James Richard Perry = Two (2)and Life Path = Four (4)
Rick Perry = Six (6)
03/04/1950 = Attraction = Four (4)
[Get full tiers and word patterns for numbers on my post entitled, What the Numbers Represent. To save space, I won’t add them all here, but will mention them as they come up in analysis.]
This analysis is lengthy and complex due to the number of scandals associated with Governor Rick Perry that need documentation for legitimacy. I did not mention all of his scandals. Search "Rick Perry scandals" to expand on what I cite herein.
Life Path and Attraction Equals Four (4):
Rick Perry’s Life Path number of Four (4) is to be (Victory Made) over personal animus, so not to (Do Venom) to others, i.e., vindictiveness is its negative trait. Being (Made Victorious) over personal animosities is through being (Moved) to change so to be free of stubbornly-rooted personality flaws. Outwardly, Governor Perry seems an affable guy when getting what he wants. His campaigning style, however, is to attack and disparage opponents using what he must think is colorful language. With two Fours (4) his determination for winning is great. If he were on the positive side of Number Four (4), he would not resort to these tactics, but would rely on merit.
Four (4) in his Subconscious Attraction number gives Perry extra deeply-rooted impetus to succeed at his endeavors. Success feeds our sense of well-being and ego. When dissuaded, deterred, or thwarted in achieving enterprises, a negative Four (4) of (Do Venom) on this tier can resort to vengefulness. Perry’s comfortable use of scathing language shows he easily adopts meanspirited tactics for winning. Already, Perry’s bulling assaults on President Obama and fellow GOP candidates, shows arrogant disrespect.
Perry’s tongue lashings aren’t limited to opponents. He called out-of-work Texans "drug addicts" who didn’t need an Unemployment Insurance (UI) stimulus because, "This is exactly how addicts get hooked on drugs." The source was the Austin American-Statesman. He turned down federal unemployment insurance funds when he was hyping succession. These remarks against financially struggling citizens seem craven to promote an agenda, especially when he takes stimulus monies for his projects and lives lavishly. He uses this language against out-of-work Texans while bragging that Texas has one of the highest employment rates.
According to Noelle Bell of the Huffington Post, Governor Perry found himself embroiled in "sneaky" land transactions. She reports that they garnered him more than a million dollars while serving in public office. Also, according to Bell, an alleged reputed international arms dealer is the kind of guy that Perry looks to for help in maintaining his fancy lifestyle.
The Dallas Morning News found evidence that a series of professional and personal favors enhanced Perry’s investments. These favors came from friends, campaign donors, and the head of a Texas family who has a history of political power brokering.
During the 2010 election for Texas Governor on Political Live Journal, opponent Bill White revealed Perry’s payoffs to contributors with appointments and favors.
Many ambitious people, especially those in sports have Four (4) as Significancy numbers. They apply the (Made Victorious) aspect that, for these numbers, is for positive psychological growth. Yet, people take advantage of its winning ways for material success.
According to Wikipedia Perry comes from a Democratic family. His father was repeatedly elected as a Democrat to the Haskell County Commission. Perry himself won his first election to the Texas State House in 1984 as a Democrat. Perry was considered an effective legislator. He won reelection in 1986 and 1988 before switching parties to challenge Democratic Agricultural Commissioner Jim Hightower in 1990. Hightower was a popular Democrat, but whose staffers became embroiled in a bribery scandal, making Hightower vulnerable to a challenge. Did Perry switch parties for political expediency?
Perry served as Al Gore’s Texas campaign manager in his 1988 presidential bid, but changed his stance on global warming. Suggesting he'd seen the light on the climate issue, Perry took a snipe at his once friend, Al Gore, "I certainly got religion. I think he's [Al Gore] gone to hell."
People can have genuine changes of ideologies. Perry’s timing raises questions. While running for president, he still espouses the conservative line. However, according to him, scientists who promote global warming are merely corrupt, and only doing so to enhance their professional careers and pocketbooks. He does not accept that different opinions can genuinely exist, but only attributes the worst motives for believing in global warming. Is he projecting his motives onto others? Perry’s comments come from someone with his financial scandals. The text and audio for his speech are on www.blogs.abcnews.com.
Original Birth and Subordinate Conscious Name Directions:
James Richard Perry equals Two (2) as his original Conscious Direction number that represents (To Be Constant), through being (Backed) and supporting others in (To Back) and (Back It). This is also for ideals, not just relationships. Yet rumors persist about Perry’s fidelity and sexuality. No evidence is found to support that Perry’s wife has threatened to divorce him without court filings, www.opednews.com reports. Others think, however, that these rumors are vicious partisan politics to hurt Governor Perry politically. Both parties use low tactics for winning.
In one speech Perry adamantly opposes Government spending, the next, he is suing the Federal Government for monies. This tendency may be in part due to his original Conscious Direction Name of Two (2), showing that he can be indecisive and (Take Back) decisions.
The tier (Moved) of Four (4) in Perry’s Attraction and Life Path numbers helps diminish the indecisiveness of the (Take Back) aspects of Two (2). He is sticking to the points in his book, Fed Up. Liberal pundits feel, however, this is to appeal to the Tea Party to get the nomination.
Fidelity to ideals may not be Perry’s long-suit though it is not necessarily a bad thing to be able to change outdated ideas for better ones. (Constant, To Be) seems more problematic for him regarding ideals than personal relationships of (Constant, Be Two). The (Take Back) aspect of Two (2) breaks promises for various reasons. Some are from being uninformed. When getting older, people do become less idealistic than in youth. Other reasons, however, are less altruistic, but for the advantage of personal gain.
