Barack Hussein Obama: (08/04/1961) = Life Path of Two (2) + Year 2008 One (1) = Three (3)
Adding the Life Path number to the yearly number give the lessons and obstacles for that year. The year allows all of us to experience each number in a 10-year cycle. Numbers challenge and show us their meanings. We learn from each number to achieve its negative or positive side and how to transition to the positive side if on the negative.
The race for the top prize of POTUS in 2008 added Number One (1) to candidates Life Paths. With McCain (08/29/1936) having a Two (2) Life Path plus the year 2008 equaling One (1), we’d think he was a shoo-in with all that (Luck) (Lucky You) (Your Luck) on his side of Three (3). Wait one moment! So does Barack Obama have a Two (2) Life Path, giving his 2008 year a Three (3), and making the stars fall favorably on him as well. Both men won their party’s nominations.
In 2008 how did Barack Obama beat out the favorite, Hillary Clinton in the primary when her Life Path was Three (3), numerically speaking? Her yearly number in 2007 was also Three (3), i.e., 2007 equals Nine (9). When adding 3 + 9 they equal 12 and 1 + 2 equals 3. That seemed an unbeatable combination. The polls and pundits concurred. Then came the year 2008 to make them eat their words. 2 + 8 equals 1. Adding the year 1 to her Life Path Three (3) gave her a Four (4). It seemed no sooner did January ring in the New Year than Hillary fell out of favor. Four (4) even has (Made Victorious) and (Victory Made) as tiers. However, so does it have (Doom Victory) and (Victory Doomed) as tiers representing the yin and yang elements. The other tiers may give clues about what slipped her up, but the entire election was complicated. Karma may have been in the mix as she has Eight (8) as her Attraction number, putting having tests into her Subconscious. It was clear by the gracefulness she exhibited when losing that she looked to higher reasons for her loss. Also, being that she has two Sixes (6) as Conscious Direction numbers, when she isn’t lying, others seem to perceive her as doing so. The negative Four (4) year tiers of (Victory Doomed) seemed to thwart a (Made Victorious) ending to her campaign.
The Numbers favored both Barack Obama and John McCain with (Luck). Ultimately, however, lessons and choices may have had something to do with who won. We do learn more from bad presidents than good ones as we often sit back and ride the wave.
Sometimes, however, America needs a respite from bad ones. America is long overdue for a good POTUS.
[If anyone has questions or comments, I hope you will make them.]
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.
Monday, October 22, 2012
Monday, August 27, 2012
Numbers Open a Window Into Obama
Barack Hussein Obama II = One (1)
Barack Hussein Obama = One (1)
Barack Obama = Five (5)
Barry Obama = Six (6)
Barry Soetoro = Nine (9)
(08/04/1961) = Attraction is Four (4) and Life Path is Two (2)
[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.]
Of the names he now uses, Obama’s main Conscious Name Direction number is One (1), and his subordinate Name numbers are Five (5), Six (6), and Nine (9). His Name as Number One (1) reflects either, naivete’ of a (Jackass) who will (Just Ask) for advice or (A Sage) who has learned from life. Do his policies reflect well-thought-out wisdom or do they pander to his base of voters and financial backers? All presidents have advisers to whom they can turn. Most, if not all, politicians indulge those who buy them off. Nevertheless, other Presidents spent countless hours ruminating over and engaging in policies, not vacationing, swinging golf clubs, or endlessly campaigning for a second term. President Obama parties and vacations (at taxpayer expense) more than he governs. President Obama’s predecessor did the same, setting a precedent for allowing this leeway because the Presidency is such a "stressful" job. When we have enough life experience, we are not as anxious, knowing how to connect unrelated matters to solve current problems that a well-developed Number One (1) learns to do. Is the job of the presidency for a newbie?
At www.pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/03/26/ gen44-obama-names-entire-generation-after-himself-whether-they . . . . The link is confusing and you’ll have to search to find the YouTube posting on the page where President Obama names a generation after his 44th presidency, thus himself. Going to my twitter account @nnnTheCode or @NoNonsenseCode will get you the posted link.
I knew by President Obama’s actions, statements, and demeanor that he had to have an arrogant (I Are) better than others, Nine (9) in his arsenal. Yet, it just wasn’t there. Where is the arrogance he shows in his numbers? How could I be so wrong to view him that way when he doesn’t have a Nine (9)? I’d have to do some hard reflection to understand from where this trait in him arises.
One day, one of my Twitter followers @ACollinsByrnes a.k.a. TappyWise tweeted that Obama’s name under his stepfather was Barry Soetoro. I checked it out. Evidence exists that he went by Barry Soetoro in his youth. This gives him a Nine (9) as a subordinate Name Direction number. Love to be right. Hate crow pie.
Obama’s Life Path Number Two (2) tier of (Take Back) reinforces the (Jackass) (Just Ask) tier of his Direction Number One (1). As with other Presidents, he took back campaign promises. However, did he really believe his rhetoric or was he deliberately lying to get votes? Is he clinging to the (Be Too Constant) tier of Two (2), making him wedded tightly to ideals? He allowed the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy to continue when he promised otherwise. His rhetoric about millionaires and billionaires paying their "fair share," seems to pander to his base. Since 2010 President Obama, however, is now part of the top 1% he criticizes at his current worth of $11.8M from a $400,000 a year job. Does he really empathize with the middle and poor income classes, or is he chomping at the bit to become an elite billionaire?
Who would blame him for not wanting to be poor? Yet, he seems to bite the hands of those opening the door where he wants to enter. Being good at politics and by definition a liar is not necessarily being a good president. This might be where Obama calls upon his Six (6) (Fox Of) Conscious Direction number, calculating everything he does. Is he helping poorer classes or succumbing to the (Ask For) greed of Six (6)?
Obama has both Conscious Direction Name numbers of Five (5) and Six (6). During the 2008 debates Obama admitted being lazy. He was being honest, however, as with postponing and obfuscating about his stance on same sex marriage, he avoids candor unless it benefits him. Nevertheless, the remark reveals he doesn’t operate under the (Of Ox) hard-working tier of Six (6). By his actions, he seems not interested in the seriously hard work this office requires, but prefers the luxuries that benefit him.
If Obama is an advanced Number One (1) we’d expect him to (Just Say) the truth and be honestly direct. He doesn’t always do this. When he appeases his base, his speech is often awkward and stilted while searching for the right words. The whole having done cocaine business never sat well with many people no matter how forthright Obama seemed. It seemed more like a tactic to deflect it from being an election issue so that opponents couldn’t use it against him. He was successful at deflecting a questionable past. Yet, was he also appealing to young "hip" voters? No one said he is stupid. He knows how to manipulatively get his way. Look at what he did with the healthcare bill. President Obama purposefully said it "was not a tax." If naive’ legislators thought it was a tax, fewer would have voted for it.
Barack Obama’s Conscious Direction subordinate Name Five (5), shows he can learn from experiences. This gives him instincts to know what is (In You), so that he can relate with other people. This is a good trait. Relating and caring are different matters however. Is he understanding what is (In You) for others’ benefit or his own? This shows how one can develop into the crafty (Fox Of) nature of the subsequent Six (6). For all his rhetoric, no genuine feelings for citizens come from him, except contempt when he disparages religious gun owners.
Five (5) is the most enigmatic or puzzling number to define. (From Wanting New) experiences, Fives (5) can become easily dissatisfied. If they aren’t problem-solvers, they can easily dismiss problems rather than solving them thoroughly. Obama has already admitted during 2008 debates that he isn’t into details. He’d rather let others trifle with weighty matters. This gives the impression of aloofness or disengagement.
Obama’s Subconscious Attraction number is Four (4) that if negative can brew to (Do Venom), becoming vindictive or if positive is (Made Victorious) by rising above personal animosities. On History Channel’s, It’s Good to Be President, journalist Richard Wolfe said, President Obama is vindictive on the golf course when he doesn’t get his way: Also, that it was especially visible when he’s tired. This kind of temper over a simple golf game shows a spoiled nature. This is not a temperament of someone who is mature. Obama can let animosities brew into a (Wen) of Five (5) that is a boil or cyst of mental agitation. When he confronts them, however, his famous temper comes into action.
The website www.humanevents.com reports, "Remember last week, when President Obama threw a fit and stormed out of budget negotiations with the House Republican leadership? Do you recall what made him blow a fuse? It was when House Majority Leader Eric Cantor suggested a short-term deal to raise the debt limit a bit, because Democrats and Republicans could use more time to settle their differences." Have we ever seen President Obama on Capitol Hill, engaging Congress in negotiations for a piece of legislation? He uses Executive Orders to get his way as he did with an illegal immigration issue.
Wesley Pruden reports in The Washington Times about Obama’s famous temper tantrums, calling them sometimes effective strategy. Frustration from partisan gridlock makes this temper understandable. Jay Newton-Small reports at www.swampland.times.com about Obama’s temper. He justifies it that when he’s tired he snaps at people. However, maturity would temper his temper. Not getting what he wants seems to anger him. Followers don’t mind this if he is fighting for them, but overall, an ill-tempered leader is not a positive trait. Obama’s temper is so famous that several articles explore it. One was the liberal magazine, The Nation. Their in-house laureate Calvin Trillin put it into poetry. Being that Four (4) is his Subconscious Attraction number, a quick temper may be his character.
Number Four (4) paired with Five (5) can be a chilling combination. Five (5) can have issues in a (Wen) tier of unresolved emotional angst. When combined with (Do Venom) tier of Four (4), the Five (5) (When) bursting can be spontaneously vindictive. However, once Five (5) confronts animosities, he or she forgets them unless paired with Six (6) who might calculate revenge. Unfortunately, Obama does have a Four (4) and Five (5) pairing that can be volatile, and Six (6) in his subordinate Conscious Direction can make him calculatingly vengeful.
Candidates have surrogate Super PACs for trashing opponents so that their hands appear clean. Obama is not the only president to take advantage of the system. Does this, however, bring the "change" he promised? He was never specific, so many voters projected the change they wanted onto his campaign rhetoric. This was a very clever tactic.
During the 2008 primaries, Obama wasn’t someone to go against. He was the one who played the race card then turned it to Bill Clinton’s problem who never played it. He also played it against Hillary Clinton and John McCain. Now he is playing it again every chance he gets using his surrogate Eric Holder and others. Many websites chronicled Obama playing the race card when he insinuated:
"So nobody really thinks that Bush or McCain have a real answer for the challenges we face. So what they’re going to try to do is make you scared of me. You know. He’s not patriotic enough. He’s got a funny name. You know, he doesn’t look like all those other presidents on those dollar bills, you know. He’s risky. That’s essentially the argument they’re making."
That is how clever political operatives work. Is it underhanded? Voters didn’t care. They voted their hearts, not their minds. The country has paid the price because we’re deeper in debt with no real solutions to fixing the problems that Obama himself continues to blame on predecessors. In 2000 voters also elected a candidate with whom they wanted to share a beer. We’re in the exact if not worse situation in 2012 that he promised to fix in 2008 when he said opponents could not. Nevertheless, he can blame the obstructive GOP Congress. Yet, the Democrats, including then Senator Obama, went along with what Bush wanted to do, giving him expensive wars and tax cuts for the wealthy. Obama now distances himself from the very policies for which he voted.
An inexperienced Five (5) longs to find (New) experiences. This attests to his unpreparedness for the gravity of the position. Just because one thinks an idea is good, doesn’t mean it will work as imagined. This is where idealism and practicability butt heads. Weekly "date nights," costing taxpayers $ ½ M each attests, he is a nine-to-five President, preferring to clock out as an hourly employee than work as a manager with long hours. Who were the date nights to appease? Barack and Michelle Obama aren’t newlyweds. To be so cavalier with taxpayers’ monies during difficult financial times in America shows a "Let them, eat cake," attitude. The President does seem to enjoy campaigning. He could be in Washington, but was on the campaign trail long before the General election when he has no Democrat rivals. This shows his priorities. Being president seems more important to him personally than concerning himself with the problems of America.
His Life Path of Number Two (2) puts him in conflict with his stubborn Four (4). Neediness in his Two (2) (Be Too Constant) tier makes him give in on principles rather than fight for them because his desire for personal aggrandizement is paramount. Needing to be liked can go against duties of the Office. He is good at speaking up for poor Americans on the campaign stump, but not so good at applying them when it matters. The PPACA may be more about securing globalization and benefitting Medical Insurance industries than getting low income earners medical care. The poor can get onto Medicaid so would have coverage without the Healthcare Bill. It also seems for some vocal Legislators and Pundits that it was about getting their personal premiums lowered by mandating that those who don’t pay for coverage do so. After all, modern politics, for some, is about personal aggrandizement.
No rumors exist that Barack Obama is not faithful, therefore, we can assume he is on the positive side of (To Be Constant) and (Constant, Be Two) regarding relationships.
President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) with provisions authorizing detention of any American by the military without a habeas corpus or due process. His signing statement seemed politically expedient that while he is in office, he won’t enact those provisions, which sounded like extortion. When he is out of office, any despot can carry out the provisions unless Congress repeals it or courts overturn it. One federal court did strike that provision as reported by Democracy Now!
