and he heard the saloon go silent as the few people inside took in his unfamiliar face. He slowly and deliberately walked to the bar, enjoying the attention and the curious stares. Of course, nobody would ask him questions out loud. It wasn't polite. He had always liked the sound of his boots on wooden floors, though, so he took his time, and made that 15 feet of hardwood last.
"Whiskey," he told the bartender. His voice was pleasant enough and the room resumed it's usual quiet chatter and poker games.
"Coming right up," said the barkeep and quick as that, returned with a glass and a bottle. "Two bits," he said. The cowboy's coin clinked on the counter as he laid it down. Slowly, he drank, sipping at the glass as if he were never going to get another one as long as he lived. The taste was beautiful to his dry, parched throat and the warmth of it burning down to his belly was truly treasured. He fell in love with that little glass right there on the spot they made love together there at the bar for quite some time.
After a little while, the cowboy noticed that there was a gloom to the saloon as well, more than you could blame on the dimness of the light. Many bars are happy places, the liquor loosening everyone's spirits, the occasional brawl being more good-natured than viscious. But this saloon was different somehow. He noticed, a little more quickly this time, that it was the people, much as it had been outside. Still, he didn't quite get it but, he figured it wasn't much of his business and continued with his cherished, long-needed drink.
Then he noticed the little sign, right there on the bar. It was an old sign, lettered by hand many many years ago. The cowboy couldn't read so he asked the drink slopper about it.
"Oh, that sign says, '$50 to the man who can make my horse laugh.' Been there a while, though."
"Make a horse laugh?!" The cowboy chuckled out loud and noticed the saloon go quiet again. The bar patrons were really paying attention, now. "Surely you jest," he said.
The barkeep explained. "Nope. Y'see, I have this horse out back. Many years ago, I bought him off'n an old gold miner who's long since left these parts in search of better things. He sold that horse to me so as to build up his stake for the next big gold rush. Then he high-tailed it outta here."
"I see," said the cowboy. He was a little perplexed and asked, "But how is it that you're offering a reward for makin' 'im laugh?"
The barkeep was more than pleased to tell all. "Well, the horse must've really loved that old prospector because the minute the old man was out of sight, this 'ere horse broke down and started cryin'. He's been bawlin' his eyes out ever since and while he's still a good horse and all, works hard, plenty capable, it's just a little embarrassing to ride around town on a horse that cries like a baby. Y'ever try to punch cows on a cryin' horse? It jest ain't manly."
"I see," said the cowboy, still chuckling a little. "And I can see why you'd want to git 'im to stop cryin'. Is the offer still good?"
"Yup. Got the reward right here," and he showed the cowboy two $20 gold eagles and a $10 bill. The cowboy inspected the $10 bill closely and then handed it back.
"Show me this horse o' yers," said the cowboy.
So, the saloon keeper walked around the bar and led the cowboy out to the back of the saloon. There was a corral there with a stall at the far end. The cowboy could see barely make out a horse in there, standing under the shade of the stall. In the bright sunlight, all he could make out was the horse's ass end. Still, he could hear it; the sounds of wracking, sad sobs and wails. The cries of a grief-stricken soul who could never be comforted. It was the saddest thing the cowboy ever heard in his life and he was overcome with sympathy for the poor animal, not to mention the bartender. As he approached the horse, he saw great tears dropping from his eyes and the horse looked over at him, forlorn and weary from all the tears.
"I kin saddle him up for ya if you like," said the bartender. "Just to show you that the horse is really a good animal."
"Naw, that won't be necessary," the cowboy replied. "Just gimme a minute."
The cowboy walked up to the horse and began whispering in his ear. After a moment, he stepped away and the horse looked at the cowboy, took one deep breath and burst out laughing!
The transformation was incredible. Looking at him, one would've never thought it was the same horse! The cowboy turned to the bartender and realized that the people in the saloon had followed them out. All of them were dumbfounded, jaws agape! They had all tried over and over and over again to win that fifty bucks and had never succeeded in all the years they had tried. More people heard what was going on and drifted over to the corral to see what was the matter. They, too, remained, awed by the miracle before their eyes.
"Wellp. That about takes care of that," drawled the cowboy. "Can I get my reward money now?"
In slow motion, the saloon keeper reached into his pocket and handed him the money. "I don't know how you did it, mister. What's your secret?"
The cowboy just chuckled and said, "I think I'll keep that little tidbit to myself for now. And I think I need another drink before I hit the road again."
The bar tender said, "Your drink's on me, sir. In fact," and he shouted out, "Drinks are on the house!"
The crowd cheered and they all went into the saloon to take full advantage of the bartender's newfound exhuberance!
"Well, that sure lightened the mood around here," the cowboy muttered to himself. He joined the celebration for a while and after he finished another drink, he moseyed on out to his horse and rode off over the horizon.
"Strange town," he commented to his horse. His horse just nickered back at him and they rode off with the sounds of a laughing horse fading into the distance behind them.
Chapter Two.
Several years later, the same cowboy found himself in the same territory. Another hot, sunny day at the end of a long, dusty trail. He rode into town and tied up at the same hitching rail as before there in front of the town's only saloon. He noted that the townsfolk were rather subdued, a little less than eager to be polite. A little tense. He listened and sure enough, the sounds of laughter rose above the saloon from the corral out back. He chuckled to himself and muttered, "Unbelievable," as he walked in, savoring the sounds of his boots on the wood floor.
Nobody said anything to him; he rather suspected he wasn't recognized at first.
"Whiskey," he said to the saloon keeper.
"Four bits," was the reply.
The cowboy raised an eyebrow briefly and wondered at the inflation but he was too thirsty to challenge the price increase. He plunked his coins on the counter and proceeded to nurse a drink which, in his opinion, wasn't quite as good as it'd been last time. He didn't expect to see the sign so he was a little surprised to see it there on the bar, as before. But he noticed it was different. He still couldn't read but he could tell it said something different. Just wasn't sure what it said this time around.
Next time the bartender came around, he asked him about it. "Oh, it's you," said the bartender. His tone wasn't complimentary in the least. "That sign now says, '$100 to the man who can get my horse to stop laughing."
"Whoa," said the cowboy, slowly and deliberately. "What do you mean? I thought you wanted him to laugh?"
"Well, I did," replied the barkeeper. "Way back then, anyways. Now, though, all that horse does is laugh all the time and he's rather useless, frankly. The crying was depressing but at least I could get some work out of him and ride him when I needed to. Hitch him to a wagon now and then, that sort of thing." The bar tender was getting a little worked up. His voice rose a little as he continued, "Now, what do I get? Nothing!" He was nearly shouting now. The patrons in the saloon hung on every word, waiting to see what was going to happen. They too recognized this legendary cowboy and couldn't wait to see how the confrontation was going to end. Frankly, it was the best entertainment they'd seen in a very long time.
The bartender carried on, "That damn horse does nothin' but laugh now. Day in and day out. Can't put a saddle on him or hitch him up or nothin'! The minute you go to touch him, he breaks into peals of fresh laughter and usually gets to rollin' around and ya just cain't do a damn thing with the worthless animal. Frankly, I'd rather had the old cryin' horse around so I could at least get something worthwhile out of him."
The cowboy listened to the man's rantings and when he was done, tipped his hat back and quietly thought for a minute. Finally, he said, "Is that reward still good?"
The bartender pulled out five $20 gold pieces from his pocket and said, "Mister, you make him cry again and it's all yours!" Well, a hundred bucks is nothing to sneeze at these days but back then, it was well-nigh a fortune.
"Done deal," said the cowboy and headed around to the corral, the bartender close on his heels.
When he got there, he noticed that a barn had been built at the far end of the corral and the horse's laughter was coming from within.
"What's with the barn?" the cowboy asked.
"Oh, that. Well, when you left here last time, word of this horse was rumored all around the countryside and people started linin' up to see him. I was charging two cents a person to everyone who wanted to see the famous laughing horse. That lasted a couple of years and I even made a little cash money but lately, nobody's interested any more. I was just about to tear that ol' barn down and use it for firewood next winter. That don't change nothin' though. I cain't get any use out of that cayuse as long as he's just laughin' all the time."
