What's in a Name . . .

. . . that smells so sweet . . . or stinky?


At this historical time, we are watching the most vile, petty, and selfish characteristics in many of our federally-elected officials. A comment I made in one Token Rock blog now seems prophetic: "When those who are supposed to be the best of us do not do what is right, the world will die." The Tea Party has hijacked the Republican Party. They are mindlessly pushing this country into oblivion from a fear-based point-of-view, defiantly beating down "The Man," but instead, hurting the most vulnerable.


Those in the Tea Party see the same things that the rest of us do. Congress needs to stop spending our money like it comes from their private piggy banks. Yet, many of those in the Tea Party act out of fear, but they must keep their heads so not to lose their minds. They seem willing to throw fragile people into the street to die in poverty and of disease. This seems feebleminded when making the most wealthy people more so. Are we to return to the days of "Les Miserables" and "A Tale of Two Cities" by adopting platforms from frightened people? When people respond from fear, they cut off information from their rational minds. Instead, they behave like bullies who pick on those weaker than themselves. People in wheelchairs can’t fight back.


To understand this partisan bickering regarding the debt-ceiling, perhaps, we should calculate the numbers of the two parties’ names. What does Republican numerically mean? What does Democrat numerically mean? Below are their numbers with analyses, though they are, admittedly, cursory.

R E P U B L I C A N
9 5 7 3 2 3 9 3 1 5 = 2

R E P U B L I C A N S
9 5 7 3 2 3 9 3 1 5 1 = 3

D E M O C R A T
4 5 4 6 3 9 1 2 = 7

D E M O C R A T S
4 5 4 6 3 9 1 2 1 = 8

REPUBLICAN(S):


This analysis only refers to the Republican Party. Individuals, obviously, have separate numbers, giving them different lessons. As a whole, however, the Party is steering members.


Number Two (2) essentially means learning fidelity in relationships and ideals as in (Constant, To Be), (To Be Constant), and (To Back). To the contrary, Two (2) warns against being needy as in (Be Too Constant) when one is (Backed) so consistently that he or she becomes hooked on it. When one doesn’t have independent thought, one becomes dependent upon others and their opinions, becoming a "yes" person so as not to face the world first hand. An unlearned One (1) who didn’t or couldn’t (Adjust) to life circumstances, might become a (Be Too Constant) Two (2). This person is needy and dependent on others, and may (Take Back) what he or she previously supported in relationship or ideals. Conversely, (Be Too Constant) can make one stubbornly cling to people, also ideas.


Adding the "s" to Republican gives the name a Three (3). Number Three (3) is to (Cull) a (Clue) that will bring them (Luck). People learned to do this or they did not from how well they learned to (Adjust) to life circumstances in Number One (1) by remaining independent in Two (2). Thus, they became dependent from not learning, or independent from learning this. Three (3) is also (Lucky). This makes Republicans a fortunate group.


Republicans are truly a force. If they are operating negatively, however, society is in trouble. If their goals or agendas are really for public-good, they are a force for positive change. When they operate out of ignorance, society is the loser because they prefer group behavior rather than independent actions. Republicans will never contest a bad president, but continue blindly to support him by justifying and enabling his actions even when he destroys the country.


This fused unification doesn’t allow Republicans to think independently because of being too reliant on group mentality. While this might suit Borgs and ants, it isn’t so good for human beings. Clinging so tightly together while mindlessly jumping off the cliff seems at odds with their conservative orientation of self-reliance. They, however, want others to be self-reliant, not dependent on government. This is, however, part of the mind-set that everyone is to act and think alike.


Let’s look at having no government options. First, governments cannot legislate that people are loving. Society cannot force parents to love their children above themselves. Various eras and cultures have tried and still do try very cruel ways to fashion behavior: imprisoning, shackling, lashing, stoning, beheading, etc. Ruling by creating fear only achieves reflexive responses, not genuinely learned ones. Current scandals of mothers killing their children confirm the reality of unloving parents. Fathers beating and abandoning wives and children also supports this fact.


People find themselves homeless and alone for various reasons when also coming from unsupportive backgrounds. I once saw a woman, who could have been anyone’s respectable looking grandmother, always sitting at a bus stop with her belongings in a grocery cart. Concerned, I called Social Services about her. They told me not to go near her because she was schizophrenic and might get angry any moment. Did she choose to be schizophrenic? She got a hotel voucher three times a week. Clearly, that was not enough.


Millions of people suffer from similar conditions that make them harmful to themselves and others. What are we to do about them? Should society just warehouse them in institutions? Public money still maintains institutions. Are we to make them private, so people can farm them by profiting from their misery? We’ve risen above those days. Are we to return to them? What kind of society do we want?


I’ve used an extreme case. However, people who suffer illness often caused by environmental assaults are so ill that no one will hire them. What are they to do—kill themselves—go into prostitution as people were forced to do in the past? These same Legislators have eliminated controls over environmental restrictions on corporations, so they can continue poisoning people. What kind of person gets into government to do this?


DEMOCRAT(S):


The word Democrat equals the Number Seven (7). This is an easy number to reconcile. Either, a Democrat is one who cons others as the (Gyp) from being a greedy (Pig) or (Piggy), or he is a naive (Gypee) who gets duped. Otherwise he or she wonders, (Why Gyp) or (Why Pig) others by conning and cheating them? This Seven (7) is pure-hearted and cannot tolerate the degradation of character in themselves or others when having taken the positive road of numbers. A Seven (7) can also be in transition or transformation to the positive side. He wonders, personally, (Why Gyp) or (Why Pig) are his or her characteristics, and works to change for the better.


When adding an "s" to Democrat, the plural number becomes Eight (8). The six tiers define having quizzes to varying degrees as in (Has Question) about (Hard Quiz). Eight (8) takes them reluctantly or enthusiastically on either material or spiritual matters.


Eight (8) often gives up something material to get something spiritual. The problem with some Democrats in Congress, is that they are giving up what the country needs, so they can prosper themselves from corporate sponsors. These are the (Gyp), (Pig), and (Piggy) Democrats.


As a party, Democrats seem less unified than Republicans. They will often go up against a leader who is out-of-touch or governing the country badly. Altruism seems to drive Democrats’ ideals more than merely cost-benefit ratios that influences so many Republicans.


Yesterday, on Current TV, Ralph Nader advocated that someone go up against Obama from the Democratic Party, or another party. Remember 1982, when Carter received a challenge to his reelection, costing him his job? Will history, repeat itself?