According to Talking Points Memo, "Yet another anti-stimulus GOP governor, who had been hinting previously that his state would be turning down cash, is now accepting the money. Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who co-wrote an op-ed piece with South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford about all the things that were wrong with the bill, has now informed the White House that he'll accept the money. Perry is, however, leaving the door open to not taking all of it, as he doesn't want to spend money that would expand existing social programs, and thus trap him into having to continue the increases later on with state money. . . ."
On 08/25/11 My San Antonio of www.mysanantonio.com reported ongoing political bickering involving federal funding for Texas schools. Democrats fired back Thursday at Gov. Rick Perry and Republican colleagues in the House and Senate. Democrats accuse Perry of trying to use $830 million in federal education funds to replace state funds as Texas grapples with budget deficits. Perry accuses Doggett of adding an amendment to require future funding, "It's time for Congress to eliminate the anti-Texas Doggett amendment." Perry said in a statement earlier this week, "And for our hardworking teachers and schools to get the $830 million they deserve." Texas Democrats wrote Perry, saying, "Repealing the amendment would only indicate that your desire is to use federal aid simply to replace state educational dollars as was done in 2009." Democrats say the state used $3.25 billion in emergency education funds in 2009 to replace state funding, ". . . thereby denying an opportunity to support improvements in the quality of public education." Education is another issue where Perry talks out of both sides of his mouth.
Rick Perry equals Six (6) for his subordinate Conscious Name Direction. Six (6) is easy to resolve. One gains his or her desires by developing the intelligence of (Fox) or uses (Fox Of) nature that deceives others for gain. One may use its opposite (Of Ox) nature that works hard at manual labor to get needs met. Politics does not require hard manual labor, though people often use politics to gain power. When on the positive side of Six (6), one is earnest and works hard.
No doubt Rick Perry uses guile to outwit opponents. The Burnt Orange Report has a list of Rick Perry’s Top Ten Failures. Much includes covering up improprieties and bad decisions.
(Ask For) is a negative word pattern of Six (6), i.e., showing one is dependent on material comforts for validation so has developed an insatiable appetite.
According to The Huffington Post, [Texas] is facing a budget shortfall of at least $11 billion. Nevertheless, Governor Rick Perry spent almost $600,000 in public money during the past two years to live in a sprawling rental home in the hills above the capital. This was according to the Associated Press. The Huffington Post, says that the five-bedroom, seven-bath mansion costs more than $10,000 a month in rent, utilities, and upkeep. Perry spent more than $130,000 in campaign donations to throw parties, and many other services since he moved in. All this while Perry asked state agencies to cut their budgets by 5 percent. The Republican House speaker considered furloughs and shortened workweeks for state employees while the Governor’s lifestyle is extravagant.
From the website, Back to Basics at www.backtobasicspac.org, in 2006, Perry ordered all Texas schoolgirls to receive a controversial new vaccine against HPV, alarming parents and the Texas Legislature. Details surfaced about connections between Perry’s staff, campaign contributions, and the drug maker Merck.
If Rick Perry’s Six (6) rested in his Subconscious Attraction, denial would be his burden. However, it is in his subordinate Conscious Name Direction number, meaning he intentionally uses deceit to gain. His record speaks for itself. The Internet is saturated with Rick Perry scandals.
Wednesday, 08/24/11, Ed Shultz on his MSNBC show, The Ed Show aired tapes of Perry talking about being the "Education Governor" when he was first running for that office. Comparing that tape to a recent tape as he runs for President where he talked about getting rid of the Department of Education and promoting Charter Schools. His record on education is that he cut billions of dollars from its budget and hundreds-of-thousands of teachers face layoffs.
Comparing the two tapes, Perry’s Bushy swagger and twang bordering on sounding just as stupid did not seem to exist in his earlier incarnation. The more intense Perry campaigns for President, the more pronounced his caricature of George W. Bush becomes. Other times when he appears caught up in the moment, he forgets his folksy twang.
Governor Perry’s extreme views are not likely to win him the general election. Especially when restating comments as he did recently that Social Security is a ponzi scheme, or that he is going to make federal government inconsequential in people’s lives. These statements that play to the Tea Party are just not realistic for a general election. Is he going to tell independent and moderate voters that his pandering was just politics? Doesn’t he regard voters as sophisticated enough to discern lies when they hear them? His pandering seems hypocritical. He has shown that he selectively uses federal monies when it suits him.
Even more unsettling than Rick Perry, are the television and radio pundits who called him the front runner after receiving only 4.26% or 567 votes at the Iowa Straw Poll. In one report, this tied him with Mitt Romney who didn’t campaign in Iowa, but who showed a mere 3.37% with the same number of 567 votes. Huh? Without waiting for pesky polls, pundits immediately put Perry in the top three when he was near the bottom. Adding those few hundred from write-in votes from the stunt by Stephen Colbert using "a" rather than "e" gave him a mere few tenths more percentage. * Perry still didn’t fall in the top three, not qualifying him for such elevation.
Do some pundits want Perry in the general election to ensure Obama’s reelection? Are some, positioning Jeb Bush, who declined to run, but by comparison seems a sensible alternative to both Perry and Obama? Or, are Jeb and his political family willing to sit it out until 2016 with no incumbent to run against?