"Wait here," said the cowboy and he went inside, leaving the bartender out in the dusty corral.
He peered into the darkness while his eyes adjusted. The horse had his ass to the door and was still laughing himself silly, just as he had been those many years before. The cowby made his way over to the horse.
As soon as the horse saw the cowboy, he burst into fresh laughter which could be heard all over town. People once again gathered in the corral, curious as only quiet, bored, hot and dusty people can be.
Suddenly, they heard the laughter stop. They were awed. They wondered about it. A moment or two went by and the cowboy came out of the barn, squinting at the people in the corral while the people gaped at him, completely slack-jawed. Speechless, the bartender handed the cowboy the money. The cowboy took it without saying a word. Then he meandered back into the bar to finish his drink.
Silently, the townsfolk followed. They gathered as quietly as possible behind the cowboy, watching, not daring to speak. The miracle he had performed, twice now, was beyond their comprehension and they couldn't stand to not know how he did it. The cowboy could feel all eyes on him but he pretended not to notice. He finished his drink at his own leisure and then slowly turned to face the silent crowd.
He stared at them, smiling a little.
They stared back. They smiled back. A little.
Finally, the old saloon keeper dared to ask, "Tell us, sir, how on earth did you get that horse to laugh all those years ago and now, how did you get him to cry? We MUST know!" The townsfolk all shook their heads up and down in anxious agreement.
The cowboy scanned the crowd carefully and said, "Well, back when I made him laugh, I just whispered in his ear, 'Y'know, you sad sack of horse, my dick is bigger'n yours is.'"
"Today, I showed him!"
The End.
--Wag--
A cowboy rode into town, dusty from long, hot weeks on the Arizona trails. It had been so long since he'd had a drink, he couldn't remember the taste of whiskey but he rode up at the first, and only, saloon in town and tied his horse to the hitchin' rail. The water barrel on the shaded porch looked cool and inviting and while his horse drank, he paused for a moment to consider.
He looked around. The sun was shining brightly. It always did. But for some reason, the town had a dark pall to it. A somber mood. He couldn't put his finger on it at first but after a moment, it occurred to him that it was the people. Not that there were many of them. This town was a leftover from the happy, riotous days of the gold rush and the cattle drives. Those days were long gone and the people looked it. Naw, there was more to it than that. An additional shadow he couldn't quite figure out. Should he just move on?
Nope. That whiskey was callin' his name. The batwing doors squeaked gently as he walked through them and he heard the saloon go silent as the few people inside took in his unfamiliar face. He slowly and deliberately walked to the bar, enjoying the attention and the curious stares. Of course, nobody would ask him questions out loud. It wasn't polite. He had always liked the sound of his boots on wooden floors, though, so he took his time, and made that 15 feet of hardwood last.
"Whiskey," he told the bartender. His voice was pleasant enough and the room resumed it's usual quiet chatter and poker games.
"Coming right up," said the barkeep and quick as that, returned with a glass and a bottle. "Two bits," he said. The cowboy's coin clinked on the counter as he laid it down. Slowly, he drank, sipping at the glass as if he were never going to get another one as long as he lived. The taste was beautiful to his dry, parched throat and the warmth of it burning down to his belly was truly treasured. He fell in love with that little glass right there on the spot they made love together there at the bar for quite some time.
After a little while, the cowboy noticed that there was a gloom to the saloon as well, more than you could blame on the dimness of the light. Many bars are happy places, the liquor loosening everyone's spirits, the occasional brawl being more good-natured than viscious. But this saloon was different somehow. He noticed, a little more quickly this time, that it was the people, much as it had been outside. Still, he didn't quite get it but, he figured it wasn't much of his business and continued with his cherished, long-needed drink.
Then he noticed the little sign, right there on the bar. It was an old sign, lettered by hand many many years ago. The cowboy couldn't read so he asked the drink slopper about it.
"Oh, that sign says, '$50 to the man who can make my horse laugh.' Been there a while, though."
"Make a horse laugh?!" The cowboy chuckled out loud and noticed the saloon go quiet again. The bar patrons were really paying attention, now. "Surely you jest," he said.
The barkeep explained. "Nope. Y'see, I have this horse out back. Many years ago, I bought him off'n an old gold miner who's long since left these parts in search of better things. He sold that horse to me so as to build up his stake for the next big gold rush. Then he high-tailed it outta here."
"I see," said the cowboy. He was a little perplexed and asked, "But how is it that you're offering a reward for makin' 'im laugh?"
The barkeep was more than pleased to tell all. "Well, the horse must've really loved that old prospector because the minute the old man was out of sight, this 'ere horse broke down and started cryin'. He's been bawlin' his eyes out ever since and while he's still a good horse and all, works hard, plenty capable, it's just a little embarrassing to ride around town on a horse that cries like a baby. Y'ever try to punch cows on a cryin' horse? It jest ain't manly."
"I see," said the cowboy, still chuckling a little. "And I can see why you'd want to git 'im to stop cryin'. Is the offer still good?"
"Yup. Got the reward right here," and he showed the cowboy two $20 gold eagles and a $10 bill. The cowboy inspected the $10 bill closely and then handed it back.
"Show me this horse o' yers," said the cowboy.
So, the saloon keeper walked around the bar and led the cowboy out to the back of the saloon. There was a corral there with a stall at the far end. The cowboy could see barely make out a horse in there, standing under the shade of the stall. In the bright sunlight, all he could make out was the horse's ass end. Still, he could hear it; the sounds of wracking, sad sobs and wails. The cries of a grief-stricken soul who could never be comforted. It was the saddest thing the cowboy ever heard in his life and he was overcome with sympathy for the poor animal, not to mention the bartender. As he approached the horse, he saw great tears dropping from his eyes and the horse looked over at him, forlorn and weary from all the tears.
"I kin saddle him up for ya if you like," said the bartender. "Just to show you that the horse is really a good animal."
"Naw, that won't be necessary," the cowboy replied. "Just gimme a minute."
The cowboy walked up to the horse and began whispering in his ear. After a moment, he stepped away and the horse looked at the cowboy, took one deep breath and burst out laughing!
The transformation was incredible. Looking at him, one would've never thought it was the same horse! The cowboy turned to the bartender and realized that the people in the saloon had followed them out. All of them were dumbfounded, jaws agape! They had all tried over and over and over again to win that fifty bucks and had never succeeded in all the years they had tried. More people heard what was going on and drifted over to the corral to see what was the matter. They, too, remained, awed by the miracle before their eyes.
"Wellp. That about takes care of that," drawled the cowboy. "Can I get my reward money now?"
In slow motion, the saloon keeper reached into his pocket and handed him the money. "I don't know how you did it, mister. What's your secret?"
The cowboy just chuckled and said, "I think I'll keep that little tidbit to myself for now. And I think I need another drink before I hit the road again."
The bar tender said, "Your drink's on me, sir. In fact," and he shouted out, "Drinks are on the house!"
The crowd cheered and they all went into the saloon to take full advantage of the bartender's newfound exhuberance!
"Well, that sure lightened the mood around here," the cowboy muttered to himself. He joined the celebration for a while and after he finished another drink, he moseyed on out to his horse and rode off over the horizon.
"Strange town," he commented to his horse. His horse just nickered back at him and they rode off with the sounds of a laughing horse fading into the distance behind them.
Chapter Two.
Several years later, the same cowboy found himself in the same territory. Another hot, sunny day at the end of a long, dusty trail. He rode into town and tied up at the same hitching rail as before there in front of the town's only saloon. He noted that the townsfolk were rather subdued, a little less than eager to be polite. A little tense. He listened and sure enough, the sounds of laughter rose above the saloon from the corral out back. He chuckled to himself and muttered, "Unbelievable," as he walked in, savoring the sounds of his boots on the wood floor.