A federal judge has struck down part of a controversial law that allows the government to indefinitely detain anyone it considers a terrorism suspect anywhere in the world without charge or trial, including U.S. citizens. The ruling came in a lawsuit challenging the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, filed by a group of journalists, scholars and political activists. Judge Katherine Forrest of the Southern District of New York struck down the indefinite detention provision, saying it likely violates the First and Fifth Amendments. Judge Forrest rejected the Obama administration’s argument that the NDAA merely reaffirmed an existing law recognizing the military’s right to perform certain routine duties.
If President Obama were certain about the provision’s constitutionality, why did he pen an Executive Order saying that he would not enact those provisions while he’s President? He must have known that they weren’t constitutional, but he signed the NDAA with those provisions anyway.
President Obama took credit for ending the Iraq war when it wasn’t his to take. His predecessor George Walker Bush made an agreement with Iraqi officials to end it on that date, and though the Obama Administration wanted to continue, Iraq said No. Iraqi Officials wouldn’t continue giving American soldiers amnesty for actions.
Since President Obama is hanging his presidency on the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act (PPACA) examining it for its veracity is fair. The PPACA takes $500 billion from Medicare over a ten-year period. Obama also authorized other cuts of $50 billion to get the debt extension enacted. Various sources estimate that the PPACA cuts more than $700 Billion from Medicare. PPACA does not eliminate preexisting conditions. It only shortens the time before treating them: 18 months to 9 months and 12 to 3 months. Private health insurance companies do not necessarily ban pre-existing conditions either. Depending on the provider has short or long waiting times for pre-existing conditions. Some have shorter periods than PPACA has to begin treatment once signing on the dotted line. People are so uninformed that they buy the lies about the preexisting condition clause of PPACA, thinking all health insurers disallow them.
Medicare is not the end-all-be-all of healthcare. It is exactly like private insurers who charge premiums, co-pays, and deductibles, and chooses what conditions it will pay for or not. Only those who fall below guidelines for income get everything paid for by the government on Medi-Cal and Medicaid. PPACA may very well force more people onto those programs, but state governments impose limits on conditions and medicines for which they will pay. The economy is no longer in the same condition as when those programs were first enacted.
What people don’t know about those programs, is that they allow government agencies to monitor recipients’ incomes. They watch every penny they have. Is that freedom? The government doesn’t give anyone anything, but in some states, recipients must bequeath property over to the government to repay the debt. If individuals want to get off those programs, they must repay the debts. Legislators seem to have designed these programs to keep people under government’s thumb. PPACA forcing patients onto Medicaid, is forcing them into subserviency to the government.
This bill was unnecessary when we have Medicaid and Medi-Cal, and other programs for the poor. Congress could have simply opened up Medicare for anyone who wants it, not forcing everyone to buy insurance. Yes, they would pay a premium, but it’s according to their income level. Media reported that Obama met with health insurance providers to get provisions for his bill. One could conclude that he is paying off contributors rather than looking out for citizens.
Also, PPACA will gut or eliminate Medicare Advantage programs where seniors buy outside Medicare, forcing half of them to return to Medicare. It also guts the program’s benefits. See the Heritage Foundation web site at www.heritage.org for details or search "Obamacare cuts to Medicare Advantage" for other information. Other than PPACA, he mostly governs like a conservative. PPACA raises taxes on middle income earners since Chief Justice Roberts ruled that the mandate is a tax, making it legal.
The Obama Administration has also cut Planned Parenthood funding that helps women’s health. Early in his term, Obama continued the Bush tax cuts without a fight. He has also continued the Bush wars.
Is Obama out of touch with his green agenda? He manipulated the public to enact it, without really selling its good points. The price of gas is devastating middle and lower income households. His Energy Secretary Chu even said that Obama’s Administration wants the price of gasoline to reach $8 a gallon. I forget where I heard him say it, but I heard him say it. The "Cash for Clunkers" program helped higher income earners, and did nothing for poor people to get newer cars. Dealers were forced to crush trade-ins, cars that poor people could afford to buy that would be an upgrade in miles per gallon for them. Poor people can’t afford to buy expensive tiny green cars. Ranchers would never buy them. They need their tattered trucks to haul hay and dogs. People living in rural areas where they must drive 25 to 50 miles for groceries wouldn’t buy them. They’d have to make several trips to get groceries to last the month. How is that saving gasoline energy? Poor people don’t have outlets to charge 40-mile batteries. Are apartment owners going to build them for each tenant? Obama lets ideology cloud practical judgment. He is the one who is out of touch with poor Americans. Poor people can’t afford loans for $15,000 to $30,000 cars, nor the more expensive insurance they would need. They need to buy basics like gas and food. Instead, he lets these commodities rise in price, trying to force consumers to buy his "green" cars. Where is the compassion in this? Nevertheless, he travels around in the official luxury limo for date nights and campaigning rather than staying in Washington, working.
I must be honest. When Obama sang the half bar of Al Green’s song, I would have melted if he’d gone on longer. That was the first time I ever regarded him as sexy when media spun that as his quality. I never found him sexy, but rigid and artificial, trying to appear authoritative when he was probably uncomfortable. He seems more like a little boy trying to fill daddy’s shoes when mom was left alone. I don’t fault him for that. He is too young and inexperienced for the position given to him.
[Please Tweet, send to Facebook, email, comment, etc., if you think this is helpful.]
Barack Hussein Obama = One (1)
Barack Obama = Five (5)
Barry Obama = Six (6)
Barry Soetoro = Nine (9)
(08/04/1961) = Attraction is Four (4) and Life Path is Two (2)
[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.]
Of the names he now uses, Obama’s main Conscious Name Direction number is One (1), and his subordinate Name numbers are Five (5), Six (6), and Nine (9). His Name as Number One (1) reflects either, naivete’ of a (Jackass) who will (Just Ask) for advice or (A Sage) who has learned from life. Do his policies reflect well-thought-out wisdom or do they pander to his base of voters and financial backers? All presidents have advisers to whom they can turn. Most, if not all, politicians indulge those who buy them off. Nevertheless, other Presidents spent countless hours ruminating over and engaging in policies, not vacationing, swinging golf clubs, or endlessly campaigning for a second term. President Obama parties and vacations (at taxpayer expense) more than he governs. President Obama’s predecessor did the same, setting a precedent for allowing this leeway because the Presidency is such a "stressful" job. When we have enough life experience, we are not as anxious, knowing how to connect unrelated matters to solve current problems that a well-developed Number One (1) learns to do. Is the job of the presidency for a newbie?
At www.pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/03/26/ gen44-obama-names-entire-generation-after-himself-whether-they . . . . The link is confusing and you’ll have to search to find the YouTube posting on the page where President Obama names a generation after his 44th presidency, thus himself. Going to my twitter account @nnnTheCode or @NoNonsenseCode will get you the posted link.
I knew by President Obama’s actions, statements, and demeanor that he had to have an arrogant (I Are) better than others, Nine (9) in his arsenal. Yet, it just wasn’t there. Where is the arrogance he shows in his numbers? How could I be so wrong to view him that way when he doesn’t have a Nine (9)? I’d have to do some hard reflection to understand from where this trait in him arises.
One day, one of my Twitter followers @ACollinsByrnes a.k.a. TappyWise tweeted that Obama’s name under his stepfather was Barry Soetoro. I checked it out. Evidence exists that he went by Barry Soetoro in his youth. This gives him a Nine (9) as a subordinate Name Direction number. Love to be right. Hate crow pie.
Obama’s Life Path Number Two (2) tier of (Take Back) reinforces the (Jackass) (Just Ask) tier of his Direction Number One (1). As with other Presidents, he took back campaign promises. However, did he really believe his rhetoric or was he deliberately lying to get votes? Is he clinging to the (Be Too Constant) tier of Two (2), making him wedded tightly to ideals? He allowed the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy to continue when he promised otherwise. His rhetoric about millionaires and billionaires paying their "fair share," seems to pander to his base. Since 2010 President Obama, however, is now part of the top 1% he criticizes at his current worth of $11.8M from a $400,000 a year job. Does he really empathize with the middle and poor income classes, or is he chomping at the bit to become an elite billionaire?
Who would blame him for not wanting to be poor? Yet, he seems to bite the hands of those opening the door where he wants to enter. Being good at politics and by definition a liar is not necessarily being a good president. This might be where Obama calls upon his Six (6) (Fox Of) Conscious Direction number, calculating everything he does. Is he helping poorer classes or succumbing to the (Ask For) greed of Six (6)?
Obama has both Conscious Direction Name numbers of Five (5) and Six (6). During the 2008 debates Obama admitted being lazy. He was being honest, however, as with postponing and obfuscating about his stance on same sex marriage, he avoids candor unless it benefits him. Nevertheless, the remark reveals he doesn’t operate under the (Of Ox) hard-working tier of Six (6). By his actions, he seems not interested in the seriously hard work this office requires, but prefers the luxuries that benefit him.
If Obama is an advanced Number One (1) we’d expect him to (Just Say) the truth and be honestly direct. He doesn’t always do this. When he appeases his base, his speech is often awkward and stilted while searching for the right words. The whole having done cocaine business never sat well with many people no matter how forthright Obama seemed. It seemed more like a tactic to deflect it from being an election issue so that opponents couldn’t use it against him. He was successful at deflecting a questionable past. Yet, was he also appealing to young "hip" voters? No one said he is stupid. He knows how to manipulatively get his way. Look at what he did with the healthcare bill. President Obama purposefully said it "was not a tax." If naive’ legislators thought it was a tax, fewer would have voted for it.
Barack Obama’s Conscious Direction subordinate Name Five (5), shows he can learn from experiences. This gives him instincts to know what is (In You), so that he can relate with other people. This is a good trait. Relating and caring are different matters however. Is he understanding what is (In You) for others’ benefit or his own? This shows how one can develop into the crafty (Fox Of) nature of the subsequent Six (6). For all his rhetoric, no genuine feelings for citizens come from him, except contempt when he disparages religious gun owners.
Five (5) is the most enigmatic or puzzling number to define. (From Wanting New) experiences, Fives (5) can become easily dissatisfied. If they aren’t problem-solvers, they can easily dismiss problems rather than solving them thoroughly. Obama has already admitted during 2008 debates that he isn’t into details. He’d rather let others trifle with weighty matters. This gives the impression of aloofness or disengagement.
Obama’s Subconscious Attraction number is Four (4) that if negative can brew to (Do Venom), becoming vindictive or if positive is (Made Victorious) by rising above personal animosities. On History Channel’s, It’s Good to Be President, journalist Richard Wolfe said, President Obama is vindictive on the golf course when he doesn’t get his way: Also, that it was especially visible when he’s tired. This kind of temper over a simple golf game shows a spoiled nature. This is not a temperament of someone who is mature. Obama can let animosities brew into a (Wen) of Five (5) that is a boil or cyst of mental agitation. When he confronts them, however, his famous temper comes into action.
The website www.humanevents.com reports, "Remember last week, when President Obama threw a fit and stormed out of budget negotiations with the House Republican leadership? Do you recall what made him blow a fuse? It was when House Majority Leader Eric Cantor suggested a short-term deal to raise the debt limit a bit, because Democrats and Republicans could use more time to settle their differences." Have we ever seen President Obama on Capitol Hill, engaging Congress in negotiations for a piece of legislation? He uses Executive Orders to get his way as he did with an illegal immigration issue.
Wesley Pruden reports in The Washington Times about Obama’s famous temper tantrums, calling them sometimes effective strategy. Frustration from partisan gridlock makes this temper understandable. Jay Newton-Small reports at www.swampland.times.com about Obama’s temper. He justifies it that when he’s tired he snaps at people. However, maturity would temper his temper. Not getting what he wants seems to anger him. Followers don’t mind this if he is fighting for them, but overall, an ill-tempered leader is not a positive trait. Obama’s temper is so famous that several articles explore it. One was the liberal magazine, The Nation. Their in-house laureate Calvin Trillin put it into poetry. Being that Four (4) is his Subconscious Attraction number, a quick temper may be his character.
Number Four (4) paired with Five (5) can be a chilling combination. Five (5) can have issues in a (Wen) tier of unresolved emotional angst. When combined with (Do Venom) tier of Four (4), the Five (5) (When) bursting can be spontaneously vindictive. However, once Five (5) confronts animosities, he or she forgets them unless paired with Six (6) who might calculate revenge. Unfortunately, Obama does have a Four (4) and Five (5) pairing that can be volatile, and Six (6) in his subordinate Conscious Direction can make him calculatingly vengeful.
Candidates have surrogate Super PACs for trashing opponents so that their hands appear clean. Obama is not the only president to take advantage of the system. Does this, however, bring the "change" he promised? He was never specific, so many voters projected the change they wanted onto his campaign rhetoric. This was a very clever tactic.
During the 2008 primaries, Obama wasn’t someone to go against. He was the one who played the race card then turned it to Bill Clinton’s problem who never played it. He also played it against Hillary Clinton and John McCain. Now he is playing it again every chance he gets using his surrogate Eric Holder and others. Many websites chronicled Obama playing the race card when he insinuated:
That is how clever political operatives work. Is it underhanded? Voters didn’t care. They voted their hearts, not their minds. The country has paid the price because we’re deeper in debt with no real solutions to fixing the problems that Obama himself continues to blame on predecessors. In 2000 voters also elected a candidate with whom they wanted to share a beer. We’re in the exact if not worse situation in 2012 that he promised to fix in 2008 when he said opponents could not. Nevertheless, he can blame the obstructive GOP Congress. Yet, the Democrats, including then Senator Obama, went along with what Bush wanted to do, giving him expensive wars and tax cuts for the wealthy. Obama now distances himself from the very policies for which he voted.