Are media pundits pushing Perry for reasons of self-interest? They really must believe negative news is more profitable than positive news. If we had a president, who really made the country better, do they think there would be nothing interesting to talk about?
Try it. We might like it.
* One report had Governor Rick Perry winning 718 votes at 3.62%, including write-in, using "a" rather than "e" if counting Stephen Colbert’s stunt. Governor Mitt Romney had 567 votes at 3.36%.
To my knowledge NO NONSENSE NUMEROLOGY - THE CODE is the only numerology book to break the code of deciphering alphabet letters to numbers 1 to 9. Some letter patterns spell exact words. They go from being the JACKASS in Number One (1) to RISE in Number Nine (9) and completing the circle to become the SAGE. These patterns also show how to return to the positive path if taking the negative one.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Sunday, August 21, 2011
Thanks Jon Stewart
For the show he aired Thursday, August 18, 2011 on Comedy Central’s Daily Show with Jon Stewart. [It may air again as a rerun on, Monday, August 22, 2011. Or, watch it on Comedy Central or Jon Stewart’s web sites.] Stewart’s adept razor wit put so much into perspective. It is heartwarming to have at least one person stick up to conservative politicians and pundits who spewed such vile vitriol about poor people.
Framing the Issues:
"Animals," was Ann Colter’s description of poor people on social programs. Choosing his side, Neal Boortz harangued, "It is all out war on the productive class in our society, for the benefit of the moocher-class!" He ranted on, "Many of them get so much money in credits that it wipes out any Social Security taxes or Medicare taxes they are paying. They are absolutely on a free ride."
Absolutely? Well, not exactly. Most likely, poor and middle classes pay state, sales, property, as well federal taxes added to their phone and power bills, etc. The power bills pay for refrigerators that 99.6% of poor people "own" [or they belong to landlords of apartments, poor people rent].
Stewart’s keenly barbed reporting left off the statistic of poor people owning computers. It was on another statistic that I commented on in a Tweet. Poor is determined as $22,800 a year for a family of four. This family then has children. Today, children cannot go to school without a computer to do homework. So, poor parents sacrifice elsewhere to educate their children properly. Gee, would "moochers" do that?
Herman Cain wants what he and others call a "fair tax." People will pay no income tax, but 23% federal sales tax on everything they buy. This includes, but is not limited to, federal sales taxes added to other taxes on medical services, gasoline, propane, electricity, rent, mortgages, etc. State and local governments aren’t going to give up their take.
For example, someone subsisting on $800 a month should really be making $984 to break even, giving them no money to save or invest. This Federal Sales Taxpayer will need $194 x 12 = $2,328 extra yearly to survive. If this person lives in subsidized housing, he or she pays about 40% of their income on rent, minus medical bills. He or she has about $480 left for gas, utilities, food, and medicine. Without housing subsidies, more would find housing on the streets. (Those in other countries may think this is much money. They don’t have the high rents America does.)
Is a compassionate government going to subsidize this extra money needed to pay the 23% Federal Sales Tax? This federal sales tax idea might put us into greater debt. Only a compassionate government, however, would install subsidies. Republicans might not care if the country goes back to the days of Les Miserable, or Tale of Two Cities.
Perhaps, Mr. Cain cares, who says he is not without compassion. His program will return a "prebate" check of $230 a year that is about 2.3% of the 23% taxation. Two point three. Poor people paying approximately $320 monthly rent will pay an extra $883.20 per year for housing. They are supposed to find this extra money where? Not to mention, that all prices will increase so corporations can make up for the 23% extra they are paying in federal sales taxes.
Can we count on corporations to recognize that they are no longer paying federal income tax that many don’t pay anyway, so they might forgo increasing prices? If their comportment is anything near the whining conservative pundits and politicians depicted on Jon Stewart’s show, they would never consider lowering prices.
Painting a Picture of a Friend:
I’m honored to call my friend someone whom conservative pundits and politicians would vilify in their screeching rants. My friend agreed that I may extract images from her life, but I’m NOT to use her name. She was clear about that. My friend’s name will be Jane Doe. Also, though similarities between us exist, I’m not Jane Doe.
I’ve got to be fair and say, Jane Doe is not typical. She gives religion a good name. She really does love Jesus, and wants only to live her life as good as he lived his life. Knowing her, I’m sure that she entered this world the beautiful soul that she is.
Jane Doe was not a wanted child. Her mother tried, unsuccessfully, to abort her. She was left with permanent medical conditions because of this. To avoid the beatings and berating, she left home in her early years, supporting herself with modeling and whatever work she could find. Looking to fill the emotional void her unloving parents left her, she searched for someone to love. She ended up having four marriages. Of course, understanding basic psychology, we know that she unconsciously looked for the wrong men who validated the demeaning attitude and language of her parents. This left her with very little self-esteem.
Although she is highly intelligent, this kind of upbringing integrates into the psyche no matter how hard one tries to clear it out. Religion, therapy, or self-empowerment cannot fully purge deeply rooted abuse. Activities do help negativity from creeping to the forefront. The childhood wounds, however, are haunting. They can surface from an unkind word, look, or gesture.
Jane Doe’s fragile face, sad eyes, and delicate demeanor show the hard life she lived. Sometimes her deportment is harsh from a raspy voice of too many cigarettes aging her too early. She smoked for decades to calm her nerves, but is quitting for her health. She doesn’t take pain medications her doctors push onto her, but takes herbal-supplements to improve her health.