Nobody said anything to him; he rather suspected he wasn't recognized at first.
"Whiskey," he said to the saloon keeper.
"Four bits," was the reply.
The cowboy raised an eyebrow briefly and wondered at the inflation but he was too thirsty to challenge the price increase. He plunked his coins on the counter and proceeded to nurse a drink which, in his opinion, wasn't quite as good as it'd been last time. He didn't expect to see the sign so he was a little surprised to see it there on the bar, as before. But he noticed it was different. He still couldn't read but he could tell it said something different. Just wasn't sure what it said this time around.
Next time the bartender came around, he asked him about it. "Oh, it's you," said the bartender. His tone wasn't complimentary in the least. "That sign now says, '$100 to the man who can get my horse to stop laughing."
"Whoa," said the cowboy, slowly and deliberately. "What do you mean? I thought you wanted him to laugh?"
"Well, I did," replied the barkeeper. "Way back then, anyways. Now, though, all that horse does is laugh all the time and he's rather useless, frankly. The crying was depressing but at least I could get some work out of him and ride him when I needed to. Hitch him to a wagon now and then, that sort of thing." The bar tender was getting a little worked up. His voice rose a little as he continued, "Now, what do I get? Nothing!" He was nearly shouting now. The patrons in the saloon hung on every word, waiting to see what was going to happen. They too recognized this legendary cowboy and couldn't wait to see how the confrontation was going to end. Frankly, it was the best entertainment they'd seen in a very long time.
The bartender carried on, "That damn horse does nothin' but laugh now. Day in and day out. Can't put a saddle on him or hitch him up or nothin'! The minute you go to touch him, he breaks into peals of fresh laughter and usually gets to rollin' around and ya just cain't do a damn thing with the worthless animal. Frankly, I'd rather had the old cryin' horse around so I could at least get something worthwhile out of him."
The cowboy listened to the man's rantings and when he was done, tipped his hat back and quietly thought for a minute. Finally, he said, "Is that reward still good?"
The bartender pulled out five $20 gold pieces from his pocket and said, "Mister, you make him cry again and it's all yours!" Well, a hundred bucks is nothing to sneeze at these days but back then, it was well-nigh a fortune.
"Done deal," said the cowboy and headed around to the corral, the bartender close on his heels.
When he got there, he noticed that a barn had been built at the far end of the corral and the horse's laughter was coming from within.
"What's with the barn?" the cowboy asked.
"Oh, that. Well, when you left here last time, word of this horse was rumored all around the countryside and people started linin' up to see him. I was charging two cents a person to everyone who wanted to see the famous laughing horse. That lasted a couple of years and I even made a little cash money but lately, nobody's interested any more. I was just about to tear that ol' barn down and use it for firewood next winter. That don't change nothin' though. I cain't get any use out of that cayuse as long as he's just laughin' all the time."
"Wait here," said the cowboy and he went inside, leaving the bartender out in the dusty corral.
He peered into the darkness while his eyes adjusted. The horse had his ass to the door and was still laughing himself silly, just as he had been those many years before. The cowby made his way over to the horse.
As soon as the horse saw the cowboy, he burst into fresh laughter which could be heard all over town. People once again gathered in the corral, curious as only quiet, bored, hot and dusty people can be.
Suddenly, they heard the laughter stop. They were awed. They wondered about it. A moment or two went by and the cowboy came out of the barn, squinting at the people in the corral while the people gaped at him, completely slack-jawed. Speechless, the bartender handed the cowboy the money. The cowboy took it without saying a word. Then he meandered back into the bar to finish his drink.
Silently, the townsfolk followed. They gathered as quietly as possible behind the cowboy, watching, not daring to speak. The miracle he had performed, twice now, was beyond their comprehension and they couldn't stand to not know how he did it. The cowboy could feel all eyes on him but he pretended not to notice. He finished his drink at his own leisure and then slowly turned to face the silent crowd.
He stared at them, smiling a little.
They stared back. They smiled back. A little.
Finally, the old saloon keeper dared to ask, "Tell us, sir, how on earth did you get that horse to laugh all those years ago and now, how did you get him to cry? We MUST know!" The townsfolk all shook their heads up and down in anxious agreement.
The cowboy scanned the crowd carefully and said, "Well, back when I made him laugh, I just whispered in his ear, 'Y'know, you sad sack of horse, my dick is bigger'n yours is.'"
"Today, I showed him!"
The End.
--Wag--
Friday, March 11, 2005
Some more religious comment.
Posted on another forum to another inquisitive mind. Minor mods, as usual. Also, don't worry about stuff that's out of context. The major points still apply and they are reasons for posting this here.
--Wag--
------------------------
Religion. Whew. I think I could write a book on the subject. I was born and raised in one of the more pervasive religious cults ever: Mormonism. It isn't the worst but it's pretty bad, generally speaking. But it's given me an immense amount of subject matter with which to write books on the subject! You name it: Brainwashing, intimidation, fear, guilt, fallacy; the works. Now I just need to get to writing it!
One of my friends quipped one time, "The reason we know god is a creation of men is because he hates all the same people we do." Makes ya stop and think. Why DO people claim that god told them to wipe someone out?
Marx hit the nail on the head when he said, "Religion is the opiate of the masses." I personally believe religion is about control. It's easy to keep people suppressed when they believe that no matter how rotten this life could ever get, the next life will see everything all fixed up. Ostensibly, the bad guys will get the punishment they deserve and the good guys will get the rewards and the riches of an all-powerful god, said rewards and punishments to last FOREVER! Sadly, such ingrained belief causes people to lose hope and enjoyment for this life and keeps them from becoming all they can be. Keeps them from thinking about possibilities.
The usual exceptions apply. I don't believe for a microsecond that my general comments above are globally applicable to all individuals. I'll get to that below.
I've come to believe that in many cases, religion causes more problems than it solves. T. alluded to the idea that you either believe or you don't. You can't make yourself believe. If you, as an individual, are incompatible to religious belief, you'll be miserable and vice-versa. For many years, I was one of the ones who WANTED to believe and TRIED really really hard to believe and ended up realizing that regardless of anything I said or did, I simply had never believed. Did I give up hope? Not really. I merely refocused my life and attention on things which were and are much more productive to my own well-being and overall enjoyment of life. Hope was restored and refreshed.
It's unfortunate that feverish religious nutballs, though a minority, make the most racket and therefore bring the judgment of others on the whole group, simply by association. I believe, though I could be wrong, that the majority of Christians, Catholics, Muslims, etc. etc. are inherently good-hearted and intend no harm or ill-will to others. It's the charismatic fruitcakes who bring a bad image to the whole of their specific religions. Every time I encounter one of these types of believers, I have to laugh because despite their professions of love for me, it is comically apparent that such is not the intent of their hearts. Ironically, it's sad at the same time. The "rightness" of any of their additional commentary becomes suspect at that point.
What is it about human nature which compels us to always want to be "right?" Sometimes even at the expense of ours and others' well-being.
Yesterday, I read about the death of S. back in December. It is a prime example of people being capable of many great and wonderful things. I was deeply touched when I read some of those accounts and my heart goes out to the friends and family of a wonderful man I will never know. The people on this board do fantastic things for and with each other. I have greater faith in human nature because of that series of threads and I love the idea that people have this power within them. But you see examples of this kind of benevolence on a regular basis. Enough to make life worth living.
I'm continually impressed with other people's ability to do good things for each other but are those good things inspired by religion? I don't believe so, not because religion CAN'T inspire good things but that there is no causal relationship between doing good things and having religion in your life. There are too many various people with differing beliefs all doing good things for and with each other for me to believe that religion is the key motivator of it. Granted, if religion inspires some people to do well, to clean up their lives, to take more happines home with them every day, more power to those religious experiences. There are equal examples, however, of people doing evil things because of religion and no religion is excepted of this, past, present or future. Bottom line is, I think people are what they are. They will continue to be as such regardless of any external influence.