An inexperienced Five (5) longs to find (New) experiences. This attests to his unpreparedness for the gravity of the position. Just because one thinks an idea is good, doesn’t mean it will work as imagined. This is where idealism and practicability butt heads. Weekly "date nights," costing taxpayers $ ½ M each attests, he is a nine-to-five President, preferring to clock out as an hourly employee than work as a manager with long hours. Who were the date nights to appease? Barack and Michelle Obama aren’t newlyweds. To be so cavalier with taxpayers’ monies during difficult financial times in America shows a "Let them, eat cake," attitude. The President does seem to enjoy campaigning. He could be in Washington, but was on the campaign trail long before the General election when he has no Democrat rivals. This shows his priorities. Being president seems more important to him personally than concerning himself with the problems of America.
His Life Path of Number Two (2) puts him in conflict with his stubborn Four (4). Neediness in his Two (2) (Be Too Constant) tier makes him give in on principles rather than fight for them because his desire for personal aggrandizement is paramount. Needing to be liked can go against duties of the Office. He is good at speaking up for poor Americans on the campaign stump, but not so good at applying them when it matters. The PPACA may be more about securing globalization and benefitting Medical Insurance industries than getting low income earners medical care. The poor can get onto Medicaid so would have coverage without the Healthcare Bill. It also seems for some vocal Legislators and Pundits that it was about getting their personal premiums lowered by mandating that those who don’t pay for coverage do so. After all, modern politics, for some, is about personal aggrandizement.
No rumors exist that Barack Obama is not faithful, therefore, we can assume he is on the positive side of (To Be Constant) and (Constant, Be Two) regarding relationships.
President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) with provisions authorizing detention of any American by the military without a habeas corpus or due process. His signing statement seemed politically expedient that while he is in office, he won’t enact those provisions, which sounded like extortion. When he is out of office, any despot can carry out the provisions unless Congress repeals it or courts overturn it. One federal court did strike that provision as reported by Democracy Now!
If President Obama were certain about the provision’s constitutionality, why did he pen an Executive Order saying that he would not enact those provisions while he’s President? He must have known that they weren’t constitutional, but he signed the NDAA with those provisions anyway.
President Obama took credit for ending the Iraq war when it wasn’t his to take. His predecessor George Walker Bush made an agreement with Iraqi officials to end it on that date, and though the Obama Administration wanted to continue, Iraq said No. Iraqi Officials wouldn’t continue giving American soldiers amnesty for actions.
Since President Obama is hanging his presidency on the Patient Protection Affordable Care Act (PPACA) examining it for its veracity is fair. The PPACA takes $500 billion from Medicare over a ten-year period. Obama also authorized other cuts of $50 billion to get the debt extension enacted. Various sources estimate that the PPACA cuts more than $700 Billion from Medicare. PPACA does not eliminate preexisting conditions. It only shortens the time before treating them: 18 months to 9 months and 12 to 3 months. Private health insurance companies do not necessarily ban pre-existing conditions either. Depending on the provider has short or long waiting times for pre-existing conditions. Some have shorter periods than PPACA has to begin treatment once signing on the dotted line. People are so uninformed that they buy the lies about the preexisting condition clause of PPACA, thinking all health insurers disallow them.
Medicare is not the end-all-be-all of healthcare. It is exactly like private insurers who charge premiums, co-pays, and deductibles, and chooses what conditions it will pay for or not. Only those who fall below guidelines for income get everything paid for by the government on Medi-Cal and Medicaid. PPACA may very well force more people onto those programs, but state governments impose limits on conditions and medicines for which they will pay. The economy is no longer in the same condition as when those programs were first enacted.
What people don’t know about those programs, is that they allow government agencies to monitor recipients’ incomes. They watch every penny they have. Is that freedom? The government doesn’t give anyone anything, but in some states, recipients must bequeath property over to the government to repay the debt. If individuals want to get off those programs, they must repay the debts. Legislators seem to have designed these programs to keep people under government’s thumb. PPACA forcing patients onto Medicaid, is forcing them into subserviency to the government.
This bill was unnecessary when we have Medicaid and Medi-Cal, and other programs for the poor. Congress could have simply opened up Medicare for anyone who wants it, not forcing everyone to buy insurance. Yes, they would pay a premium, but it’s according to their income level. Media reported that Obama met with health insurance providers to get provisions for his bill. One could conclude that he is paying off contributors rather than looking out for citizens.
Also, PPACA will gut or eliminate Medicare Advantage programs where seniors buy outside Medicare, forcing half of them to return to Medicare. It also guts the program’s benefits. See the Heritage Foundation web site at www.heritage.org for details or search "Obamacare cuts to Medicare Advantage" for other information. Other than PPACA, he mostly governs like a conservative. PPACA raises taxes on middle income earners since Chief Justice Roberts ruled that the mandate is a tax, making it legal.
The Obama Administration has also cut Planned Parenthood funding that helps women’s health. Early in his term, Obama continued the Bush tax cuts without a fight. He has also continued the Bush wars.
Is Obama out of touch with his green agenda? He manipulated the public to enact it, without really selling its good points. The price of gas is devastating middle and lower income households. His Energy Secretary Chu even said that Obama’s Administration wants the price of gasoline to reach $8 a gallon. I forget where I heard him say it, but I heard him say it. The "Cash for Clunkers" program helped higher income earners, and did nothing for poor people to get newer cars. Dealers were forced to crush trade-ins, cars that poor people could afford to buy that would be an upgrade in miles per gallon for them. Poor people can’t afford to buy expensive tiny green cars. Ranchers would never buy them. They need their tattered trucks to haul hay and dogs. People living in rural areas where they must drive 25 to 50 miles for groceries wouldn’t buy them. They’d have to make several trips to get groceries to last the month. How is that saving gasoline energy? Poor people don’t have outlets to charge 40-mile batteries. Are apartment owners going to build them for each tenant? Obama lets ideology cloud practical judgment. He is the one who is out of touch with poor Americans. Poor people can’t afford loans for $15,000 to $30,000 cars, nor the more expensive insurance they would need. They need to buy basics like gas and food. Instead, he lets these commodities rise in price, trying to force consumers to buy his "green" cars. Where is the compassion in this? Nevertheless, he travels around in the official luxury limo for date nights and campaigning rather than staying in Washington, working.
I must be honest. When Obama sang the half bar of Al Green’s song, I would have melted if he’d gone on longer. That was the first time I ever regarded him as sexy when media spun that as his quality. I never found him sexy, but rigid and artificial, trying to appear authoritative when he was probably uncomfortable. He seems more like a little boy trying to fill daddy’s shoes when mom was left alone. I don’t fault him for that. He is too young and inexperienced for the position given to him.
[Please Tweet, send to Facebook, email, comment, etc., if you think this is helpful.]
Monday, April 16, 2012
Ann Romney Proves a Positive Case for These Numbers
Ann Lois Davies = Original Conscious Name Direction = Nine (9)
Ann Lois Romney = Subordinate Conscious Name Direction = Three (3)
Ann D Romney = Subordinate Conscious Name Direction = Six (6)
Ann Romney = Subordinate Conscious Name Direction = Two (2)
04/16/1949 = Subconscious Attraction = (7) Super-Conscious Life Path = (7)
I just found out that today is Ann Romney’s birthday of 04/16/1949. So I looked up her numbers for the heck of it. I’m not going into deep analysis as Mrs. Romney is not a presidential candidate.
As you can see, Ann Romney has Seven (7) in both Attraction and Life Path numbers. It’s almost not even a surprise. Nevertheless, she clearly remains on the positive side of numbers. Ann Romney comes across as a positive person. Nothing exists to say that she is otherwise. Through her adversities of multiple sclerosis and breast cancer she remains strong and positive. She also remains positive through grueling and often hostile campaigns. Also, nothing exists to show her to be an "in transition Seven (7)," who has a troubled past that she is overcoming. This makes Mrs. Romney a Pure-Heart who never went to the negative side of numbers. A positive Seven (7) is someone who would not cheat or lie to gain.
Ann Lois Davies' Original Conscious Name Direction number is Nine (9). She shows to be a positive and confident Nine (9) in how she consciously comports herself.
Another subordinate Direction Number is Two (2). This gives Ann a familial bent, meaning that family is important to her. This is clear, i.e., working outside the home was not her priority. The obviousness of the Romneys’ love, affection, and loyalty for each other shows Ann to be a positive Two (2) as the highest tier of (To Be Constant).
The Romneys share Six (6) in common for their Name Direction numbers. If Mrs. Romney passed through to Seven (7) on the positive side, she has to be a positive Six (6) as her subordinate Conscious Name Direction number. She is honest and works hard. This seems a trait Mitt and Ann share. One being negative while the other is positive would be impossible to have their marriage survive this long and well no matter how opponents want to paint Mitt.
The Romneys also have numbers Three (3) and Nine (9) in common. His Life Path is Nine (9), possibly making their union from his Super-Conscious Life Path and her feelings for him from her Conscious Direction. His Three (3) is in his Attraction number, making his desire for her from a deep Subconscious level. Numbers show Ann is drawn to Mitt from a Conscious level, being that Nine (9) is in her Direction number. It is clear that they are (Lucky) to have each other.
Numbers that I’ve studied of Presidents and First Ladies all have compatible numbers. The reason seems obvious when considering the gravity of the position.
Ann Lois Romney = Subordinate Conscious Name Direction = Three (3)
Ann D Romney = Subordinate Conscious Name Direction = Six (6)
Ann Romney = Subordinate Conscious Name Direction = Two (2)
04/16/1949 = Subconscious Attraction = (7) Super-Conscious Life Path = (7)
I just found out that today is Ann Romney’s birthday of 04/16/1949. So I looked up her numbers for the heck of it. I’m not going into deep analysis as Mrs. Romney is not a presidential candidate.
As you can see, Ann Romney has Seven (7) in both Attraction and Life Path numbers. It’s almost not even a surprise. Nevertheless, she clearly remains on the positive side of numbers. Ann Romney comes across as a positive person. Nothing exists to say that she is otherwise. Through her adversities of multiple sclerosis and breast cancer she remains strong and positive. She also remains positive through grueling and often hostile campaigns. Also, nothing exists to show her to be an "in transition Seven (7)," who has a troubled past that she is overcoming. This makes Mrs. Romney a Pure-Heart who never went to the negative side of numbers. A positive Seven (7) is someone who would not cheat or lie to gain.
Ann Lois Davies' Original Conscious Name Direction number is Nine (9). She shows to be a positive and confident Nine (9) in how she consciously comports herself.
Another subordinate Direction Number is Two (2). This gives Ann a familial bent, meaning that family is important to her. This is clear, i.e., working outside the home was not her priority. The obviousness of the Romneys’ love, affection, and loyalty for each other shows Ann to be a positive Two (2) as the highest tier of (To Be Constant).
The Romneys share Six (6) in common for their Name Direction numbers. If Mrs. Romney passed through to Seven (7) on the positive side, she has to be a positive Six (6) as her subordinate Conscious Name Direction number. She is honest and works hard. This seems a trait Mitt and Ann share. One being negative while the other is positive would be impossible to have their marriage survive this long and well no matter how opponents want to paint Mitt.
The Romneys also have numbers Three (3) and Nine (9) in common. His Life Path is Nine (9), possibly making their union from his Super-Conscious Life Path and her feelings for him from her Conscious Direction. His Three (3) is in his Attraction number, making his desire for her from a deep Subconscious level. Numbers show Ann is drawn to Mitt from a Conscious level, being that Nine (9) is in her Direction number. It is clear that they are (Lucky) to have each other.
Numbers that I’ve studied of Presidents and First Ladies all have compatible numbers. The reason seems obvious when considering the gravity of the position.
Friday, March 9, 2012
Numerology Confirms Why Sponsors Rush Away from Limbaugh
Rush Hudson Limbaugh III = Four (4)
Rush Hudson Limbaugh = Four (4)
Rush Limbaugh = Four (4)
01/12/1951 = Attraction = Three (3) and Life Path = Two (2)
[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 if they come up in analysis. Not everyone has all tiers. These numbers only confirm character that is observably verifiable.]
Searching the Internet for "Rush Limbaugh scandals" reveal what we already know. His Oxycodone and Viagra scandals are legendary, as well his diatribes against anyone who challenges him, especially spewing venomous language toward women and minorities. He uses the airwaves to vent his personal hatreds, rationalizing that he’s an entertainer who thinks he’s funny. Funny? Seriously? What low bar do his listeners set?
It takes a callously corrupt personality to kick someone while he’s down. Ask Michael J Fox whether Limbaugh was being a funny entertainer or not when he mercilessly mocked Fox for having Parkinson disease.
Who is laughing, except those who agree with Limbaugh’s hateful rhetoric? Limbaugh cannot take any criticism. According to a recent news clip, he screens callers who would rebuke him. This reveals a fragile ego unable to discuss issues calmly and intelligently. He isn’t alone on the radio airwaves of shock jocks who are unable to calmly exchange ideas, but instead vent their personal brands of hatred.