Though Jane Doe gets angry when people deliberately hurt her feelings, she works very hard to avoid taking her life out on others. Friends have told her that those who purposely berate her are jealous. She’s working on having a thicker skin. She is grateful for what little people give to her, and always insists on returning the favor twice over. She has a sensitive spot for those less fortunate than she. As little as she has materially, she is rich beyond measure spiritually.
At the age of seventy, and with multiple medical conditions, Jane Doe gets commodities monthly for about 15 other Seniors existing through the grace of social safety nets. Some are veterans. Some were homemakers, who never made their own money, but live on their dead husband’s Social Security. Jane Doe asks nothing for doing this errand, shouldering the financial burden of extra gasoline. It also tires her physically. If one of them occasionally forces her to take a dollar, she accepts it in grudging good grace to allow them to feel good too. She is happy helping other people. This brings her closer to being like Jesus.
Jane Doe shops at thrift stores, and avoids using air conditioning (already in her rented apartment) and the propane stove as much as possible. When a taillight gets broken, the cost of fixing it eats into her carefully crafted budget. To get the commodities for her neighbors, she doesn’t need a busted taillight. Tickets would really cut into her stipend.
Jane Doe also gets frustrated with others on social programs just like conservative pundits and politicians. At least she tries to understand why they sit around all day doped up on prescription drugs. We discussed it.
First, let’s get some things straight about "Obamacare." If he and Congress cared so much about people having healthcare, they’d have given Americans a one-payer system. They’d never put in the carrot for the insurance companies as a Mandate to purchase insurance that he and Pelosi exempted friends from buying. They’d have stressed paying for alternative medicines and procedures that can cure.
Patients have regarded physicians as gods for too long, thinking that only they can cure illnesses. Drug advertisements are incessant. Seniors are hooked on debilitating drugs because some doctors farm patients to make a comfortable living when getting perks for prescribing. One medicine often needs another to counteract its effects and so on. Patients trust their doctors to do what is best for them, not themselves. Pharmaceutical lobbies are too powerful.
No one educates patients about alternative medicine and healing. Most seniors never read Adelle Davis’s books like, Let’s Get Well, or Let’s Eat Right to Stay Fit. However, we now have Dr. Oz.
Not only healthy eating, but herbs are part of Jane Doe’s routine. She knows how to help herself when doctors are willing to give her the diagnoses she needs to get the proper herbs.
Both Sides are Acting Like Siblings:
Are conservative politicians and pundits feeling picked on by others trying to make them do right? They are behaving like siblings crying about the other child getting a bigger slice of the pie. Huh? Isn’t their slice bigger? It’s really about fairness, not who has the biggest piece of pie.
They tell us that they aren’t the privileged ones, but that they worked for their wealth. We’ve no doubt that the paid mouth pieces for the extremely wealthy work hard to give their bosses’ point-of-view. Not withstanding, Social Security and Medicare recipients also worked hard paying into those programs their entire working lives. It’s not welfare. It’s insurance.
Pundits and politicians throw the word entitlement around like a dirty word as though meaning people feel entitled to what isn’t theirs. When it really means, people ARE ENTITLED to the benefits for which they paid.
If the system is broken, taxpayers didn’t break it. Congress stole from the Social Security Trust Fund that is separate from the General Fund to pay for pet projects and never returned the money. That’s what Al Gore referred to when campaigning for president in 2000 when he talked about a "lock box" that Congress couldn’t touch.
Would those conservative politicians and pundits begrudge Social Security if Wall Street could get its paws on the privatized proceeds? Other corporations could do what Enron did—pilfer pockets until going bankrupt, and thus, ending the program. These are the greedy rich whom taxpayers resent, not millionaires generally, though they still should play fair, especially in these bad economic times.
It really is a fairness issue. While families are struggling to stay afloat in these bad times, millionaires and billionaires are basking in riches. Surely, no one believes that families of four, earning $250,000 a year, especially in large cities, are wealthy. Those numbers need updating to reflect the current economy.
Obviously, the ranting pundits, who Jon Stewart so artfully depicted, have no self-esteem. Unless they confess in memoirs, the public will never know why they are so rabidly against the financial poor and middle classes.
My mother’s wisdom often returns to me, "Try to remember, your father had parents too." We get it. Some rich parents of these conservative politicians and pundits didn’t want children either just as poor parents sometimes don’t want them. So, their parents shoved large amounts of money into their little mitts."Here kid. Take this. Go away and don’t bother me." Copious cash was the only source of comfort for children who grew up to become conservative politicians and pundits. Not getting love, they became cynical about humanity. Perhaps, they think even more money will assuage the hollowness in their hearts. They have not learned that money is no substitution for families, friends or even loving pets.
The poor, who in selfish, sibling eyes also use the system just like rich corporations, irk many. However, do we really know what path their shoes walk? Perhaps, like Seniors, doctors also prescribed them drugs that dose them into losing their Life Forces diminished by their parents. Love isn’t as easy to mandate as healthcare.
If the Right will understand the Left, and vice versa, maybe both sides can think of each other as human beings. Yes, people in both financial classes can be a bit lazy. Should both sides agree to try to do better? Because, if we lose our compassion, we are nothing.
So, have I convinced conservative pundits social safety nets should exit? "Okay, maybe Jane Doe can keep her Social Security and Medicare. She doesn’t or rarely uses Medicare anyway." Who decides which of us is worthy? These programs need an unbiased entity, not privatized ones who stand to gain. This is why government does do this best.