I've seen religious zealots pray with destitute families when what that family needed was groceries on the table. That is not Christian, nor is it faithful, nor is it a show of true Christian belief. On the other hand, I've seen people who were given the sustenance they needed to carry them through rough times without another word spoken. You can imagine which of the two types of experiences was the more religious to observe. At the end of the day, it made no difference whatsoever what religion anyone believed in.
Recently a motorcylist told of being confronted mid-morning by a fellow employee about the fact that the biker was splitting lanes in traffic and had been seen by the workmate as the biker passed by. The fellow employee said, "If I weren't a Christian, I would have opened my door on you as you went by." Sounds like the kind of Christian who professes to be one thing but in their heart of hearts, is something else entirely. Living such a double-life can only cause misery. This particular individual is a murderer at heart and while it's good that her "Christianity" stopped her from an evil deed, still, it changes not at all what she is. Her particular brand of "Christianity" has changed her behavior but has not changed what she is.
It's one of the primary reasons I no longer attempt to change people's beliefs as I once did. It's not good for people to be shoehorned into a space for which they are not suited. Farbeit from me to be the cause of that kind of suffering any longer.
Sometimes, the religious organization is faulty, other times, the person is faulty, sometimes, it's a combination of both. It's important to be able to judge which is the case in any individual contact we make before we react as much as, or more so, than the imbecile we seem to despise.
T., you're probably one of the more rational Christians I've ever encountered, 'specially on line. It'd be a pleasure to trade conceptual beliefs with you some day, given the opportunity to do so. You're relatively near so maybe that's more probable than not! I agree that slamming people for idiocy is appropriate but slamming them for their religion and hiding behind the defense that religion itself is idiocy is out of line. Granted, I've met plenty of religious idiots but I've encountered far more who are rational and thoughtful and deserving of great respect. You seem to be one of those and I suspect there are many others on this board of similar nature.
Life changed for me when I kicked religion to the curb. My marriage improved a thousand percent, my feelings of self-worth increased, my fears and guilt were washed away and I was reborn an atheist without regret and except for early on in that process of exiting Mormonism, I have never looked back. This is one guy who would remain an atheist, even in the proverbial foxhole.
I'm in agreement that we can all live together and all believe as we please and no harm no foul, insofar as unpleasantries are dispensed and we see each other as valuable people in any way possible.
We need each other, every one of us.
--Wag--
--Wag--
------------------------
Religion. Whew. I think I could write a book on the subject. I was born and raised in one of the more pervasive religious cults ever: Mormonism. It isn't the worst but it's pretty bad, generally speaking. But it's given me an immense amount of subject matter with which to write books on the subject! You name it: Brainwashing, intimidation, fear, guilt, fallacy; the works. Now I just need to get to writing it!
One of my friends quipped one time, "The reason we know god is a creation of men is because he hates all the same people we do." Makes ya stop and think. Why DO people claim that god told them to wipe someone out?
Marx hit the nail on the head when he said, "Religion is the opiate of the masses." I personally believe religion is about control. It's easy to keep people suppressed when they believe that no matter how rotten this life could ever get, the next life will see everything all fixed up. Ostensibly, the bad guys will get the punishment they deserve and the good guys will get the rewards and the riches of an all-powerful god, said rewards and punishments to last FOREVER! Sadly, such ingrained belief causes people to lose hope and enjoyment for this life and keeps them from becoming all they can be. Keeps them from thinking about possibilities.
The usual exceptions apply. I don't believe for a microsecond that my general comments above are globally applicable to all individuals. I'll get to that below.
I've come to believe that in many cases, religion causes more problems than it solves. T. alluded to the idea that you either believe or you don't. You can't make yourself believe. If you, as an individual, are incompatible to religious belief, you'll be miserable and vice-versa. For many years, I was one of the ones who WANTED to believe and TRIED really really hard to believe and ended up realizing that regardless of anything I said or did, I simply had never believed. Did I give up hope? Not really. I merely refocused my life and attention on things which were and are much more productive to my own well-being and overall enjoyment of life. Hope was restored and refreshed.
It's unfortunate that feverish religious nutballs, though a minority, make the most racket and therefore bring the judgment of others on the whole group, simply by association. I believe, though I could be wrong, that the majority of Christians, Catholics, Muslims, etc. etc. are inherently good-hearted and intend no harm or ill-will to others. It's the charismatic fruitcakes who bring a bad image to the whole of their specific religions. Every time I encounter one of these types of believers, I have to laugh because despite their professions of love for me, it is comically apparent that such is not the intent of their hearts. Ironically, it's sad at the same time. The "rightness" of any of their additional commentary becomes suspect at that point.
What is it about human nature which compels us to always want to be "right?" Sometimes even at the expense of ours and others' well-being.
Yesterday, I read about the death of S. back in December. It is a prime example of people being capable of many great and wonderful things. I was deeply touched when I read some of those accounts and my heart goes out to the friends and family of a wonderful man I will never know. The people on this board do fantastic things for and with each other. I have greater faith in human nature because of that series of threads and I love the idea that people have this power within them. But you see examples of this kind of benevolence on a regular basis. Enough to make life worth living.
I'm continually impressed with other people's ability to do good things for each other but are those good things inspired by religion? I don't believe so, not because religion CAN'T inspire good things but that there is no causal relationship between doing good things and having religion in your life. There are too many various people with differing beliefs all doing good things for and with each other for me to believe that religion is the key motivator of it. Granted, if religion inspires some people to do well, to clean up their lives, to take more happines home with them every day, more power to those religious experiences. There are equal examples, however, of people doing evil things because of religion and no religion is excepted of this, past, present or future. Bottom line is, I think people are what they are. They will continue to be as such regardless of any external influence.
I've seen religious zealots pray with destitute families when what that family needed was groceries on the table. That is not Christian, nor is it faithful, nor is it a show of true Christian belief. On the other hand, I've seen people who were given the sustenance they needed to carry them through rough times without another word spoken. You can imagine which of the two types of experiences was the more religious to observe. At the end of the day, it made no difference whatsoever what religion anyone believed in.
Recently a motorcylist told of being confronted mid-morning by a fellow employee about the fact that the biker was splitting lanes in traffic and had been seen by the workmate as the biker passed by. The fellow employee said, "If I weren't a Christian, I would have opened my door on you as you went by." Sounds like the kind of Christian who professes to be one thing but in their heart of hearts, is something else entirely. Living such a double-life can only cause misery. This particular individual is a murderer at heart and while it's good that her "Christianity" stopped her from an evil deed, still, it changes not at all what she is. Her particular brand of "Christianity" has changed her behavior but has not changed what she is.
It's one of the primary reasons I no longer attempt to change people's beliefs as I once did. It's not good for people to be shoehorned into a space for which they are not suited. Farbeit from me to be the cause of that kind of suffering any longer.
Sometimes, the religious organization is faulty, other times, the person is faulty, sometimes, it's a combination of both. It's important to be able to judge which is the case in any individual contact we make before we react as much as, or more so, than the imbecile we seem to despise.
T., you're probably one of the more rational Christians I've ever encountered, 'specially on line. It'd be a pleasure to trade conceptual beliefs with you some day, given the opportunity to do so. You're relatively near so maybe that's more probable than not! I agree that slamming people for idiocy is appropriate but slamming them for their religion and hiding behind the defense that religion itself is idiocy is out of line. Granted, I've met plenty of religious idiots but I've encountered far more who are rational and thoughtful and deserving of great respect. You seem to be one of those and I suspect there are many others on this board of similar nature.
Life changed for me when I kicked religion to the curb. My marriage improved a thousand percent, my feelings of self-worth increased, my fears and guilt were washed away and I was reborn an atheist without regret and except for early on in that process of exiting Mormonism, I have never looked back. This is one guy who would remain an atheist, even in the proverbial foxhole.
I'm in agreement that we can all live together and all believe as we please and no harm no foul, insofar as unpleasantries are dispensed and we see each other as valuable people in any way possible.
We need each other, every one of us.