I confronted a neighbor who had a radio show poster for Rush Limbaugh in his window. When challenged on listening to Limbaugh, his embarrassed excuse was that "He’s funny." As time reveals all wrinkles, he turned out to be just as hatefully-minded. I’ve done business with people who’ve had Limbaugh blaring from radios. As time passed, I learned they too had just as meanspirited attitudes. I no longer do business with people who have their radios tuned to Rush. Since water seeks its own level, that’s a clue to their character. Limbaugh feeds into the worst traits of humanity. Without his loud and aggressive timbre would Rush have a job?
Past comedians who were as acerbic and crude instigated pubic outrage. According to Wikipedia, "[Andrew Dice] Clay is known for a style of comedy that has sparked controversy and much media coverage. He is loved by some and reviled by others, who feel that his act is crude, misogynistic, racist, homophobic and degrading. Clay has been widely opposed by women's rights groups and he has been banned from many radio and television shows for his explicit language and socially and politically charged humor. MTV banned him for life in 1989 for reciting what he called ‘adult nursery rhymes’ during the annual Video Music Awards ceremony (September 6, 1989). In 2011, he was [reinstated] by MTV. The Biography Channel refuses to produce a biography of him." Clay, however, did not have the political clout of Limbaugh.
Lenny Bruce’s vulgar haranguing paled in comparison to Limbaugh’s crude mouth although he used shocking words. Only those, sitting in boozy smoked-filled bars were subjected to his rants. It was by choice. Innocent people didn’t have to hear him through overplayed media clips to make political points.
Rush Hudson Limbaugh with or without the III or minus his middle name Hudson, can’t escape the Conscious Name Direction Number Four (4). This Significancy consciously completes the Life Path Significancy. (The Name is the only number that is immutable so represents Conscious awareness.) His Life Path is Number Two (2). He consciously uses vitriol of to (Do Venom) to get supporters (To Back) him. Limbaugh seems a negative (Be Too Constant) Two (2) in that he clings tightly to this method without self reflection that what he is doing is destructive to society. If he knows it is destructive, then he makes the Conscious choice to be so. He might even take pride as a child would do toward the destructive mess he’s helped make when feeding off the worst in human character.
Instead of being (Moved) to change his routine Rush doubles down to (Do Venom) even more by slamming more women with vicious language when criticized for his hateful comments. This proves Limbaugh cannot be (Made Victorious) over his personal animus, putting him on the negative side of numbers. He stubbornly clings to his addiction of spewing hate speech. Not being introspective, he does not heed the warning of what (Venom Do) causes. Rush is determined to not be (Victory Doomed) in endeavors that benefit him. Negative Four (4) can be a force for destruction.
Conversely, being (Made Victorious) over personal angst and animus is the positive goal of Fours (4). They can be very uplifting when overcoming personal obstacles to inspire others to also reclaim their Life Forces in positive ways.
Being that Four (4) is in his Conscious Direction number, Rush chooses to project negativity in what he calls entertainment. A few other pundits have said that in private, he is a pleasant person.
An unfortunate part of being an "entertainer," however, is that the entertainer can become his or her act. Entertainers both dead and living have transformed themselves into their acts by carrying them over to their personal lives. Some to their detriments, others become successful. Unfortunately those who are successful can lose touch with their genuine self when playing a character for a long time. Or, conversely, they really are that character, it just slipped into their acts. Hollywood is very good at type casting.
Limbaugh’s Subconscious Attraction Three (3) embeds into his psyche that (Luck) is on his side, making him inherently believe he has no responsibility to answer for actions by changing them. He seems not to (Cull) a (Clue) about his personal shortcomings when he continues down the same road that got him into hot water in the first place. This lands him on the negative tiers of Three (3). His Conscious Direction of Four (4) amplifies his being unable to be (Moved) to change, landing him on the negative tiers of that number as well.
Rush’s Life Path of Two (2) gives him the opportunity of learning (To Be Constant) in relationships of (Constant, Be Two). With so many marriages behind him, this seems not to be his strength. What he does not do is (Take Back) anything he says except begrudgingly. When he apologizes, he then becomes more virulent in his vitriol, making slanderous personal attacks toward detractors. He gives bogus apologies, determined not to be (Moved), thus standing by his negativity.
Those in Two (2) Life Paths learn (To Back) others. With his massive wealth, Limbaugh may feel he is supporting his spouses as a good provider. Surely he has alimonies to pay, therefore, massive wealth is important to him.
"The Daily KOS," reported, however, that Limbaugh is willing to give his show away free as sponsors flee. "KOS" asked what this makes him. Though I wouldn’t return one attack with another, in my view, it makes him addicted to vitriol. Unable to give it up, Limbaugh’s negative show is who he is and not an act. He may want to prove critics wrong by changing tactics, but should we hold our collective breaths?
In the end, people must ask themselves whether they want a hateful and hostile society, or a pure and polite one. Limbaugh may realize he has no career if he changes his tune to a kinder, gentler Rush. So, his discourse changing anytime soon is not likely. Rush Limbaugh must also decide how he wants people to remember him. People only know him by his on air persona.
My theory is that everyone on this planet has a fragile Life Force. Some attempt to recover it by hurting and demeaning others, thinking this elevates them by stepping on and over others. They have made it a competition. Others with tentative Life Forces recover them in positive ways, helping to uplift humanity rather than diminish it without being in competition with anyone but themselves.
Because derogatory language, is commonly used, must we make ourselves common by using it?
We should commend commentators like Keith Olbermann, who humbly recognized his hurtful words and vowed to change his ways to uplift public discourse, even relinquishing his "Worst Persons" category. Liberal entertainers and commentators like Bill Maher and Ed Schultz, who also verbally attack women with whom they disagree with disgusting and degrading characterizations, should follow. Again, we should keep breathing.
Every one of us who writes books, articles, blogs, or tweets are as guilty as pundits and commentators of wanting to influence society. How we want to influence it is the question: for the better or for the worst?
Even if it’s free, hate speech is costly to society.
[I welcome your comments and if you agree with this, please tweet on Twitter, Facebook, e-mail, etc. so we can spread understanding.]
Rush Hudson Limbaugh = Four (4)
Rush Limbaugh = Four (4)
01/12/1951 = Attraction = Three (3) and Life Path = Two (2)
[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 if they come up in analysis. Not everyone has all tiers. These numbers only confirm character that is observably verifiable.]
Searching the Internet for "Rush Limbaugh scandals" reveal what we already know. His Oxycodone and Viagra scandals are legendary, as well his diatribes against anyone who challenges him, especially spewing venomous language toward women and minorities. He uses the airwaves to vent his personal hatreds, rationalizing that he’s an entertainer who thinks he’s funny. Funny? Seriously? What low bar do his listeners set?
It takes a callously corrupt personality to kick someone while he’s down. Ask Michael J Fox whether Limbaugh was being a funny entertainer or not when he mercilessly mocked Fox for having Parkinson disease.
Who is laughing, except those who agree with Limbaugh’s hateful rhetoric? Limbaugh cannot take any criticism. According to a recent news clip, he screens callers who would rebuke him. This reveals a fragile ego unable to discuss issues calmly and intelligently. He isn’t alone on the radio airwaves of shock jocks who are unable to calmly exchange ideas, but instead vent their personal brands of hatred.
I confronted a neighbor who had a radio show poster for Rush Limbaugh in his window. When challenged on listening to Limbaugh, his embarrassed excuse was that "He’s funny." As time reveals all wrinkles, he turned out to be just as hatefully-minded. I’ve done business with people who’ve had Limbaugh blaring from radios. As time passed, I learned they too had just as meanspirited attitudes. I no longer do business with people who have their radios tuned to Rush. Since water seeks its own level, that’s a clue to their character. Limbaugh feeds into the worst traits of humanity. Without his loud and aggressive timbre would Rush have a job?
Past comedians who were as acerbic and crude instigated pubic outrage. According to Wikipedia, "[Andrew Dice] Clay is known for a style of comedy that has sparked controversy and much media coverage. He is loved by some and reviled by others, who feel that his act is crude, misogynistic, racist, homophobic and degrading. Clay has been widely opposed by women's rights groups and he has been banned from many radio and television shows for his explicit language and socially and politically charged humor. MTV banned him for life in 1989 for reciting what he called ‘adult nursery rhymes’ during the annual Video Music Awards ceremony (September 6, 1989). In 2011, he was [reinstated] by MTV. The Biography Channel refuses to produce a biography of him." Clay, however, did not have the political clout of Limbaugh.
Lenny Bruce’s vulgar haranguing paled in comparison to Limbaugh’s crude mouth although he used shocking words. Only those, sitting in boozy smoked-filled bars were subjected to his rants. It was by choice. Innocent people didn’t have to hear him through overplayed media clips to make political points.
Rush Hudson Limbaugh with or without the III or minus his middle name Hudson, can’t escape the Conscious Name Direction Number Four (4). This Significancy consciously completes the Life Path Significancy. (The Name is the only number that is immutable so represents Conscious awareness.) His Life Path is Number Two (2). He consciously uses vitriol of to (Do Venom) to get supporters (To Back) him. Limbaugh seems a negative (Be Too Constant) Two (2) in that he clings tightly to this method without self reflection that what he is doing is destructive to society. If he knows it is destructive, then he makes the Conscious choice to be so. He might even take pride as a child would do toward the destructive mess he’s helped make when feeding off the worst in human character.
Instead of being (Moved) to change his routine Rush doubles down to (Do Venom) even more by slamming more women with vicious language when criticized for his hateful comments. This proves Limbaugh cannot be (Made Victorious) over his personal animus, putting him on the negative side of numbers. He stubbornly clings to his addiction of spewing hate speech. Not being introspective, he does not heed the warning of what (Venom Do) causes. Rush is determined to not be (Victory Doomed) in endeavors that benefit him. Negative Four (4) can be a force for destruction.
Conversely, being (Made Victorious) over personal angst and animus is the positive goal of Fours (4). They can be very uplifting when overcoming personal obstacles to inspire others to also reclaim their Life Forces in positive ways.
Being that Four (4) is in his Conscious Direction number, Rush chooses to project negativity in what he calls entertainment. A few other pundits have said that in private, he is a pleasant person.
An unfortunate part of being an "entertainer," however, is that the entertainer can become his or her act. Entertainers both dead and living have transformed themselves into their acts by carrying them over to their personal lives. Some to their detriments, others become successful. Unfortunately those who are successful can lose touch with their genuine self when playing a character for a long time. Or, conversely, they really are that character, it just slipped into their acts. Hollywood is very good at type casting.
Limbaugh’s Subconscious Attraction Three (3) embeds into his psyche that (Luck) is on his side, making him inherently believe he has no responsibility to answer for actions by changing them. He seems not to (Cull) a (Clue) about his personal shortcomings when he continues down the same road that got him into hot water in the first place. This lands him on the negative tiers of Three (3). His Conscious Direction of Four (4) amplifies his being unable to be (Moved) to change, landing him on the negative tiers of that number as well.
Rush’s Life Path of Two (2) gives him the opportunity of learning (To Be Constant) in relationships of (Constant, Be Two). With so many marriages behind him, this seems not to be his strength. What he does not do is (Take Back) anything he says except begrudgingly. When he apologizes, he then becomes more virulent in his vitriol, making slanderous personal attacks toward detractors. He gives bogus apologies, determined not to be (Moved), thus standing by his negativity.
Those in Two (2) Life Paths learn (To Back) others. With his massive wealth, Limbaugh may feel he is supporting his spouses as a good provider. Surely he has alimonies to pay, therefore, massive wealth is important to him.
"The Daily KOS," reported, however, that Limbaugh is willing to give his show away free as sponsors flee. "KOS" asked what this makes him. Though I wouldn’t return one attack with another, in my view, it makes him addicted to vitriol. Unable to give it up, Limbaugh’s negative show is who he is and not an act. He may want to prove critics wrong by changing tactics, but should we hold our collective breaths?
In the end, people must ask themselves whether they want a hateful and hostile society, or a pure and polite one. Limbaugh may realize he has no career if he changes his tune to a kinder, gentler Rush. So, his discourse changing anytime soon is not likely. Rush Limbaugh must also decide how he wants people to remember him. People only know him by his on air persona.
My theory is that everyone on this planet has a fragile Life Force. Some attempt to recover it by hurting and demeaning others, thinking this elevates them by stepping on and over others. They have made it a competition. Others with tentative Life Forces recover them in positive ways, helping to uplift humanity rather than diminish it without being in competition with anyone but themselves.
Because derogatory language, is commonly used, must we make ourselves common by using it?
We should commend commentators like Keith Olbermann, who humbly recognized his hurtful words and vowed to change his ways to uplift public discourse, even relinquishing his "Worst Persons" category. Liberal entertainers and commentators like Bill Maher and Ed Schultz, who also verbally attack women with whom they disagree with disgusting and degrading characterizations, should follow. Again, we should keep breathing.
Every one of us who writes books, articles, blogs, or tweets are as guilty as pundits and commentators of wanting to influence society. How we want to influence it is the question: for the better or for the worst?
Even if it’s free, hate speech is costly to society.
[I welcome your comments and if you agree with this, please tweet on Twitter, Facebook, e-mail, etc. so we can spread understanding.]
Saturday, January 21, 2012
Romney - Good Qualities Media Ignores - UPDATE
Willard Mitt Romney = Six (6)
Mitt Romney = Eight (8)
(03/12/1947) = Three (3) Attraction and Life Path of Nine (9)
[Get full tiers and word patterns for numbers on my blog entitled, What the Numbers Represent. To save space, I won’t add them all here, but will only refer to them in this blog as they come up in analysis.]