Framing the Issues:
"Animals," was Ann Colter’s description of poor people on social programs. Choosing his side, Neal Boortz harangued, "It is all out war on the productive class in our society, for the benefit of the moocher-class!" He ranted on, "Many of them get so much money in credits that it wipes out any Social Security taxes or Medicare taxes they are paying. They are absolutely on a free ride."
Absolutely? Well, not exactly. Most likely, poor and middle classes pay state, sales, property, as well federal taxes added to their phone and power bills, etc. The power bills pay for refrigerators that 99.6% of poor people "own" [or they belong to landlords of apartments, poor people rent].
Stewart’s keenly barbed reporting left off the statistic of poor people owning computers. It was on another statistic that I commented on in a Tweet. Poor is determined as $22,800 a year for a family of four. This family then has children. Today, children cannot go to school without a computer to do homework. So, poor parents sacrifice elsewhere to educate their children properly. Gee, would "moochers" do that?
Herman Cain wants what he and others call a "fair tax." People will pay no income tax, but 23% federal sales tax on everything they buy. This includes, but is not limited to, federal sales taxes added to other taxes on medical services, gasoline, propane, electricity, rent, mortgages, etc. State and local governments aren’t going to give up their take.
For example, someone subsisting on $800 a month should really be making $984 to break even, giving them no money to save or invest. This Federal Sales Taxpayer will need $194 x 12 = $2,328 extra yearly to survive. If this person lives in subsidized housing, he or she pays about 40% of their income on rent, minus medical bills. He or she has about $480 left for gas, utilities, food, and medicine. Without housing subsidies, more would find housing on the streets. (Those in other countries may think this is much money. They don’t have the high rents America does.)
Is a compassionate government going to subsidize this extra money needed to pay the 23% Federal Sales Tax? This federal sales tax idea might put us into greater debt. Only a compassionate government, however, would install subsidies. Republicans might not care if the country goes back to the days of Les Miserable, or Tale of Two Cities.
Perhaps, Mr. Cain cares, who says he is not without compassion. His program will return a "prebate" check of $230 a year that is about 2.3% of the 23% taxation. Two point three. Poor people paying approximately $320 monthly rent will pay an extra $883.20 per year for housing. They are supposed to find this extra money where? Not to mention, that all prices will increase so corporations can make up for the 23% extra they are paying in federal sales taxes.
Can we count on corporations to recognize that they are no longer paying federal income tax that many don’t pay anyway, so they might forgo increasing prices? If their comportment is anything near the whining conservative pundits and politicians depicted on Jon Stewart’s show, they would never consider lowering prices.
Painting a Picture of a Friend:
I’m honored to call my friend someone whom conservative pundits and politicians would vilify in their screeching rants. My friend agreed that I may extract images from her life, but I’m NOT to use her name. She was clear about that. My friend’s name will be Jane Doe. Also, though similarities between us exist, I’m not Jane Doe.
I’ve got to be fair and say, Jane Doe is not typical. She gives religion a good name. She really does love Jesus, and wants only to live her life as good as he lived his life. Knowing her, I’m sure that she entered this world the beautiful soul that she is.
Jane Doe was not a wanted child. Her mother tried, unsuccessfully, to abort her. She was left with permanent medical conditions because of this. To avoid the beatings and berating, she left home in her early years, supporting herself with modeling and whatever work she could find. Looking to fill the emotional void her unloving parents left her, she searched for someone to love. She ended up having four marriages. Of course, understanding basic psychology, we know that she unconsciously looked for the wrong men who validated the demeaning attitude and language of her parents. This left her with very little self-esteem.
Although she is highly intelligent, this kind of upbringing integrates into the psyche no matter how hard one tries to clear it out. Religion, therapy, or self-empowerment cannot fully purge deeply rooted abuse. Activities do help negativity from creeping to the forefront. The childhood wounds, however, are haunting. They can surface from an unkind word, look, or gesture.
Jane Doe’s fragile face, sad eyes, and delicate demeanor show the hard life she lived. Sometimes her deportment is harsh from a raspy voice of too many cigarettes aging her too early. She smoked for decades to calm her nerves, but is quitting for her health. She doesn’t take pain medications her doctors push onto her, but takes herbal-supplements to improve her health.
Though Jane Doe gets angry when people deliberately hurt her feelings, she works very hard to avoid taking her life out on others. Friends have told her that those who purposely berate her are jealous. She’s working on having a thicker skin. She is grateful for what little people give to her, and always insists on returning the favor twice over. She has a sensitive spot for those less fortunate than she. As little as she has materially, she is rich beyond measure spiritually.
At the age of seventy, and with multiple medical conditions, Jane Doe gets commodities monthly for about 15 other Seniors existing through the grace of social safety nets. Some are veterans. Some were homemakers, who never made their own money, but live on their dead husband’s Social Security. Jane Doe asks nothing for doing this errand, shouldering the financial burden of extra gasoline. It also tires her physically. If one of them occasionally forces her to take a dollar, she accepts it in grudging good grace to allow them to feel good too. She is happy helping other people. This brings her closer to being like Jesus.
Jane Doe shops at thrift stores, and avoids using air conditioning (already in her rented apartment) and the propane stove as much as possible. When a taillight gets broken, the cost of fixing it eats into her carefully crafted budget. To get the commodities for her neighbors, she doesn’t need a busted taillight. Tickets would really cut into her stipend.
Jane Doe also gets frustrated with others on social programs just like conservative pundits and politicians. At least she tries to understand why they sit around all day doped up on prescription drugs. We discussed it.