--Wag--
Thursday, March 03, 2005
Persistence
I read this article this morning and was struck by it rather deeply. Personally, I don't have a drive to do any one particular thing, a fact brought to the forefront of my mind by this article. Hope you find it of value. Regardless, I'm merely posting it here for my future reference at the moment.
--Wag--
-----------------------
Persistence by Bob Proctor
If you were to choose just one part of your personality to develop that would virtually guarantee your success, I'd like to suggest that you place persistence at the top of your list.
Napoleon Hill, in his classic "Think and Grow Rich" felt so strongly about this subject, he devoted an entire chapter to it. Hill suggested, "There may be no heroic connotation to the word persistence but the quality is to your character what carbon is to steel."
Think about it. If you took a quick mental walk down memory lane and reviewed some of your accomplishments in the past - large and small - you would have to agree that persistence played an important role in your success.
Napoleon Hill studied many of the world's most successful people. He pointed out the only quality he could find in Henry Ford, Thomas Edison or a host of other notable greats that he could not find in everyone else was persistence. What I found even more intriguing was the fact that Hill made comment of the fact that these individuals were often misunderstood to be ruthless or cold-blooded and that this misconception grew out of their habit of following through in all of their plans with persistence.
It's both interesting and sadly amusing to me that, as a society, we would be quick to criticize people for realizing they had an unshakeable power within them and were capable of overcoming any obstacle outside of them. This power would ultimately move them toward a greater chance of achieving any goal they set for themselves!
Milt Campbell is a good friend of mine. He and I have shared many hours together discussing the very topic of persistence. Milt was a Decathlete in the Olympic Games held in Helsinki, Finland in 1952. His goal was to capture gold for the US. Unfortunately, another fierce competitor who had taken home the gold four years previous in London wasn't satisfied with one gold, Bob Mathias wanted two; Milt had to settle for silver. That did not deter Milt one bit. He had formed the habit of persistence and four years later in Melbourne, Australia, Milt won the gold medal, earning him the title of the greatest athlete in the world.
On numerous occasions Milt has said, "There were many guys in school who were far better athletes than me, but they quit." I can recount story after story about individuals who overcame obstacles so great, but only did so because they dared persist. These individuals are no different than you and I.
Ultimately persistence becomes a way of life, but that is not where it begins. To develop the mental strength - persistence - you must first want something. You have to WANT something so much that it becomes a heated desire... a passion in your belly. You must fall in love with that idea. Yes, literally fall in love with the idea and magnetize yourself to every part of the idea. At that point, persistence will be virtually automatic.
Persistence is a subject I have studied all of my adult life and I can tell you one thing I know for certain: very few people ever, mentally or verbally, say to themselves... this is what I really want and I am prepared to give my life for it, and thus, they never develop the persistence to achieve it.
Persistence is a unique mental strength; a strength that is essential to combat the fierce power of the repeated rejections and numerous other obstacles that sit in waiting and are all part of winning in a fast-moving, ever-changing world. As Napoleon Hill found out, there are hundreds of highly successful men and women who have cut a path for others to follow, while leaving their mark on the scrolls of history รข€¦ and every one of these great individuals was persistent. In many cases it was the only quality that separated them from everyone else.
It is generally believed that a lack of persistence is a consequence of a weak willpower. That is not true. A person could have a highly evolved willpower and still lack the persistence required to keep moving forward in life. In more cases than not, if a person lacks persistence, they do not have a goal that is worthy of them, a desirable goal that excites them to their very core.
Though willpower is important in moving a person toward their goal, if there is ever a war between the will and the imagination, the imagination will win every time. What that means is: you're powered by desire and fuelled by the dream you hold. Once you start to use your imagination to help you build a bigger picture of your dream, to define and refine it until you get it just right in your mind, the emotion that is triggered by that desire far outweighs any force that may be caused by sheer will alone. I am not suggesting the will does not have to be developed, it does. It must become highly developed in order to direct you toward the image with which you are emotionally involved.
Your intellectual factors hold the potential for enormous good when they are properly employed. However, you must remember that everything has an opposite and any of your intellectual factors can turn, without warning, into destructive lethal enemies when they are directed toward results that are not wanted. It is easy to find individuals who are persistently doing what they don't want to do and achieving results that they do not want. A lack of persistence is not their problem; that person is persisting to their own detriment. Ignorance and paradigms are the enemy that we must defeat. Everyone is persistent. Our objective must be to put persistence to work for us rather than against us.
Vision and desire have to be the focus of your attention if you're going to develop persistence into the great ally it can become.
Another excellent example of persistence was demonstrated when, in 1953, a beekeeper from Auckland, N.Z., Edmund Hillary and his native guide, Tenzing Norguay, became the first two people to climb Mt. Everest and return, after having tried and failed the two previous years.
Hillary had two obvious character strengths that took him to the very top - vision and desire. Even despite the seemingly insurmountable challenges, he had no trouble persisting with the strenuous acts that were required because every act was hooked into the image of him standing on top of the mountain. They were expressed because of his persistence, but he was persistent because he was emotionally involved with the image. Without persistence, all his skills would have meant nothing.
Persistence is an expression of the mental strength that is essential in almost every profession, where repeated rejection and obstacles are part of a daily routine.
In closing, let me give you four relatively simple steps that will help you to turn persistence into a habit. These steps can be followed by virtually anyone.
1. Have a clearly defined goal. The goal must be something you are emotionally involved with, something you want very much. (In the beginning, you may not even believe that you can accomplish it - the belief will come.)
2. Have a clearly established plan that you can begin working on immediately. (Your plan will very likely only cover the first and possibly the second stage of the journey to your goal. As you begin executing your plan, other steps required to complete your journey will be revealed at the right time.)
3. Make an irrevocable decision to reject any and all negative suggestions that come from friends, relatives or neighbors. Do not give any conscious attention to conditions or circumstances that appear to indicate the goal cannot be accomplished.
4. Establish a mastermind group of one or more people who will encourage, support and assist you wherever possible.
What do you dream of doing with your life? Do it. Begin right now and never quit. There is greatness in you. Let it out. Be persistent.
--Wag--
-----------------------
Persistence by Bob Proctor
If you were to choose just one part of your personality to develop that would virtually guarantee your success, I'd like to suggest that you place persistence at the top of your list.
Napoleon Hill, in his classic "Think and Grow Rich" felt so strongly about this subject, he devoted an entire chapter to it. Hill suggested, "There may be no heroic connotation to the word persistence but the quality is to your character what carbon is to steel."
Think about it. If you took a quick mental walk down memory lane and reviewed some of your accomplishments in the past - large and small - you would have to agree that persistence played an important role in your success.
Napoleon Hill studied many of the world's most successful people. He pointed out the only quality he could find in Henry Ford, Thomas Edison or a host of other notable greats that he could not find in everyone else was persistence. What I found even more intriguing was the fact that Hill made comment of the fact that these individuals were often misunderstood to be ruthless or cold-blooded and that this misconception grew out of their habit of following through in all of their plans with persistence.
It's both interesting and sadly amusing to me that, as a society, we would be quick to criticize people for realizing they had an unshakeable power within them and were capable of overcoming any obstacle outside of them. This power would ultimately move them toward a greater chance of achieving any goal they set for themselves!
Milt Campbell is a good friend of mine. He and I have shared many hours together discussing the very topic of persistence. Milt was a Decathlete in the Olympic Games held in Helsinki, Finland in 1952. His goal was to capture gold for the US. Unfortunately, another fierce competitor who had taken home the gold four years previous in London wasn't satisfied with one gold, Bob Mathias wanted two; Milt had to settle for silver. That did not deter Milt one bit. He had formed the habit of persistence and four years later in Melbourne, Australia, Milt won the gold medal, earning him the title of the greatest athlete in the world.
On numerous occasions Milt has said, "There were many guys in school who were far better athletes than me, but they quit." I can recount story after story about individuals who overcame obstacles so great, but only did so because they dared persist. These individuals are no different than you and I.