By the look of Former Governor Mitt Romney’s numbers, he really is who he is. He confirms my number theories.
Willard Mitt Romney has both Six (6) and Eight (8) as his Conscious Direction numbers that he uses to fulfil his Life Path Number Nine (9). Using the subordinate Name Direction of Mitt Romney, however, makes his Conscious Direction of Eight (8) more prominent.
Can we assume that presidential candidates with Six (6) stretch the truth or out-and-out lie when on a (Fox) or (Fox Of) tier? How much they do this depends upon their expectation of achieving power from the Office to use for personal aggrandizement, or to genuinely help the Country. Politics, after all, does not require hard manual labor that one on an (Of Ox) tier might need. Governor Romney, however, does work hard for votes as @nyformitt, whom I follow on Twitter shows in their links.
Willard Mitt Romney has Six (6) as an original Conscious Name Direction number. The press considered him "squeaky clean" until they turned from him and on him. Personally, I’m tired of media selecting winners and losers instead of voters doing so. Nevertheless, Romney’s fibbing under the (Fox Of) nature amounts to embellishments on his hunting "record" to appeal to the NRA in the 2008 presidential elections. In 2012 debates, he has owned up to and clarified his hunting abilities this time around. Also, he seems to think of his job-creating differently than do media and opponents. However, when trying to clarify his record, media seems not to want to hear or report that he has helped companies survive. When checking the Internet, he nets very little controversy compared to the selected frontrunners. (See posts titled Newt GinGRINCH on the Numbers Couch, Is It Time to Define Santorum, and Copycat Cowboy.)
Those on the (Fox) tier of Six (6) can work to broadened intelligence, using it to outwit opponents. Romney does appear to cleverly use his intelligence. Despite media spin, he is very articulate and no more boring than any other candidate. Personally, I don’t find President Obama to be all that spellbinding. Not many have the oratory expertise of Bill Moyers or former New York Governor Mario Cuomo. If it were up to me, however, I’d suggest Romney use his hands less when speaking.
Sixes (6) can (Ask For) things, making them materialistic or they can (Ask Of) themselves to achieve to their highest nature, making them more spiritual. Thanks to my Twitter follower Linda @committedvoter, I discovered a side of Romney that I didn’t know exists. Checking out her tweets, I discovered that he often didn’t take salaries for his work. According to www.philanthropytoday.com Romney never took a salary as Governor of Massachusetts, but donated it to charity. Also, he pledged to do the same as President. This philanthropy puts former Governor Romney on the positive (Ask Of) tier of Six (6).
Though I could not definitively find that he didn’t take a salary as head of the Olympics, through www.politifact.com I discovered that Romney returned to them respectability. It was sinking with corruption scandals when he restored integrity. Would the Olympic committee have turned to someone who was corrupt to restore integrity? No. Opponents and left wing pundits leave out these facts about him as they try to smear him as some "vulture capitalist," an unfitting term when examining the complete record.
Last night on Coast-to-Coast AM on the George Knapp show, fearless award winning BBC journalist Greg Palast commented on Bain Capital. He described it as a "benign" company, meaning, "genial or kindly and favorable, not harmful." Palast is a very credible source. He is forthright when uncovering corruption. If he regards Bain as benign, most likely the American media is showing bias by their excessively negative characterizations. The media vilification of Bain came before they did any investigation. Pundits say that they await information on Bain. If unbiased, wouldn’t they do their investigations first rather than putting negative stereotypes into voters’ minds?
One thing he does not do, is to brag about his personal philanthropy. Some of his opponents cannot say this. By their actions, if they were as philanthropic, they clearly would let us know.
Also, for the media to play the sibling rivalry card pitting people against each other is what is really despicable. As I’ve said in my Twitter feed, the size of one’s pocketbook does not determine the size of one’s heart. I’ve known good rich people and bad poor people and vice versa. The media spinning that people deserve jobs even when they are negligent is ludicrous. Does anyone think that the Captain of the cruise ship that he ran aground is worthy of continued employment?
Media opponents hammered the spin that Romney is in the privileged class because he bought a bigger house on the west coast. Personally, I don’t fault him. He has a very large and close family. Staying at his home rather than in motels while visiting him isn’t out of the question, so he would need larger digs. Did pundits criticize Reagan or Bush for having multiple homes and ranches across the country? They are using this to pit citizens against citizens for their political purposes.
I didn’t condemn John Edwards for the $400 haircut either. Cheating on his ill wife was another matter. This is something no one has ever accused Mitt Romney of doing. In Edwards’ case regarding the haircut, the Stylist would have to go to him. Secret Service security sitting in salon chairs would have been awkward for other customers and stylists, perhaps, worrying them needlessly that something could happen with Edwards at the salon. Having to go to him, the Stylist would most likely lose a day’s pay. It would only be fair that he compensated the Stylist for that potential loss of earnings. This might explain why the actual haircut didn’t look special or worth the price.
When we are searching for the truth and not just spinning biased stories, we come to different conclusions than media hands us to promote their agendas. What could be their agenda in smearing Governor Romney? Can it be to keep Obama in the White House, perhaps? Are they trying to give voters such reprehensible candidates that President Obama sees a second term?
His subordinate Name as Mitt Romney equals Eight (8), testing him on material and spiritual matters. Often those with Eight (8) relinquish cherished material aspects of their lives when seeking spirituality. Romney won the governorship of Massachusetts, so he is a political winner. His losses in 2008 for president and for Massachusetts U.S. Senator has not embittered him, showing him to be a positive person. Also, he is not without personal struggles. His wife, Ann diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in 1998 also fought a battle with double breast cancer. To Mitt Romney’s credit, he did not leave his wife and genuinely seems to love her. During his runs for public office, no one has come forward to claim he is anything but a loyal and loving husband.
Also, Romney does not harp on this nobility of character during debates to exploit them. To the contrary, Gingrich uses such personal circumstances to gain what respect he thinks it will garner him. Romney not only comes across as calm, but noble unlike some opponents who come across as so desperate that they would bring down their party rather than lose gracefully. This is not showing us the best candidate, but the most desperate for power. Mr. Romney has lost elections for both the Presidency and the United States Senate. Unlike Gingrich, Romney’s demeanor is not of someone who is bitter and vindictive with disappointment. Romney comes across as someone who takes losses in his stride, and someone who is willing to learn from circumstances. He humbly admits his mistakes, making him credible when he does tout his strengths.
On Chris Wallace’s Sunday show, Wallace asked Romney about his 10 percent tithing. Romney said that if he didn’t give the full 10 percent that would not be living up to his agreement. This is someone who works at being honorable. He also talked about being tested. He seems to rise to the challenge as the tier (Question Hard Unknown Quantity) in Number Eight (8) that embraces challenges.
An effect of Six (6) in his Conscious Direction seems that he learns from his Subconscious Attraction number of Three (3) to (Cull) a proper (Clue) to gain his (Luck). He doesn’t sit back idly wallowing in his wealth, but puts his talents to use. Yes, he may have been (Lucky) to be born into a wealthy family. This family, however, was not from established wealth and earned their fortunes. He points out that his father George Romney taught him good work ethics. Voters can connect with that. Many parents taught good work ethics.
Romney’s Life Path number is Nine (9). Our traits in this number come from learning or not learning our lessons in previous numbers. Romney exudes good-natured confidence even when facing down confrontations during debates. He does not exhibit one iota of maliciously angry (Ire) or vindictiveness. Pointing out opponents’ records is fair game if the media deems it such, but is it negative campaigning? Bad-mouthing opponents seems more like negative campaigning. When Romney does defend his record or points out the records of opponents, it is direct and with good-nature. He is like a Saint Bernard gently nuzzling away a sniping Chihuahua from his heals, making a scolding from Romney almost desirable. This trait surely would be more handy when negotiating with other countries rather than Newt Gingrich’s "it’s my way or the highway," attitude. Isn’t that the attitude that diminished America’s standing in the world from the Bush Administration?
The lessons that Nine (9) learns, lean toward full confidence as the (I Are) tier, equaling the "I Am" precept. Is Romney completely there yet? He is not. He does seem a bit insecure as the (Are I) tier of Nine (9) when explaining himself. It is a matter of perspective how people view this. This may come from reluctance to brag about his good qualities. When doing our ethical best, to have motives questioned really hurts. Romney’s confidence seems genuine rather than bluster. Countering this to Gingrich’s disrespectful nose-in-the-air F U attitude makes Romney easier to warm to than GinGRINCH. Other world leaders would probably prefer Romney’s style. However, when, push-comes-to-shove, resolve that makes him successful kicks in.
When campaigning among voters, he seems to genuinely like people whether or not he personally relates with all of them. Who can? He stops to listen to them. He does not "glad hand" people. This is something I noticed about John Edwards when he campaigned. He glad-handed voters. While shaking their hands, Edwards looked past the immediate voter to the next person without genuinely connecting. Romney looks in peoples’ eyes, signaling that the person matters.
Whether he learned this or whether it comes naturally is irrelevant. If his upbringing didn’t prepare him to understand all classes of people, I’m not sure that is a mark against him. Most of us don’t understand others from different backgrounds. Romney earnestly seems to like people. Romney does not come across like an angry person that the negative tier of (Ire) can, keeping him on the positive side of numbers. In fact, when he does get confrontational, he does so with good nature. A 180 from Newt Gingrich, Romney doesn’t come off as unpleasant, meanspirited, or vindictive.
Personally, I want the best candidate possible, to have the best world possible. I would have been happy with Huntsman or Roemer, but that isn’t going to happen. Initially, I wasn’t a Romney fan, but having kept an open mind, I watched and learned. Voters need to stop relying on the party label next to candidates’ names and examine the candidates for their personal qualities. If the bought-and-paid-for media help to pick Gingrich or Santorum simply for ratings to keep viewers hooked, heaven, help us.
UPDATE:
Thanks to a retweet of @Slone on Twitter whom I follow, @nyformitt, an article by PolitiFacts confirms that while Romney headed Bain, he did save a partner’s missing daughter’s life. Upon hearing that the daughter was missing, he immediately shut down the company. Romney hired detectives, got the police department and employees involved and found her before she died of an overdose from a rave party. Apparently, he didn’t give it a second thought. He went into action to get the job done.
The title of the article is, "Viral Internet Story Says Mitt Romney Helped Locate Missing Teen Daughter of Bain Capital Partner." The article’s anonymous author wrote: "So, here’s my epiphany: Mitt Romney simply can’t help himself. He sees a problem, and his mind immediately sets to work solving it, sometimes consciously, and sometimes not-so-consciously. He doesn’t do it for self-aggrandizement or for personal gain. He does it because that’s just how he’s wired."
Mitt Romney was born into wealth, but he also earned his own. Because he learned to attain "the American Dream," isn’t a mark against him in my book. He can show us how to achieve the best in ourselves through his actions. I do not think he is an ideologue who thinks only he has the answers for others to live their lives. He has never held himself up as an icon of virtue only to fall through the holes as his opponent Newt Gingrich fell into that trap.
My Twitter tweeter @MittforPres2012 sent a link to an article by anonymous writers from www.thecompetentconservative.com. These writers described why Romney voters are passionate about him. Read their comments in, "Newsweek/Gingrich: Romney’s ‘Perfect Family’ is a Liability." I sense Romney supporters see him as the closest America has to Jim Anderson, the dad in Father Knows Best, or Ward Cleaver the father in Leave it to Beaver.
What makes people live their faith? This doesn’t mean that their brand of religion is correct, but that the individual’s willingness to believe encourages them to be good.
Indeed, Romney may be the closest resemblance we have to an iconic father figure as he seems like a good one. Other candidates seemed also to be good examples, but they dropped from the race. Romney’s steadiness reassures people. He doesn’t come across like a heartless autocrat as biased media would have us believe. He comes across as warm and caring. The media took, the "I don’t care about poor people," entirely out of context. If biased pundits played the entire comment, we would know otherwise.
I heard Romney’s entire statement regarding supposedly, not caring for the very poor. He talked about their safety nets that if they have holes he’ll fix them. He never came across as someone who is heartless. Romney could have phrased the statement knowing opponents and pundits will crop it to use anything he says against him to weight the election. He is right about conditions of both poor and middle class. Government offers the poor everything, while the middle class has no safety net. When prices rise as gasoline has done, budgets suffer. Rents have continued to rise ever since President Jimmy Carter said he’d put a federal rent control in place, but never did. After he publically stated that, rents skyrocketed and never fell to earth. Some rents increased 300% overnight. Some parents had to move in with their kids and some kids couldn’t afford to leave home.
More to Romney exists than merely his wealth. His optimism is infectious to those willing to see beyond negative Media spin that pits Americans against each other for ratings. By the way, these tactics garner them, big bucks. The blindness concerning former Governor Mitt Romney is a real concern. Those, who support an obviously negative nabob like Newt GinGRINCH, are scarier than he is because they control the outcome of elections.
[If you agree with this, please Tweet, Facebook, Google, and e-mail to others.]
Mitt Romney = Eight (8)
(03/12/1947) = Three (3) Attraction and Life Path of Nine (9)
[Get full tiers and word patterns for numbers on my blog entitled, What the Numbers Represent. To save space, I won’t add them all here, but will only refer to them in this blog as they come up in analysis.]