First, let’s get some things straight about "Obamacare." If he and Congress cared so much about people having healthcare, they’d have given Americans a one-payer system. They’d never put in the carrot for the insurance companies as a Mandate to purchase insurance that he and Pelosi exempted friends from buying. They’d have stressed paying for alternative medicines and procedures that can cure.
Patients have regarded physicians as gods for too long, thinking that only they can cure illnesses. Drug advertisements are incessant. Seniors are hooked on debilitating drugs because some doctors farm patients to make a comfortable living when getting perks for prescribing. One medicine often needs another to counteract its effects and so on. Patients trust their doctors to do what is best for them, not themselves. Pharmaceutical lobbies are too powerful.
No one educates patients about alternative medicine and healing. Most seniors never read Adelle Davis’s books like, Let’s Get Well, or Let’s Eat Right to Stay Fit. However, we now have Dr. Oz.
Not only healthy eating, but herbs are part of Jane Doe’s routine. She knows how to help herself when doctors are willing to give her the diagnoses she needs to get the proper herbs.
Both Sides are Acting Like Siblings:
Are conservative politicians and pundits feeling picked on by others trying to make them do right? They are behaving like siblings crying about the other child getting a bigger slice of the pie. Huh? Isn’t their slice bigger? It’s really about fairness, not who has the biggest piece of pie.
They tell us that they aren’t the privileged ones, but that they worked for their wealth. We’ve no doubt that the paid mouth pieces for the extremely wealthy work hard to give their bosses’ point-of-view. Not withstanding, Social Security and Medicare recipients also worked hard paying into those programs their entire working lives. It’s not welfare. It’s insurance.
Pundits and politicians throw the word entitlement around like a dirty word as though meaning people feel entitled to what isn’t theirs. When it really means, people ARE ENTITLED to the benefits for which they paid.
If the system is broken, taxpayers didn’t break it. Congress stole from the Social Security Trust Fund that is separate from the General Fund to pay for pet projects and never returned the money. That’s what Al Gore referred to when campaigning for president in 2000 when he talked about a "lock box" that Congress couldn’t touch.
Would those conservative politicians and pundits begrudge Social Security if Wall Street could get its paws on the privatized proceeds? Other corporations could do what Enron did—pilfer pockets until going bankrupt, and thus, ending the program. These are the greedy rich whom taxpayers resent, not millionaires generally, though they still should play fair, especially in these bad economic times.
It really is a fairness issue. While families are struggling to stay afloat in these bad times, millionaires and billionaires are basking in riches. Surely, no one believes that families of four, earning $250,000 a year, especially in large cities, are wealthy. Those numbers need updating to reflect the current economy.
Obviously, the ranting pundits, who Jon Stewart so artfully depicted, have no self-esteem. Unless they confess in memoirs, the public will never know why they are so rabidly against the financial poor and middle classes.
My mother’s wisdom often returns to me, "Try to remember, your father had parents too." We get it. Some rich parents of these conservative politicians and pundits didn’t want children either just as poor parents sometimes don’t want them. So, their parents shoved large amounts of money into their little mitts."Here kid. Take this. Go away and don’t bother me." Copious cash was the only source of comfort for children who grew up to become conservative politicians and pundits. Not getting love, they became cynical about humanity. Perhaps, they think even more money will assuage the hollowness in their hearts. They have not learned that money is no substitution for families, friends or even loving pets.
The poor, who in selfish, sibling eyes also use the system just like rich corporations, irk many. However, do we really know what path their shoes walk? Perhaps, like Seniors, doctors also prescribed them drugs that dose them into losing their Life Forces diminished by their parents. Love isn’t as easy to mandate as healthcare.
If the Right will understand the Left, and vice versa, maybe both sides can think of each other as human beings. Yes, people in both financial classes can be a bit lazy. Should both sides agree to try to do better? Because, if we lose our compassion, we are nothing.
So, have I convinced conservative pundits social safety nets should exit? "Okay, maybe Jane Doe can keep her Social Security and Medicare. She doesn’t or rarely uses Medicare anyway." Who decides which of us is worthy? These programs need an unbiased entity, not privatized ones who stand to gain. This is why government does do this best.
Thursday, August 18, 2011
Confirmation is a Good Feeling
After receiving a copy of my book that I gave her, my friend Fran was thrilled. Not simply because a friend published a book, but because she too used to analyze the numbers. Her way of doing so was similar to mine. Hurray! Someone else got it! She realized that the letters beneath the numbers meant something—a code perhaps? Fran’s way of doing numerology confirmed that I wasn’t coming from left field. Fran is dyslexic so we are having to discuss much of what is in the book.
Amazon.com had 837 books on numerology the time I checked. More probably exist now. I honestly couldn’t check them all before publishing. I didn’t want to publish if someone else broke the code. I don’t need to hear the sound of my own fingers hitting the keys euphemism for voice. I don’t need to flaunt my ego. See! I’m smart! After all, I could be totally wrong in my analyses. At least with Fran’s and Dr. McCoy’s confirmation I’m not totally stupid either.