Ultimately persistence becomes a way of life, but that is not where it begins. To develop the mental strength - persistence - you must first want something. You have to WANT something so much that it becomes a heated desire... a passion in your belly. You must fall in love with that idea. Yes, literally fall in love with the idea and magnetize yourself to every part of the idea. At that point, persistence will be virtually automatic.
Persistence is a subject I have studied all of my adult life and I can tell you one thing I know for certain: very few people ever, mentally or verbally, say to themselves... this is what I really want and I am prepared to give my life for it, and thus, they never develop the persistence to achieve it.
Persistence is a unique mental strength; a strength that is essential to combat the fierce power of the repeated rejections and numerous other obstacles that sit in waiting and are all part of winning in a fast-moving, ever-changing world. As Napoleon Hill found out, there are hundreds of highly successful men and women who have cut a path for others to follow, while leaving their mark on the scrolls of history รข€¦ and every one of these great individuals was persistent. In many cases it was the only quality that separated them from everyone else.
It is generally believed that a lack of persistence is a consequence of a weak willpower. That is not true. A person could have a highly evolved willpower and still lack the persistence required to keep moving forward in life. In more cases than not, if a person lacks persistence, they do not have a goal that is worthy of them, a desirable goal that excites them to their very core.
Though willpower is important in moving a person toward their goal, if there is ever a war between the will and the imagination, the imagination will win every time. What that means is: you're powered by desire and fuelled by the dream you hold. Once you start to use your imagination to help you build a bigger picture of your dream, to define and refine it until you get it just right in your mind, the emotion that is triggered by that desire far outweighs any force that may be caused by sheer will alone. I am not suggesting the will does not have to be developed, it does. It must become highly developed in order to direct you toward the image with which you are emotionally involved.
Your intellectual factors hold the potential for enormous good when they are properly employed. However, you must remember that everything has an opposite and any of your intellectual factors can turn, without warning, into destructive lethal enemies when they are directed toward results that are not wanted. It is easy to find individuals who are persistently doing what they don't want to do and achieving results that they do not want. A lack of persistence is not their problem; that person is persisting to their own detriment. Ignorance and paradigms are the enemy that we must defeat. Everyone is persistent. Our objective must be to put persistence to work for us rather than against us.
Vision and desire have to be the focus of your attention if you're going to develop persistence into the great ally it can become.
Another excellent example of persistence was demonstrated when, in 1953, a beekeeper from Auckland, N.Z., Edmund Hillary and his native guide, Tenzing Norguay, became the first two people to climb Mt. Everest and return, after having tried and failed the two previous years.
Hillary had two obvious character strengths that took him to the very top - vision and desire. Even despite the seemingly insurmountable challenges, he had no trouble persisting with the strenuous acts that were required because every act was hooked into the image of him standing on top of the mountain. They were expressed because of his persistence, but he was persistent because he was emotionally involved with the image. Without persistence, all his skills would have meant nothing.
Persistence is an expression of the mental strength that is essential in almost every profession, where repeated rejection and obstacles are part of a daily routine.
In closing, let me give you four relatively simple steps that will help you to turn persistence into a habit. These steps can be followed by virtually anyone.
1. Have a clearly defined goal. The goal must be something you are emotionally involved with, something you want very much. (In the beginning, you may not even believe that you can accomplish it - the belief will come.)
2. Have a clearly established plan that you can begin working on immediately. (Your plan will very likely only cover the first and possibly the second stage of the journey to your goal. As you begin executing your plan, other steps required to complete your journey will be revealed at the right time.)
3. Make an irrevocable decision to reject any and all negative suggestions that come from friends, relatives or neighbors. Do not give any conscious attention to conditions or circumstances that appear to indicate the goal cannot be accomplished.
4. Establish a mastermind group of one or more people who will encourage, support and assist you wherever possible.
What do you dream of doing with your life? Do it. Begin right now and never quit. There is greatness in you. Let it out. Be persistent.
Wednesday, March 02, 2005
A letter to a new mom.
I sent the following e-mail to my cousin, J. today. It came from the heart and I thought it usefully exposed another layer to my feelings about the birth of my new "nephew" 02/14. This was sent in response to an e-mail from her.
--Wag--
P.S. Yes, I know that R. is not my nephew, he is my first cousin once removed, as J. informed me! Still, I'm lazy and it's easier to refer to him as a nephew!
J,
You're cute! It's nearly impossible to put myself into your shoes given the radical changes you're having now. Picturing you as a mother is something I haven't done yet. I've still thought of you as the same fun-loving, party animal we've come to love and enjoy in the recent years. Nevertheless, I hope the mommy side of you will still let the plaything out from time to time. We out here in the sandbox still need a J. fix from time to time! ;-)
I wrote in my blog something about the fact R.'s birth and the fact that I was there for it has changed me in some fundamental way which I can't put my finger on.
What I hadn't considered in depth until reading your e-mail is that it has most assuredly changed you and D. as well. And FAR more drastically than it changed me. It has to have changed how you think about yourself, just you you say. I can't even begin to comprehend how that is. It's one thing to consider how I look at you but I'm fascinated with how your view of yourself has been changed. Also, D.'s perspective about himself and about you as well. Your e-mail has overwhelmed me as I consider how you both must have had changes to your views of your inner selves.
Some other thoughts I had as we talked the other night. In a radical sense, you're doing things backwards from how "everyone else" does them. Many couples have children early in life, WAY before they're really ready to have that kind of responsibility. Indeed, in the VAST majority of cases, it seems couples or mothers have kids completely IR-responsibly. It makes for more sad times than joyous ones in families with an immature mother and father (if there's a father around after the sperm-donor stage) trying to be parents when they haven't finished being kids yet.
I look at you and D. and I admire the fact that you've made the decision to have a child and that you did so with careful consideration and deliberation. Not to mention all the effort you put into maximizing his health in the process. The responsible way in which you've gone about this is a demonstration of a purer love than I've encountered in the past.
I suppose N. and I did the same thing: Approached the idea of children in the home with a sense of responsibility and with a determination of what is going to be best for a little one. Ultimately, we concluded that it would be best to not have kids but truth be told, had we not encountered obstructions along the way, we would be the irresponsible parents with kids we can't handle and wondering how we got ourselves into that mess.
Well, you've done more than I could have hoped for. I doubt that at this point, I could improve on anything you've done. You've had a child later in life but frankly, you're older and more mature and you have a greater sense of responsibility than you would have had ten or fifteen years ago. Full kudos to you. That all applies equally to D., as you know.
I can't tell you enough how much I admire the two of you. Thanks for including us in your lives.
All my love,
--Wag--
--Wag--
P.S. Yes, I know that R. is not my nephew, he is my first cousin once removed, as J. informed me! Still, I'm lazy and it's easier to refer to him as a nephew!
J,
You're cute! It's nearly impossible to put myself into your shoes given the radical changes you're having now. Picturing you as a mother is something I haven't done yet. I've still thought of you as the same fun-loving, party animal we've come to love and enjoy in the recent years. Nevertheless, I hope the mommy side of you will still let the plaything out from time to time. We out here in the sandbox still need a J. fix from time to time! ;-)
I wrote in my blog something about the fact R.'s birth and the fact that I was there for it has changed me in some fundamental way which I can't put my finger on.
What I hadn't considered in depth until reading your e-mail is that it has most assuredly changed you and D. as well. And FAR more drastically than it changed me. It has to have changed how you think about yourself, just you you say. I can't even begin to comprehend how that is. It's one thing to consider how I look at you but I'm fascinated with how your view of yourself has been changed. Also, D.'s perspective about himself and about you as well. Your e-mail has overwhelmed me as I consider how you both must have had changes to your views of your inner selves.
Some other thoughts I had as we talked the other night. In a radical sense, you're doing things backwards from how "everyone else" does them. Many couples have children early in life, WAY before they're really ready to have that kind of responsibility. Indeed, in the VAST majority of cases, it seems couples or mothers have kids completely IR-responsibly. It makes for more sad times than joyous ones in families with an immature mother and father (if there's a father around after the sperm-donor stage) trying to be parents when they haven't finished being kids yet.