By the look of Former Governor Mitt Romney’s numbers, he really is who he is. He confirms my number theories.
Willard Mitt Romney has both Six (6) and Eight (8) as his Conscious Direction numbers that he uses to fulfil his Life Path Number Nine (9). Using the subordinate Name Direction of Mitt Romney, however, makes his Conscious Direction of Eight (8) more prominent.
Can we assume that presidential candidates with Six (6) stretch the truth or out-and-out lie when on a (Fox) or (Fox Of) tier? How much they do this depends upon their expectation of achieving power from the Office to use for personal aggrandizement, or to genuinely help the Country. Politics, after all, does not require hard manual labor that one on an (Of Ox) tier might need. Governor Romney, however, does work hard for votes as @nyformitt, whom I follow on Twitter shows in their links.
Willard Mitt Romney has Six (6) as an original Conscious Name Direction number. The press considered him "squeaky clean" until they turned from him and on him. Personally, I’m tired of media selecting winners and losers instead of voters doing so. Nevertheless, Romney’s fibbing under the (Fox Of) nature amounts to embellishments on his hunting "record" to appeal to the NRA in the 2008 presidential elections. In 2012 debates, he has owned up to and clarified his hunting abilities this time around. Also, he seems to think of his job-creating differently than do media and opponents. However, when trying to clarify his record, media seems not to want to hear or report that he has helped companies survive. When checking the Internet, he nets very little controversy compared to the selected frontrunners. (See posts titled Newt GinGRINCH on the Numbers Couch, Is It Time to Define Santorum, and Copycat Cowboy.)
Those on the (Fox) tier of Six (6) can work to broadened intelligence, using it to outwit opponents. Romney does appear to cleverly use his intelligence. Despite media spin, he is very articulate and no more boring than any other candidate. Personally, I don’t find President Obama to be all that spellbinding. Not many have the oratory expertise of Bill Moyers or former New York Governor Mario Cuomo. If it were up to me, however, I’d suggest Romney use his hands less when speaking.
Sixes (6) can (Ask For) things, making them materialistic or they can (Ask Of) themselves to achieve to their highest nature, making them more spiritual. Thanks to my Twitter follower Linda @committedvoter, I discovered a side of Romney that I didn’t know exists. Checking out her tweets, I discovered that he often didn’t take salaries for his work. According to www.philanthropytoday.com Romney never took a salary as Governor of Massachusetts, but donated it to charity. Also, he pledged to do the same as President. This philanthropy puts former Governor Romney on the positive (Ask Of) tier of Six (6).
Though I could not definitively find that he didn’t take a salary as head of the Olympics, through www.politifact.com I discovered that Romney returned to them respectability. It was sinking with corruption scandals when he restored integrity. Would the Olympic committee have turned to someone who was corrupt to restore integrity? No. Opponents and left wing pundits leave out these facts about him as they try to smear him as some "vulture capitalist," an unfitting term when examining the complete record.
Last night on Coast-to-Coast AM on the George Knapp show, fearless award winning BBC journalist Greg Palast commented on Bain Capital. He described it as a "benign" company, meaning, "genial or kindly and favorable, not harmful." Palast is a very credible source. He is forthright when uncovering corruption. If he regards Bain as benign, most likely the American media is showing bias by their excessively negative characterizations. The media vilification of Bain came before they did any investigation. Pundits say that they await information on Bain. If unbiased, wouldn’t they do their investigations first rather than putting negative stereotypes into voters’ minds?
One thing he does not do, is to brag about his personal philanthropy. Some of his opponents cannot say this. By their actions, if they were as philanthropic, they clearly would let us know.
Also, for the media to play the sibling rivalry card pitting people against each other is what is really despicable. As I’ve said in my Twitter feed, the size of one’s pocketbook does not determine the size of one’s heart. I’ve known good rich people and bad poor people and vice versa. The media spinning that people deserve jobs even when they are negligent is ludicrous. Does anyone think that the Captain of the cruise ship that he ran aground is worthy of continued employment?
Media opponents hammered the spin that Romney is in the privileged class because he bought a bigger house on the west coast. Personally, I don’t fault him. He has a very large and close family. Staying at his home rather than in motels while visiting him isn’t out of the question, so he would need larger digs. Did pundits criticize Reagan or Bush for having multiple homes and ranches across the country? They are using this to pit citizens against citizens for their political purposes.
I didn’t condemn John Edwards for the $400 haircut either. Cheating on his ill wife was another matter. This is something no one has ever accused Mitt Romney of doing. In Edwards’ case regarding the haircut, the Stylist would have to go to him. Secret Service security sitting in salon chairs would have been awkward for other customers and stylists, perhaps, worrying them needlessly that something could happen with Edwards at the salon. Having to go to him, the Stylist would most likely lose a day’s pay. It would only be fair that he compensated the Stylist for that potential loss of earnings. This might explain why the actual haircut didn’t look special or worth the price.
When we are searching for the truth and not just spinning biased stories, we come to different conclusions than media hands us to promote their agendas. What could be their agenda in smearing Governor Romney? Can it be to keep Obama in the White House, perhaps? Are they trying to give voters such reprehensible candidates that President Obama sees a second term?
His subordinate Name as Mitt Romney equals Eight (8), testing him on material and spiritual matters. Often those with Eight (8) relinquish cherished material aspects of their lives when seeking spirituality. Romney won the governorship of Massachusetts, so he is a political winner. His losses in 2008 for president and for Massachusetts U.S. Senator has not embittered him, showing him to be a positive person. Also, he is not without personal struggles. His wife, Ann diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in 1998 also fought a battle with double breast cancer. To Mitt Romney’s credit, he did not leave his wife and genuinely seems to love her. During his runs for public office, no one has come forward to claim he is anything but a loyal and loving husband.
Also, Romney does not harp on this nobility of character during debates to exploit them. To the contrary, Gingrich uses such personal circumstances to gain what respect he thinks it will garner him. Romney not only comes across as calm, but noble unlike some opponents who come across as so desperate that they would bring down their party rather than lose gracefully. This is not showing us the best candidate, but the most desperate for power. Mr. Romney has lost elections for both the Presidency and the United States Senate. Unlike Gingrich, Romney’s demeanor is not of someone who is bitter and vindictive with disappointment. Romney comes across as someone who takes losses in his stride, and someone who is willing to learn from circumstances. He humbly admits his mistakes, making him credible when he does tout his strengths.
On Chris Wallace’s Sunday show, Wallace asked Romney about his 10 percent tithing. Romney said that if he didn’t give the full 10 percent that would not be living up to his agreement. This is someone who works at being honorable. He also talked about being tested. He seems to rise to the challenge as the tier (Question Hard Unknown Quantity) in Number Eight (8) that embraces challenges.
An effect of Six (6) in his Conscious Direction seems that he learns from his Subconscious Attraction number of Three (3) to (Cull) a proper (Clue) to gain his (Luck). He doesn’t sit back idly wallowing in his wealth, but puts his talents to use. Yes, he may have been (Lucky) to be born into a wealthy family. This family, however, was not from established wealth and earned their fortunes. He points out that his father George Romney taught him good work ethics. Voters can connect with that. Many parents taught good work ethics.
Romney’s Life Path number is Nine (9). Our traits in this number come from learning or not learning our lessons in previous numbers. Romney exudes good-natured confidence even when facing down confrontations during debates. He does not exhibit one iota of maliciously angry (Ire) or vindictiveness. Pointing out opponents’ records is fair game if the media deems it such, but is it negative campaigning? Bad-mouthing opponents seems more like negative campaigning. When Romney does defend his record or points out the records of opponents, it is direct and with good-nature. He is like a Saint Bernard gently nuzzling away a sniping Chihuahua from his heals, making a scolding from Romney almost desirable. This trait surely would be more handy when negotiating with other countries rather than Newt Gingrich’s "it’s my way or the highway," attitude. Isn’t that the attitude that diminished America’s standing in the world from the Bush Administration?
The lessons that Nine (9) learns, lean toward full confidence as the (I Are) tier, equaling the "I Am" precept. Is Romney completely there yet? He is not. He does seem a bit insecure as the (Are I) tier of Nine (9) when explaining himself. It is a matter of perspective how people view this. This may come from reluctance to brag about his good qualities. When doing our ethical best, to have motives questioned really hurts. Romney’s confidence seems genuine rather than bluster. Countering this to Gingrich’s disrespectful nose-in-the-air F U attitude makes Romney easier to warm to than GinGRINCH. Other world leaders would probably prefer Romney’s style. However, when, push-comes-to-shove, resolve that makes him successful kicks in.
When campaigning among voters, he seems to genuinely like people whether or not he personally relates with all of them. Who can? He stops to listen to them. He does not "glad hand" people. This is something I noticed about John Edwards when he campaigned. He glad-handed voters. While shaking their hands, Edwards looked past the immediate voter to the next person without genuinely connecting. Romney looks in peoples’ eyes, signaling that the person matters.
Whether he learned this or whether it comes naturally is irrelevant. If his upbringing didn’t prepare him to understand all classes of people, I’m not sure that is a mark against him. Most of us don’t understand others from different backgrounds. Romney earnestly seems to like people. Romney does not come across like an angry person that the negative tier of (Ire) can, keeping him on the positive side of numbers. In fact, when he does get confrontational, he does so with good nature. A 180 from Newt Gingrich, Romney doesn’t come off as unpleasant, meanspirited, or vindictive.
Personally, I want the best candidate possible, to have the best world possible. I would have been happy with Huntsman or Roemer, but that isn’t going to happen. Initially, I wasn’t a Romney fan, but having kept an open mind, I watched and learned. Voters need to stop relying on the party label next to candidates’ names and examine the candidates for their personal qualities. If the bought-and-paid-for media help to pick Gingrich or Santorum simply for ratings to keep viewers hooked, heaven, help us.
UPDATE:
Thanks to a retweet of @Slone on Twitter whom I follow, @nyformitt, an article by PolitiFacts confirms that while Romney headed Bain, he did save a partner’s missing daughter’s life. Upon hearing that the daughter was missing, he immediately shut down the company. Romney hired detectives, got the police department and employees involved and found her before she died of an overdose from a rave party. Apparently, he didn’t give it a second thought. He went into action to get the job done.
The title of the article is, "Viral Internet Story Says Mitt Romney Helped Locate Missing Teen Daughter of Bain Capital Partner." The article’s anonymous author wrote: "So, here’s my epiphany: Mitt Romney simply can’t help himself. He sees a problem, and his mind immediately sets to work solving it, sometimes consciously, and sometimes not-so-consciously. He doesn’t do it for self-aggrandizement or for personal gain. He does it because that’s just how he’s wired."
Mitt Romney was born into wealth, but he also earned his own. Because he learned to attain "the American Dream," isn’t a mark against him in my book. He can show us how to achieve the best in ourselves through his actions. I do not think he is an ideologue who thinks only he has the answers for others to live their lives. He has never held himself up as an icon of virtue only to fall through the holes as his opponent Newt Gingrich fell into that trap.
My Twitter tweeter @MittforPres2012 sent a link to an article by anonymous writers from www.thecompetentconservative.com. These writers described why Romney voters are passionate about him. Read their comments in, "Newsweek/Gingrich: Romney’s ‘Perfect Family’ is a Liability." I sense Romney supporters see him as the closest America has to Jim Anderson, the dad in Father Knows Best, or Ward Cleaver the father in Leave it to Beaver.
What makes people live their faith? This doesn’t mean that their brand of religion is correct, but that the individual’s willingness to believe encourages them to be good.
Indeed, Romney may be the closest resemblance we have to an iconic father figure as he seems like a good one. Other candidates seemed also to be good examples, but they dropped from the race. Romney’s steadiness reassures people. He doesn’t come across like a heartless autocrat as biased media would have us believe. He comes across as warm and caring. The media took, the "I don’t care about poor people," entirely out of context. If biased pundits played the entire comment, we would know otherwise.
I heard Romney’s entire statement regarding supposedly, not caring for the very poor. He talked about their safety nets that if they have holes he’ll fix them. He never came across as someone who is heartless. Romney could have phrased the statement knowing opponents and pundits will crop it to use anything he says against him to weight the election. He is right about conditions of both poor and middle class. Government offers the poor everything, while the middle class has no safety net. When prices rise as gasoline has done, budgets suffer. Rents have continued to rise ever since President Jimmy Carter said he’d put a federal rent control in place, but never did. After he publically stated that, rents skyrocketed and never fell to earth. Some rents increased 300% overnight. Some parents had to move in with their kids and some kids couldn’t afford to leave home.
More to Romney exists than merely his wealth. His optimism is infectious to those willing to see beyond negative Media spin that pits Americans against each other for ratings. By the way, these tactics garner them, big bucks. The blindness concerning former Governor Mitt Romney is a real concern. Those, who support an obviously negative nabob like Newt GinGRINCH, are scarier than he is because they control the outcome of elections.
[If you agree with this, please Tweet, Facebook, Google, and e-mail to others.]
Friday, January 6, 2012
Is It Time to Define Santorum? UPDATE
Richard John Santorum = original Direction = Four (4)
Rick Santorum = subordinate Direction = Nine (9)
05/10/1958 = Attraction = One (1), Life Path = Two (2)
[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.]