Dr. Kathleen McCoy gave me the thumbs-up on how I comprehended the numbers psychologically moving from one number to the next, when taking the positive or negative road. I hit the Mother Load! I didn’t need anyone else to tell me if the book works or not. Kathy’s approval was all I needed. Kathy and I were young actresses together. She went on to get her doctorate in psychology and became a famous author. If you don’t already know, click on her button to find out how wonderful she is. Anyway, I’d found Kathy again thanks to getting back on the Internet Super Highway. I’d pulled over at a Rest Stop for over a decade. My old Windows 98 with missing files that couldn’t get me on it and was good enough until I realized it was going to sputter out. I had to get a new one. Also, I was planning to publish No Nonsense Numerology—The Code and needed Internet access more than one or two hours a week the Library could provide.
I was going to analyze presidential candidates to help the few people who read this blog better understand them. I doubt, however, those from Germany care about our elections. However, if anyone wants to read analysis on a particular candidate, just send me an e-mail or comment and ask. I’ve looked at the numbers for the other "Cowboy" from Texas, and he confirms my method has validity. Nevertheless, if citizens are going to elect him when he is obviously a politician in the worst sense, no hope for humanity exists.
Amazon.com had 837 books on numerology the time I checked. More probably exist now. I honestly couldn’t check them all before publishing. I didn’t want to publish if someone else broke the code. I don’t need to hear the sound of my own fingers hitting the keys euphemism for voice. I don’t need to flaunt my ego. See! I’m smart! After all, I could be totally wrong in my analyses. At least with Fran’s and Dr. McCoy’s confirmation I’m not totally stupid either.
Dr. Kathleen McCoy gave me the thumbs-up on how I comprehended the numbers psychologically moving from one number to the next, when taking the positive or negative road. I hit the Mother Load! I didn’t need anyone else to tell me if the book works or not. Kathy’s approval was all I needed. Kathy and I were young actresses together. She went on to get her doctorate in psychology and became a famous author. If you don’t already know, click on her button to find out how wonderful she is. Anyway, I’d found Kathy again thanks to getting back on the Internet Super Highway. I’d pulled over at a Rest Stop for over a decade. My old Windows 98 with missing files that couldn’t get me on it and was good enough until I realized it was going to sputter out. I had to get a new one. Also, I was planning to publish No Nonsense Numerology—The Code and needed Internet access more than one or two hours a week the Library could provide.
I was going to analyze presidential candidates to help the few people who read this blog better understand them. I doubt, however, those from Germany care about our elections. However, if anyone wants to read analysis on a particular candidate, just send me an e-mail or comment and ask. I’ve looked at the numbers for the other "Cowboy" from Texas, and he confirms my method has validity. Nevertheless, if citizens are going to elect him when he is obviously a politician in the worst sense, no hope for humanity exists.
Thursday, August 4, 2011
Roman Numeral I and Other Anomalies
The Roman Numeral I, designating the linage does not add a number to the Conscious Name Direction since it equals nine. It only adds a cycle without increasing the number, no matter how many of them there are. When calculating numbers of our favorite male politicians to understand them better, consider this.
Junior, however, is another matter. We never spell the namesake son’s moniker, but use Jr. To be honest, I’ve never quite reconciled this when calculating male names. I calculate Jr., since it is how we add it to their names.
Women have other problems with names. When a woman is married, her married name becomes part of the equation of character as a subordinate Name.
INTERESTING NOTE:
Two currently undecided presidential candidates have at least two Four(s) (4) in Significancy numbers. One has a Four (4) in his subordinate Name, making him a triple Four (4), but has a Seven (7) in the original Name. The other has a Six (6), as a subordinate Name, but a Two (2) as the original Name number. Doing research will garner the answer of who is which.
Four (4) can be (Moved) to be (Made Victorious) over personal animus, or can be intractably stubborn and remain negative. Neither of the waffling candidates seems particularly angry, but a Six (6) can hide this well. Sometimes, however, Four (4) wants to win at material things. Many sports players have Four (4) in a Significancy.
Personally, I am suspicious on any politician with a Six (6). Six (6) has either the (Fox Of) or the (Of Ox) nature. One uses cunning to get needs met. The other uses hard work. The job of a politician is not manual labor, so might fall under the (Fox Of) tier, not the tier (Of Ox). Six (6) in a Life Path gives the opportunity to learn truthfulness, suggesting this might be lacking.
I said previously that I would check out Buddy Roemer. So, I contacted his office from his web site: www.buddyroemer.com, using both e-mail and telephone. I called more than once. Their telephone goes to an answering machine with a voice of a most unhappy sounding young man. I’m sure that others would not trust leaving a message either. I’ve not yet gotten a response from my e-mail, suggesting that he is not taking advantage after the Colbert bump. Buddy Roemer may not be a serious candidate from his standpoint. This is too bad. He made a wonderful impression, at least, on me.
The problem with having Seven (7) in a Significancy number for politicians, is that it makes them totally bad, totally good, or in transition from one to the other, respectively. Mr. Roemer seems like he is on the positive side of the numbers, but unfortunately, perhaps, may not really have a fire in his belly to be the president. Seven (7) on the positive side can easily give up desires.
Mr. Roemer piss or get off the pot. And, please don’t think of that as a California reference. I’m making an analogy, not aspersions. You don’t seem to have any scandals in the Internet searches, so what is your problem? Let us get to know you better. We may decide against you, but you are the one who threw your hat in the ring, we didn’t pull it from your head. Thank goodness that you decided not to take corporate contributions. We want to believe you that you don’t need them. Someone has to prove you are right. It may as well be you. Just do the little things to prove you are really a candidate and not padding your retirement package pockets by being one of those professional candidates who do.