I look at you and D. and I admire the fact that you've made the decision to have a child and that you did so with careful consideration and deliberation. Not to mention all the effort you put into maximizing his health in the process. The responsible way in which you've gone about this is a demonstration of a purer love than I've encountered in the past.
I suppose N. and I did the same thing: Approached the idea of children in the home with a sense of responsibility and with a determination of what is going to be best for a little one. Ultimately, we concluded that it would be best to not have kids but truth be told, had we not encountered obstructions along the way, we would be the irresponsible parents with kids we can't handle and wondering how we got ourselves into that mess.
Well, you've done more than I could have hoped for. I doubt that at this point, I could improve on anything you've done. You've had a child later in life but frankly, you're older and more mature and you have a greater sense of responsibility than you would have had ten or fifteen years ago. Full kudos to you. That all applies equally to D., as you know.
I can't tell you enough how much I admire the two of you. Thanks for including us in your lives.
All my love,
--Wag--
RoHS Compliance
Without doing any professional research on the matter, here are some speculative and therefore, highly suspect thoughts. In other words, I'm only writing based on what I've overheard on a peripheral level.
Remember the Y2K scare? Allegedly, computers everywhere were going to fail right and left. Chaos would reign the world over.
How many computer failures did YOU hear about on 01 January, 2000? I didn't hear of a single one. Maybe my life is too sheltered . . . . Even now, however, there is room for Y2K problems which have not yet been discovered but I have to believe that possibility to be remote.
Nevertheless, there was plenty of fear about the subject which resulted in a frenzy of buying replacement computer systems and software. I suspect that in the process, there was some innovation in software designs, etc. etc. But what can't be denied is the fact that there was a huge boom in the electronics industry and a LOT of people made huge amounts of money in the process.
So, came 01 January, 2000, the extreme majority of all computer and electronics users had replaced substantially all of their equipment and it was all new.
Now I don't know about the rest of you but I don't replace my computer every year. In fact, if I can, I try to make it last about 5 years and since I don't demand a lot from it, I can usually make it last a very long time. I know a lot of companies feel the same about it. They make their systems last as long as possible. More power to them and us.
Remember what happened in the subsequent years after Y2K? Recession, especially in the electronics industry. The pool of consumers and businesses buying new electronics shrank considerably. As the recession progressed with fewer customers for new products, companies went out of business in droves. The new equipment they had purchased during the boom of Y2K was sold as used and people and businesses got some great deals . . .
. . . and new stuff simply got sold in much smaller volumes for quite some time.
I think most of that equipment has been used up and the electronics industry seems to be juuuuust about to get back on its feet. Many systems bought during the Y2K scare are still being used but they are getting replaced now. Finally. Hell, a lot of those systems are still using Windows 98 to the extreme that Microsoft even extended it's deadline for End of Life on Windows 98 and they are still supporting it for that reason. There's your key indicator. When those Windows 98 systems all go away, you can be sure that most of the Y2K systems are finally gone.
But there is another problem which is faced by the electronics industry every day. Actually, two very closely related problems. Prices and Life Cycles. The electronics industry is one of the very few industries in which products continually get better AND cheaper at the same time. Remember the first Compaq "portable" 21 years ago? It had ten times the memory of anything else with a whopping 640K (yes, that's "K") of RAM. TWO, count 'em, TWO floppy disk drives. (Personally, I hadn't even heard of a hard drive at the time, though they did exist.) It had a VGA monitor and with the proper RF modulator, it could easily be connected to a T.V. to conjur up some pretty cool graphics for the day. It cost about $4,000, not including the printer and some WordPerfect software.
Nowadays, people are getting PDA's and cell phones which are FAR more powerful than that Compaq "portable" and if you work the deal right, you can damn near get 'em for free. Look at the Zire 72. Whoa. Most desktops made before about 6 to 10 years ago couldn't even compete in terms of power and capability, to say nothing of doing it for the same price. Try $300 vs. $3,000.
So, what's the effect of that pricing problem on the electronics industry? Well, everything gets better and cheaper which results in better market penetration (two cars in every garage and a computer in every living room) BUT, and this is the kicker, electronics companies have to deal with continuous pressure to get their prices down and THAT means, they are operating ever more closely to their break-even points. Moving closer and closer to the edge of the cliff, so to speak.
They HAVE to produce new products. Which brings me to the other component of the electronics industry's major problem: life cycles. When a new product is introduced, the price of it on the shelf instantly starts to decline because the product is only going to be "the latest and greatest" for a very short time. If the company is exceptionally lucky, they'll get a year of good sales out of a single product. Typically, it's more like four to six months. At that point, they'll be lucky to unload it for ANY price and the product gets relegated to pretty near garbage status. The only way for a company to do well and make any money is to release a new product every six months. Or even more often.
It's nearly a Catch-22. The very thing that makes electronics great is the same thing which shoots it in the toe. We make better and better products and we do it faster and faster all the time but doing so creates a vicious cycle of continuous and very rapid replacement of products on the shelf. Continuous and rapid obsolescence of all products electronic. Even the capital equipment required to build these products goes obsolete VERY quickly. Prices fall to the point of making it impossible to turn a profit on any "old" product.
Nasty. Kudos to the managers and company execs who manage these products and make the decisions necessary to keep their companies afloat in such a scenario.
So, I have this idea that the Y2K panic, while not conspiratorial, seems to have given the electronics industry an idea; that they have to create some kind of crisis to generate a buying spree every so often in order to keep afloat.
Introduce the RoHS (Restriction of Hazardous Substances) Directive. Essentially, it says that manufacturers are to reduce the amount of things like Lead, Mercury, etc. etc. from the products made in the electronics industry. It appears that the primary focus for the electronics industry is lead. Lead is an important component of the solder used in all or most electronics components. It gets blended with tin or silver, et al and serves to make the solder last longer, be more flexible, and resist the ordinary wear and tear and the effects of age on a circuit board. Take it out and you reduce the reliability of the product.
Note this, too. The entire electronics industry produces less than 10% (going from memory here) of the world's lead "waste" or "pollution." Even if the entire electronics industry goes completely lead-free, the world's lead pollution problem will still be an issue. (If we really want to eliminate lead from the environment, guess who we need to talk to? Battery makers, maybe?)
So what have we done here? RoHS has created another crisis, similar to that of the Y2K crisis. The only difference is, instead of affecting people at an end-user level, we have moved the crisis to the level of the electronics manufacturer. The result is similar, however. It obsoletes a lot of older inventory and demands its replacement. Prices are stabilized and profits can be restored. Puts companies a little farther above break-even because they can justify the increase or at least the maintenance of prices. Also, the reduced reliability of products means that there will be a slight increase in demand, albeit from repairs, etc. Manufacturing will have found a way to keep their assembly lines up and running.
Is it a conspiracy? Well, I'm no conspiracy nutball but this is one of those things which make you raise an eyebrow and say, "Hmmmmm. I wonder." And you do have to wonder. Is the European Union so hard-up for business that they have to create some imaginary crisis in order to compete with the rest of the world? Remember back when ISO 9000 was all the rage? My opinion only here, but that was mostly a "fad" which originated in Europe. I suppose it was a way of suggesting that if you could comply with ISO standards, your product was allegedly a better product and buying from a certified company meant you were doing better than the other guys. Kinda like the car salesman who suggests, "You don't want to buy from THOSE guys! They don't have THIS!"
So what's the deal with RoHS? I think you're going to see a lot of companies, in Europe, ironically, who will want exceptions to the "rules" and they'll gum up the whole works right before they go completely out of business. There will be plenty of exceptions made in the medical and aeorspace industries to allow their products to be made with lead in the solder to provide the reliability they demand. The prices of non-lead products will go down, eventually, as more and more companies comply. The prices of non-compliant products will start to rise as they become ever more difficult to find. Eventually, soldering and other metallurgical technologies will rise to the occasion and we'll find that we can make things without lead which are just as reliable as things with lead.