Go to the bottom of the page for the update if you’ve already read this.
It really doesn’t take doing his numbers to understand him. The Internet has already done a very good job of defining Santorum when doing a search. His words alone give light to his true heart as he spews racist, bigoted intolerance with impunity, but then lies about doing so, even when caught on tape. His rise in the polls has brought him media scrutiny where he now skirts his own statements.
By that fact that he denies what his own words say, one might think Rick Santorum has Six (6) in his Significancy numbers. Rachel Maddow of the same show name does a good job pointing out his hypocrisies. The video clip is at www.towleroad.com. She talks about "family values," Santorum tipping off Senator John Ensign that his marital indiscretions were heading toward being exposed all while he [Santorum] was condemning Rep. Anthony Weiner.
An example of how he thinks is at www.tnr.com/article/politics/99240/Santorum-Surge-2012-vetting-quotes. "I find it almost remarkable for a black man to say ‘now we are going to decide who are people who are not people.’"
This Santorum comment alone shows his perceptions of what he thinks it is that "black" people represent. Also, he does not seem to recognize that what he is saying, is that he [Santorum] finds it "remarkable" that a black man is a person. Going to the www.tnr.com site shows other outrageous closed-minded comments from someone who seems to think all thoughts coming out of his head are right—not just extremely Right.
Santorum’s "Freudian slips" aren’t petticoats. They are windows into his subconscious of, who he really is by what leisurely spews from his mouth.
The subordinate name Rick Santorum gives him the Conscious Direction of Nine (9). Santorum bounces between insecurity and confidence that are hallmarks of the number. Being confidently wrong, however, is still being wrong. This makes him more the (I Are) tier of arrogance as someone who thinks he is better than others rather than of someone who is genuinely confident. His demeanor is of someone who is not surefooted, but sheepish. He seems like the lowly employee who finally gets his chance to be in charge, but inwardly knows he is ill-equipped. This also lands him on the (Are I) tier of insecurity, putting him in conflict with confidence that he works to emulate. The problem is that he does not attempt to change himself. He wants to change everyone else, preferring others live in his narrow-minded world.
Richard John Santorum as an original Conscious Direction Name of Four (4) comes off like someone stuck in his convictions without the ability to change or be (Moved). It is laudable that he is working toward spirituality, but his world isn’t in this modern diverse one, but from centuries past. Visualizing him as a past-life magistrate during the Salem Witch Trials is easy. Even if not directly showing anger, but hiding it, his passive-aggressive comments and policies show anger. This also puts him on the (Ire) tier of Nine (9) from his original Name. Santorum’s policies are vindictive toward people he deems as lesser than he, making him a (Do Venom) Four (4) as though he has some inexplicable grudge to settle. This may only come from his religious ideologies. Nevertheless, he chose the interpretations of what to believe.
Determination from the (Made Victorious) tier of Four (4) will make him a formidable foe. Though some use it for winning, it is for overcoming personal angst. This tier surely benefitted him as an attorney. Wikipedia reported: "Representing the World Wrestling Federation in one case while with K&L, Santorum argued professional wrestling should be exempt from federal anabolic steroid regulations because it was not an actual sport, rather, entertainment." Santorum’s ideologies seem flexible to what is his benefit.
With a Subconscious Attraction of One (1) Santorum wants to teach and longs to be the (Sage). His comments, however, show him to be a know-it-all rather than someone who is all-knowing. His remarks that "people make bad decision," regarding their health, is a good example. How does he know this? Life is too complex regarding health for him to be so glib and belittling toward people he’s never met. He makes up statements based on ideology rather than facts. At times when not confronted, he seems truthful as someone who does (Just Say) what he thinks no matter how odd his remarks. When confronted, he later denies his wrongheaded remarks, putting him in conflict with honesty. Becoming honest can be a long process for the (Sage) to (Just Say) the truth.
CNN reports and shows videos of Santorum saying how proud he is of a billion dollars worth of earmark pork for himself while in the Senate. This is in direct conflict with Tea Party values. Nevertheless, as a candidate, he is against spending that reinforces the social safety net.
I have no doubt that he is not a (Jackass) who will (Just Ask) for advice. He seems to rely solely on his own opinions.
He was born to an Italian immigrant father and his mother is half Italian and half Irish. His upbringing seems conventional. He graduated college to become an attorney. Perhaps, he practiced so early in life that his world view comes not from experience, but from books. Lack of life experience except as an attorney to prepare him seems to have honed inflexibility to (Adjust) to a myriad of circumstances. This makes him less than qualified in a turbulent world for such a high office when flexibility is a needed quality for Commander and Chief.
Santorum’s Life Path is Two (2). The positive lessons he is to learn are (To Be Constant). In his core beliefs, he does seem rooted. He also appears faithful in relationships as the (Constant, Be Two) tier.
He seems to dismiss the (Be Too Constant) warning when concerning his ideals, i.e., he sees no other points of view than his own. His stubborn streak of not being (Moved) in Four (4) reinforces this inability to change. He also seems to (Take Back), his comments by denying that he made them. (To Be Constant) is a two-edged sword that needs balance with not to (Be Too Constant).
Voters have come to expect politicians to renege on promises. This is a problem, however, for one who touts, being a paragon of virtue because of his religious beliefs. He literally diminishes religion, i.e., no one can live up to the dogmas, especially, when a paragon cannot. This seems a good reason to keep religion out of politics. If Santorum now says he is fallible, what is the reason for him running, if he is not the paragon he professes by his arrogant attitude, comments, and policies?
UPDATE:
Since writing this analysis, my Tweetie Pies on Twitter sent many Santorum statements and videos. He seems to think that he is Elmer Gantry, the Evangelist. Elmer Gantry is a novel by Sinclair Lewis published in 1927 and turned into an award winning movie by Richard Brooks in 1960, staring Burt Lancaster. Elmer Gantry was a con man selling evangelism to small town America.
Many examples exist of Rick Santorum unabashedly showing the world how crazy he is. The fact that he seems clueless is distressing. Below are a few examples, however, many more exist.
At www.adictinginfo.org/2012/02/15/rick-santorum-wants-you-to-have-only-special-six-video/ is more than 44 minutes long. In the link @gtomase sent, Santorum calmly discusses that sex is for procreation purposes only.
At www.youtube.com/watch?v=qT9bbadUapo titled "Mainline Protestants are Not Christian," tweeted by @ EVK1908, Santorum disparages those who are not Catholics. He calmly and comfortably shows his intolerance for anyone who does not think as he does. His comfort in doing this shows something chilling about Santorum that should disturb reasonable people.
One of the most profound condemnations of Santorum comes from http://santorumexposed.com. The article exposes his vulnerabilities. However, clicking on the video next to the blog, "Sh*t Santorum Says," that is 4:05 minutes long is the most revealing as it comes directly from Santorum’s own mouth. He yells on the Senate floor with the passion of Elmer Gantry, trying to convert "The Stupid." At least he acts like he thinks Americans are stupid to fall for his "sh*t." And the word "sh*t" puts it mildly. To say that Santorum is a nutcase, puts it kindly. He is certifiable. He seems like someone who came directly from the Dark Ages into this era.
After seeing more of Santorum, I have reassessed his actions and statements. He is worse than I initially suggested. His Four (4) and Nine (9) in his Conscious Direction numbers make him dangerous. His actions confirm naked arrogance and contempt for anyone thinking differently than he does in his angry (Ire) and (I Are) better than others, tiers of Nine (9). This makes him scarier than I originally assessed when trying to be fair to him. Santorum, being on the (Ire) tier combined with (Do Venom) is clear in his actions and statements. He seems conflicted or he blatantly lies to get his way. Since numbers Four (4) and Nine (9) are in his Conscious Direction numbers, he clearly knows what he's doing. Regarding his statements over the years regarding sexuality, we should take him at his word. He isn’t comfortable living is a sexual world. Perhaps, he’d feel more comfortable with women in barkas, or barefoot and pregnant.
His record is both conservative and liberal. Nothing is wrong with this because people really don’t think along the rigid dividing lines of the extreme wings of the two parties. He lies, however, to get his way, making him not the paragon he pretends, but corrupted and definitely on the negative side of numbers.
Voters forget that Santorum was a practicing attorney. I like attorneys, but face it, they can be persuasive. Which side of the argument are they on? He seems able to flip with ease when watching him on the campaign trail. Nevertheless, the bought-and-paid-for media isn’t going to point this out. They want a Republican who can’t beat Obama.
Rick Santorum = subordinate Direction = Nine (9)
05/10/1958 = Attraction = One (1), Life Path = Two (2)
[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.]
Go to the bottom of the page for the update if you’ve already read this.
It really doesn’t take doing his numbers to understand him. The Internet has already done a very good job of defining Santorum when doing a search. His words alone give light to his true heart as he spews racist, bigoted intolerance with impunity, but then lies about doing so, even when caught on tape. His rise in the polls has brought him media scrutiny where he now skirts his own statements.
By that fact that he denies what his own words say, one might think Rick Santorum has Six (6) in his Significancy numbers. Rachel Maddow of the same show name does a good job pointing out his hypocrisies. The video clip is at www.towleroad.com. She talks about "family values," Santorum tipping off Senator John Ensign that his marital indiscretions were heading toward being exposed all while he [Santorum] was condemning Rep. Anthony Weiner.
An example of how he thinks is at www.tnr.com/article/politics/99240/Santorum-Surge-2012-vetting-quotes. "I find it almost remarkable for a black man to say ‘now we are going to decide who are people who are not people.’"
This Santorum comment alone shows his perceptions of what he thinks it is that "black" people represent. Also, he does not seem to recognize that what he is saying, is that he [Santorum] finds it "remarkable" that a black man is a person. Going to the www.tnr.com site shows other outrageous closed-minded comments from someone who seems to think all thoughts coming out of his head are right—not just extremely Right.
Santorum’s "Freudian slips" aren’t petticoats. They are windows into his subconscious of, who he really is by what leisurely spews from his mouth.
The subordinate name Rick Santorum gives him the Conscious Direction of Nine (9). Santorum bounces between insecurity and confidence that are hallmarks of the number. Being confidently wrong, however, is still being wrong. This makes him more the (I Are) tier of arrogance as someone who thinks he is better than others rather than of someone who is genuinely confident. His demeanor is of someone who is not surefooted, but sheepish. He seems like the lowly employee who finally gets his chance to be in charge, but inwardly knows he is ill-equipped. This also lands him on the (Are I) tier of insecurity, putting him in conflict with confidence that he works to emulate. The problem is that he does not attempt to change himself. He wants to change everyone else, preferring others live in his narrow-minded world.
Richard John Santorum as an original Conscious Direction Name of Four (4) comes off like someone stuck in his convictions without the ability to change or be (Moved). It is laudable that he is working toward spirituality, but his world isn’t in this modern diverse one, but from centuries past. Visualizing him as a past-life magistrate during the Salem Witch Trials is easy. Even if not directly showing anger, but hiding it, his passive-aggressive comments and policies show anger. This also puts him on the (Ire) tier of Nine (9) from his original Name. Santorum’s policies are vindictive toward people he deems as lesser than he, making him a (Do Venom) Four (4) as though he has some inexplicable grudge to settle. This may only come from his religious ideologies. Nevertheless, he chose the interpretations of what to believe.
Determination from the (Made Victorious) tier of Four (4) will make him a formidable foe. Though some use it for winning, it is for overcoming personal angst. This tier surely benefitted him as an attorney. Wikipedia reported: "Representing the World Wrestling Federation in one case while with K&L, Santorum argued professional wrestling should be exempt from federal anabolic steroid regulations because it was not an actual sport, rather, entertainment." Santorum’s ideologies seem flexible to what is his benefit.
With a Subconscious Attraction of One (1) Santorum wants to teach and longs to be the (Sage). His comments, however, show him to be a know-it-all rather than someone who is all-knowing. His remarks that "people make bad decision," regarding their health, is a good example. How does he know this? Life is too complex regarding health for him to be so glib and belittling toward people he’s never met. He makes up statements based on ideology rather than facts. At times when not confronted, he seems truthful as someone who does (Just Say) what he thinks no matter how odd his remarks. When confronted, he later denies his wrongheaded remarks, putting him in conflict with honesty. Becoming honest can be a long process for the (Sage) to (Just Say) the truth.
CNN reports and shows videos of Santorum saying how proud he is of a billion dollars worth of earmark pork for himself while in the Senate. This is in direct conflict with Tea Party values. Nevertheless, as a candidate, he is against spending that reinforces the social safety net.
I have no doubt that he is not a (Jackass) who will (Just Ask) for advice. He seems to rely solely on his own opinions.
He was born to an Italian immigrant father and his mother is half Italian and half Irish. His upbringing seems conventional. He graduated college to become an attorney. Perhaps, he practiced so early in life that his world view comes not from experience, but from books. Lack of life experience except as an attorney to prepare him seems to have honed inflexibility to (Adjust) to a myriad of circumstances. This makes him less than qualified in a turbulent world for such a high office when flexibility is a needed quality for Commander and Chief.
Santorum’s Life Path is Two (2). The positive lessons he is to learn are (To Be Constant). In his core beliefs, he does seem rooted. He also appears faithful in relationships as the (Constant, Be Two) tier.