The other waffling candidate (to date) with the Six (6) subordinate Name, might just be trying to fool us all as foxes, cunningly, will do. After all, imitating a previous president is creepy, especially, one so creepy. To copy such a loathed president, who ran longtime Republicans out of the party, seems delusional. This penchant for imitation, however, shows the negative (Fox Of) characteristics of Six (6) that also (Ask For) material things. Therefore, we should wonder if he is in the race for altruistic reasons or personal aggrandizement. Internet searches and news reports claim that his claims are puffed. Remember: in real estate this is acceptable, but in politics it is lying. When his constituents can’t stand him, we should listen.
Those in earlier elections on the democratic side who had JFK haircuts, unfortunately in his case, were nothing like him. A haircut did not get them the presidency. Serves them right. Candidates, please be yourselves. For female candidates, this is easier. They have no frame-of-reference to copy.
I’d say it is about time we did. However, neither one jazzes me. Ms. Bachmann is clearly a nice lady, but her perspective seems skewed. I don’t mean to be unkind, but as a First Man, he ain’t. Ms. Palin’s husband, on the other hand, would be a wonderful First Fella. Her family is what families should be. However, who, is she in this for? Her ego seems thicker than her skin, but at least she isn’t as ideologically bent as Ms. Bachmann.
Already pundits are talking up candidates based on haircuts and personal appeal. When will we stop electing presidents based on physical attributes and hire them based on personal qualities?
I’d like to hear from anyone tracking candidates. We need all the information we can get.
Junior, however, is another matter. We never spell the namesake son’s moniker, but use Jr. To be honest, I’ve never quite reconciled this when calculating male names. I calculate Jr., since it is how we add it to their names.
Women have other problems with names. When a woman is married, her married name becomes part of the equation of character as a subordinate Name.
INTERESTING NOTE:
Two currently undecided presidential candidates have at least two Four(s) (4) in Significancy numbers. One has a Four (4) in his subordinate Name, making him a triple Four (4), but has a Seven (7) in the original Name. The other has a Six (6), as a subordinate Name, but a Two (2) as the original Name number. Doing research will garner the answer of who is which.
Four (4) can be (Moved) to be (Made Victorious) over personal animus, or can be intractably stubborn and remain negative. Neither of the waffling candidates seems particularly angry, but a Six (6) can hide this well. Sometimes, however, Four (4) wants to win at material things. Many sports players have Four (4) in a Significancy.
Personally, I am suspicious on any politician with a Six (6). Six (6) has either the (Fox Of) or the (Of Ox) nature. One uses cunning to get needs met. The other uses hard work. The job of a politician is not manual labor, so might fall under the (Fox Of) tier, not the tier (Of Ox). Six (6) in a Life Path gives the opportunity to learn truthfulness, suggesting this might be lacking.
I said previously that I would check out Buddy Roemer. So, I contacted his office from his web site: www.buddyroemer.com, using both e-mail and telephone. I called more than once. Their telephone goes to an answering machine with a voice of a most unhappy sounding young man. I’m sure that others would not trust leaving a message either. I’ve not yet gotten a response from my e-mail, suggesting that he is not taking advantage after the Colbert bump. Buddy Roemer may not be a serious candidate from his standpoint. This is too bad. He made a wonderful impression, at least, on me.
The problem with having Seven (7) in a Significancy number for politicians, is that it makes them totally bad, totally good, or in transition from one to the other, respectively. Mr. Roemer seems like he is on the positive side of the numbers, but unfortunately, perhaps, may not really have a fire in his belly to be the president. Seven (7) on the positive side can easily give up desires.
Mr. Roemer piss or get off the pot. And, please don’t think of that as a California reference. I’m making an analogy, not aspersions. You don’t seem to have any scandals in the Internet searches, so what is your problem? Let us get to know you better. We may decide against you, but you are the one who threw your hat in the ring, we didn’t pull it from your head. Thank goodness that you decided not to take corporate contributions. We want to believe you that you don’t need them. Someone has to prove you are right. It may as well be you. Just do the little things to prove you are really a candidate and not padding your retirement package pockets by being one of those professional candidates who do.
The other waffling candidate (to date) with the Six (6) subordinate Name, might just be trying to fool us all as foxes, cunningly, will do. After all, imitating a previous president is creepy, especially, one so creepy. To copy such a loathed president, who ran longtime Republicans out of the party, seems delusional. This penchant for imitation, however, shows the negative (Fox Of) characteristics of Six (6) that also (Ask For) material things. Therefore, we should wonder if he is in the race for altruistic reasons or personal aggrandizement. Internet searches and news reports claim that his claims are puffed. Remember: in real estate this is acceptable, but in politics it is lying. When his constituents can’t stand him, we should listen.
Those in earlier elections on the democratic side who had JFK haircuts, unfortunately in his case, were nothing like him. A haircut did not get them the presidency. Serves them right. Candidates, please be yourselves. For female candidates, this is easier. They have no frame-of-reference to copy.
I’d say it is about time we did. However, neither one jazzes me. Ms. Bachmann is clearly a nice lady, but her perspective seems skewed. I don’t mean to be unkind, but as a First Man, he ain’t. Ms. Palin’s husband, on the other hand, would be a wonderful First Fella. Her family is what families should be. However, who, is she in this for? Her ego seems thicker than her skin, but at least she isn’t as ideologically bent as Ms. Bachmann.
Already pundits are talking up candidates based on haircuts and personal appeal. When will we stop electing presidents based on physical attributes and hire them based on personal qualities?
I’d like to hear from anyone tracking candidates. We need all the information we can get.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)