We have to hope.
But I still have to wonder: How on earth are we going to fix the problems of excess lead in batteries? Can we? I'd be the last to know but I do believe this: RoHS isn't about solving problems with lead or other hazardous materials in the environment. It's about stimulating the electronics industry and giving it a boost for a while. Especially in the European Union. The only questions are going to be, "How long will the boost last?" and "What crisis is going to come up next in order to boost the electronics industry?" Or, to rephrase that last question, "What is the European Union going to do next in order to create a bigger market for itself?" Short of actually producing some quality and service on its own merits, that is.
--Wag--
Remember the Y2K scare? Allegedly, computers everywhere were going to fail right and left. Chaos would reign the world over.
How many computer failures did YOU hear about on 01 January, 2000? I didn't hear of a single one. Maybe my life is too sheltered . . . . Even now, however, there is room for Y2K problems which have not yet been discovered but I have to believe that possibility to be remote.
Nevertheless, there was plenty of fear about the subject which resulted in a frenzy of buying replacement computer systems and software. I suspect that in the process, there was some innovation in software designs, etc. etc. But what can't be denied is the fact that there was a huge boom in the electronics industry and a LOT of people made huge amounts of money in the process.
So, came 01 January, 2000, the extreme majority of all computer and electronics users had replaced substantially all of their equipment and it was all new.
Now I don't know about the rest of you but I don't replace my computer every year. In fact, if I can, I try to make it last about 5 years and since I don't demand a lot from it, I can usually make it last a very long time. I know a lot of companies feel the same about it. They make their systems last as long as possible. More power to them and us.
Remember what happened in the subsequent years after Y2K? Recession, especially in the electronics industry. The pool of consumers and businesses buying new electronics shrank considerably. As the recession progressed with fewer customers for new products, companies went out of business in droves. The new equipment they had purchased during the boom of Y2K was sold as used and people and businesses got some great deals . . .
. . . and new stuff simply got sold in much smaller volumes for quite some time.
I think most of that equipment has been used up and the electronics industry seems to be juuuuust about to get back on its feet. Many systems bought during the Y2K scare are still being used but they are getting replaced now. Finally. Hell, a lot of those systems are still using Windows 98 to the extreme that Microsoft even extended it's deadline for End of Life on Windows 98 and they are still supporting it for that reason. There's your key indicator. When those Windows 98 systems all go away, you can be sure that most of the Y2K systems are finally gone.
But there is another problem which is faced by the electronics industry every day. Actually, two very closely related problems. Prices and Life Cycles. The electronics industry is one of the very few industries in which products continually get better AND cheaper at the same time. Remember the first Compaq "portable" 21 years ago? It had ten times the memory of anything else with a whopping 640K (yes, that's "K") of RAM. TWO, count 'em, TWO floppy disk drives. (Personally, I hadn't even heard of a hard drive at the time, though they did exist.) It had a VGA monitor and with the proper RF modulator, it could easily be connected to a T.V. to conjur up some pretty cool graphics for the day. It cost about $4,000, not including the printer and some WordPerfect software.
Nowadays, people are getting PDA's and cell phones which are FAR more powerful than that Compaq "portable" and if you work the deal right, you can damn near get 'em for free. Look at the Zire 72. Whoa. Most desktops made before about 6 to 10 years ago couldn't even compete in terms of power and capability, to say nothing of doing it for the same price. Try $300 vs. $3,000.
So, what's the effect of that pricing problem on the electronics industry? Well, everything gets better and cheaper which results in better market penetration (two cars in every garage and a computer in every living room) BUT, and this is the kicker, electronics companies have to deal with continuous pressure to get their prices down and THAT means, they are operating ever more closely to their break-even points. Moving closer and closer to the edge of the cliff, so to speak.
They HAVE to produce new products. Which brings me to the other component of the electronics industry's major problem: life cycles. When a new product is introduced, the price of it on the shelf instantly starts to decline because the product is only going to be "the latest and greatest" for a very short time. If the company is exceptionally lucky, they'll get a year of good sales out of a single product. Typically, it's more like four to six months. At that point, they'll be lucky to unload it for ANY price and the product gets relegated to pretty near garbage status. The only way for a company to do well and make any money is to release a new product every six months. Or even more often.
It's nearly a Catch-22. The very thing that makes electronics great is the same thing which shoots it in the toe. We make better and better products and we do it faster and faster all the time but doing so creates a vicious cycle of continuous and very rapid replacement of products on the shelf. Continuous and rapid obsolescence of all products electronic. Even the capital equipment required to build these products goes obsolete VERY quickly. Prices fall to the point of making it impossible to turn a profit on any "old" product.
Nasty. Kudos to the managers and company execs who manage these products and make the decisions necessary to keep their companies afloat in such a scenario.
So, I have this idea that the Y2K panic, while not conspiratorial, seems to have given the electronics industry an idea; that they have to create some kind of crisis to generate a buying spree every so often in order to keep afloat.
Introduce the RoHS (Restriction of Hazardous Substances) Directive. Essentially, it says that manufacturers are to reduce the amount of things like Lead, Mercury, etc. etc. from the products made in the electronics industry. It appears that the primary focus for the electronics industry is lead. Lead is an important component of the solder used in all or most electronics components. It gets blended with tin or silver, et al and serves to make the solder last longer, be more flexible, and resist the ordinary wear and tear and the effects of age on a circuit board. Take it out and you reduce the reliability of the product.
Note this, too. The entire electronics industry produces less than 10% (going from memory here) of the world's lead "waste" or "pollution." Even if the entire electronics industry goes completely lead-free, the world's lead pollution problem will still be an issue. (If we really want to eliminate lead from the environment, guess who we need to talk to? Battery makers, maybe?)
So what have we done here? RoHS has created another crisis, similar to that of the Y2K crisis. The only difference is, instead of affecting people at an end-user level, we have moved the crisis to the level of the electronics manufacturer. The result is similar, however. It obsoletes a lot of older inventory and demands its replacement. Prices are stabilized and profits can be restored. Puts companies a little farther above break-even because they can justify the increase or at least the maintenance of prices. Also, the reduced reliability of products means that there will be a slight increase in demand, albeit from repairs, etc. Manufacturing will have found a way to keep their assembly lines up and running.
Is it a conspiracy? Well, I'm no conspiracy nutball but this is one of those things which make you raise an eyebrow and say, "Hmmmmm. I wonder." And you do have to wonder. Is the European Union so hard-up for business that they have to create some imaginary crisis in order to compete with the rest of the world? Remember back when ISO 9000 was all the rage? My opinion only here, but that was mostly a "fad" which originated in Europe. I suppose it was a way of suggesting that if you could comply with ISO standards, your product was allegedly a better product and buying from a certified company meant you were doing better than the other guys. Kinda like the car salesman who suggests, "You don't want to buy from THOSE guys! They don't have THIS!"
So what's the deal with RoHS? I think you're going to see a lot of companies, in Europe, ironically, who will want exceptions to the "rules" and they'll gum up the whole works right before they go completely out of business. There will be plenty of exceptions made in the medical and aeorspace industries to allow their products to be made with lead in the solder to provide the reliability they demand. The prices of non-lead products will go down, eventually, as more and more companies comply. The prices of non-compliant products will start to rise as they become ever more difficult to find. Eventually, soldering and other metallurgical technologies will rise to the occasion and we'll find that we can make things without lead which are just as reliable as things with lead.
We have to hope.
But I still have to wonder: How on earth are we going to fix the problems of excess lead in batteries? Can we? I'd be the last to know but I do believe this: RoHS isn't about solving problems with lead or other hazardous materials in the environment. It's about stimulating the electronics industry and giving it a boost for a while. Especially in the European Union. The only questions are going to be, "How long will the boost last?" and "What crisis is going to come up next in order to boost the electronics industry?" Or, to rephrase that last question, "What is the European Union going to do next in order to create a bigger market for itself?" Short of actually producing some quality and service on its own merits, that is.
--Wag--
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