He seems to dismiss the (Be Too Constant) warning when concerning his ideals, i.e., he sees no other points of view than his own. His stubborn streak of not being (Moved) in Four (4) reinforces this inability to change. He also seems to (Take Back), his comments by denying that he made them. (To Be Constant) is a two-edged sword that needs balance with not to (Be Too Constant).
Voters have come to expect politicians to renege on promises. This is a problem, however, for one who touts, being a paragon of virtue because of his religious beliefs. He literally diminishes religion, i.e., no one can live up to the dogmas, especially, when a paragon cannot. This seems a good reason to keep religion out of politics. If Santorum now says he is fallible, what is the reason for him running, if he is not the paragon he professes by his arrogant attitude, comments, and policies?
UPDATE:
Since writing this analysis, my Tweetie Pies on Twitter sent many Santorum statements and videos. He seems to think that he is Elmer Gantry, the Evangelist. Elmer Gantry is a novel by Sinclair Lewis published in 1927 and turned into an award winning movie by Richard Brooks in 1960, staring Burt Lancaster. Elmer Gantry was a con man selling evangelism to small town America.
Many examples exist of Rick Santorum unabashedly showing the world how crazy he is. The fact that he seems clueless is distressing. Below are a few examples, however, many more exist.
At www.adictinginfo.org/2012/02/15/rick-santorum-wants-you-to-have-only-special-six-video/ is more than 44 minutes long. In the link @gtomase sent, Santorum calmly discusses that sex is for procreation purposes only.
At www.youtube.com/watch?v=qT9bbadUapo titled "Mainline Protestants are Not Christian," tweeted by @ EVK1908, Santorum disparages those who are not Catholics. He calmly and comfortably shows his intolerance for anyone who does not think as he does. His comfort in doing this shows something chilling about Santorum that should disturb reasonable people.
One of the most profound condemnations of Santorum comes from http://santorumexposed.com. The article exposes his vulnerabilities. However, clicking on the video next to the blog, "Sh*t Santorum Says," that is 4:05 minutes long is the most revealing as it comes directly from Santorum’s own mouth. He yells on the Senate floor with the passion of Elmer Gantry, trying to convert "The Stupid." At least he acts like he thinks Americans are stupid to fall for his "sh*t." And the word "sh*t" puts it mildly. To say that Santorum is a nutcase, puts it kindly. He is certifiable. He seems like someone who came directly from the Dark Ages into this era.
After seeing more of Santorum, I have reassessed his actions and statements. He is worse than I initially suggested. His Four (4) and Nine (9) in his Conscious Direction numbers make him dangerous. His actions confirm naked arrogance and contempt for anyone thinking differently than he does in his angry (Ire) and (I Are) better than others, tiers of Nine (9). This makes him scarier than I originally assessed when trying to be fair to him. Santorum, being on the (Ire) tier combined with (Do Venom) is clear in his actions and statements. He seems conflicted or he blatantly lies to get his way. Since numbers Four (4) and Nine (9) are in his Conscious Direction numbers, he clearly knows what he's doing. Regarding his statements over the years regarding sexuality, we should take him at his word. He isn’t comfortable living is a sexual world. Perhaps, he’d feel more comfortable with women in barkas, or barefoot and pregnant.
His record is both conservative and liberal. Nothing is wrong with this because people really don’t think along the rigid dividing lines of the extreme wings of the two parties. He lies, however, to get his way, making him not the paragon he pretends, but corrupted and definitely on the negative side of numbers.
Voters forget that Santorum was a practicing attorney. I like attorneys, but face it, they can be persuasive. Which side of the argument are they on? He seems able to flip with ease when watching him on the campaign trail. Nevertheless, the bought-and-paid-for media isn’t going to point this out. They want a Republican who can’t beat Obama.
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
Out of Tragedy Comes Understanding
Earlier this year, a dear friend had me do her numbers and explain them to her as they related to her life. My friend’s numbers were all Two (2). I couldn’t come up with another number for her. In fact, her subordinate Conscious Name Direction numbers were also Two (2). Wow! Lessons can’t get any easier than that, or any more definite.
My friend had me do her son’s numbers as well. His Life Path is also Two (2).
Shortly afterwards, my friend fell and twisted herself very badly, damaging her ankle besides other areas. The injuries laid her up for a month or two. After she healed a few months later, her daughter-in-law died in her sleep of pneumonia. She must have been walking around with it as she, nor anyone else knew she was ill with walking pneumonia. For months my friend looked after her son as she confirmed with his Life Path of Two (2) that he is very clinging and needy. A negative side of Two (2) is (Be Too Constant), warning against neediness. He was a very loyal husband and loved his wife dearly. The positive side of Two (2) is (To Be Constant), but not (Be Too Constant). He definitely lived up to the positive aspect of fidelity, but needed help with the negative side of neediness.
My friend began doing everything for her son, cooking, cleaning, etc. Remember that her numbers are also Two (2). She lives up to the positive aspects of the number in (To Be Constant) and (To Back), which simply stated are supporting—faithfully. The challenge with that is not to (Be Too Constant) or dependent and clinging.
A few weeks ago, my friend fell while getting her mail and broke her kneecap. Her leg is bound from hip to ankle and she can’t get around.
When I brought her bread that she let me get for her, she told me that she was so glad to have information from No Nonsense Numerology—The Code. My friend, who is a religious woman, told me she asked, "God why are you doing this? I don’t think I can take any more." Then she said that she understood through reflecting on her numbers that she had to let her son go and become independent. She was to help him, but not let him become needy. She now had to stop helping him. Her injury is so severe that until she gets her kneecap replaced and recovers from surgery she simply can’t help him anymore. Nor can she help others as her numbers designed her to do. The kindness she’s showed others, she must now hope they will show to her.
Incidentally, someone for whom she does good deeds came by while I was visiting to bring her soup: after first telling my friend that she is too old and can’t help her. The neighbor reconsidered and changed her attitude.
Sometimes our illnesses and injuries have a purpose that isn’t bad karma playing out in one’s life. Our misfortunes help others to learn lessons.
I cannot prove my friend’s life lessons are specifically of Number Two (2), or for that matter, any genuineness to the codes I’ve discovered in the alphabetical letters-to-numbers. The truth is, we will only know their validity through anecdotal evidence or once on the other side. I suppose that if we believe, the numbers can help us understand our particular life lessons and how to achieve them to become better people. I realize these definitions are not sexy and glamorous. They don’t predict our wealth or love life. They simply confirm our character or lack of it, but also show how to achieve good character.
Nevertheless, I’ve found my own numbers to be helpful in understanding my "lot in life." If understanding our numbers gives us peace of mind, that’s a lot. My friend’s numbers, however, played out like perfectly aligned dominos to her life experiences.
I’ve noted that this blog gets hits from other countries. Other nationalities surely would have different lessons than those for English-speaking individuals simply because they have different alphabets. It has been my hope that people from other countries will pick up my lead and find the hidden codes in their alphabets-to-numbers.
After all, this alphabet seems to give lessons for Christian believers. The letters (fox) fall directly beneath Number Six (6). What is a (fox)? It is an animal. What is an animal? An animal is a euphemism for beast. Those in countries with different alphabets may have no 666-beast to fear. Still, what lessons do they have that are separate from English-speaking ones?
I would be very interested to see what other codes and word patterns, people from different countries come up with for their alphabets. If anyone takes up the challenge, please contact me at numerologycode@snowcrest.net.
Put something appropriate in the subject line like "Number Codes from, (Country)." My spam filter will throw it into a special folder that I don’t open for safety reasons, so will never receive the email.
My friend had me do her son’s numbers as well. His Life Path is also Two (2).
Shortly afterwards, my friend fell and twisted herself very badly, damaging her ankle besides other areas. The injuries laid her up for a month or two. After she healed a few months later, her daughter-in-law died in her sleep of pneumonia. She must have been walking around with it as she, nor anyone else knew she was ill with walking pneumonia. For months my friend looked after her son as she confirmed with his Life Path of Two (2) that he is very clinging and needy. A negative side of Two (2) is (Be Too Constant), warning against neediness. He was a very loyal husband and loved his wife dearly. The positive side of Two (2) is (To Be Constant), but not (Be Too Constant). He definitely lived up to the positive aspect of fidelity, but needed help with the negative side of neediness.
My friend began doing everything for her son, cooking, cleaning, etc. Remember that her numbers are also Two (2). She lives up to the positive aspects of the number in (To Be Constant) and (To Back), which simply stated are supporting—faithfully. The challenge with that is not to (Be Too Constant) or dependent and clinging.
A few weeks ago, my friend fell while getting her mail and broke her kneecap. Her leg is bound from hip to ankle and she can’t get around.
When I brought her bread that she let me get for her, she told me that she was so glad to have information from No Nonsense Numerology—The Code. My friend, who is a religious woman, told me she asked, "God why are you doing this? I don’t think I can take any more." Then she said that she understood through reflecting on her numbers that she had to let her son go and become independent. She was to help him, but not let him become needy. She now had to stop helping him. Her injury is so severe that until she gets her kneecap replaced and recovers from surgery she simply can’t help him anymore. Nor can she help others as her numbers designed her to do. The kindness she’s showed others, she must now hope they will show to her.
Incidentally, someone for whom she does good deeds came by while I was visiting to bring her soup: after first telling my friend that she is too old and can’t help her. The neighbor reconsidered and changed her attitude.
Sometimes our illnesses and injuries have a purpose that isn’t bad karma playing out in one’s life. Our misfortunes help others to learn lessons.
I cannot prove my friend’s life lessons are specifically of Number Two (2), or for that matter, any genuineness to the codes I’ve discovered in the alphabetical letters-to-numbers. The truth is, we will only know their validity through anecdotal evidence or once on the other side. I suppose that if we believe, the numbers can help us understand our particular life lessons and how to achieve them to become better people. I realize these definitions are not sexy and glamorous. They don’t predict our wealth or love life. They simply confirm our character or lack of it, but also show how to achieve good character.
Nevertheless, I’ve found my own numbers to be helpful in understanding my "lot in life." If understanding our numbers gives us peace of mind, that’s a lot. My friend’s numbers, however, played out like perfectly aligned dominos to her life experiences.
I’ve noted that this blog gets hits from other countries. Other nationalities surely would have different lessons than those for English-speaking individuals simply because they have different alphabets. It has been my hope that people from other countries will pick up my lead and find the hidden codes in their alphabets-to-numbers.
After all, this alphabet seems to give lessons for Christian believers. The letters (fox) fall directly beneath Number Six (6). What is a (fox)? It is an animal. What is an animal? An animal is a euphemism for beast. Those in countries with different alphabets may have no 666-beast to fear. Still, what lessons do they have that are separate from English-speaking ones?
I would be very interested to see what other codes and word patterns, people from different countries come up with for their alphabets. If anyone takes up the challenge, please contact me at numerologycode@snowcrest.net.
Put something appropriate in the subject line like "Number Codes from, (Country)." My spam filter will throw it into a special folder that I don’t open for safety reasons, so will never receive the email.
Saturday, December 10, 2011
Newt GinGRINCH on the Numbers Couch
Newton Leroy McPherson = Seven (7)
Newton Leroy Gingrich = Seven (7)
Newt Gingrich = Two (2)
06/17/1943 = Attraction = Eight (8) and Life Path = 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.]
Up front, I’ve got to be honest. I thought for sure that because of Newt’s gigantic ego, reflected in the size of his head, he’d have a negative Nine (9) somewhere. I was wrong. However, if you’ve been following these numbers, his numbers still make sense.
The following comes from www.2012.republican-candidates.org/Gingrich/Childhood.php, explaining how he went from being McPherson to Gingrich.
"Gingrich was born in Harrisburg, Dauphin County, in Pennsylvania on June 17, 1943. His mother, 16-year-old Kathleen Daugherty and his father, 19-year-old mechanic, Newton Searles McPherson, divorced three days after the arrival of baby Newt. . . . Daugherty remarried the following year to Robert Bruce Gingrich, a soon-to-be highly decorated Lieutenant-Colonel with the U.S. Army, who officially adopted Newt and changed his last name to Gingrich after McPherson relinquished his custodial rights to the toddler."
The website, www.realchange.org/gingrich.htm details Newt’s flagrant abuse of the system for personal gain, and the abuse of his wives. It exposes his hypocrisies. Some include:
Draft Dodging: "Though he relentlessly pushes military spending and talks like a big time hawk, Gingrich avoided the Vietnam War through a combination of student and family deferments. (He married one of his teachers at age 19.)"
House Banking Scandal: ". . .Where so many congressmen wrote rubber checks on government money, Newt . . . bounced 22 himself, which almost cost him reelection in 1992. His vote for the secret House pay raise, . . . didn’t help."
Gingrich made shady and lucrative book deals with Rupert Murdoch. He used his influence to legislatively benefit Murdoch. (For details, see website at Real Change.)
For Gingrich to call another a flip-flopper, is the pot calling the kettle black. He is on record for having three wives, one with whom he cheated on while leading the impeachment charge against President Bill Clinton. Marital cheating comes under the category of lying. His personal style shows callousness toward women. He brought his wife divorce papers to examine while she was in the hospital being treated for cancer. After their divorce, Jackie Battley had to take her former husband to court to come through with support payments according to realchange.com.
Political ads now proliferate about how he takes money from special interests, how he flip-flops on issues that profit himself and those paying him for beneficial legislation. The scandals are endless. The scandals mentioned here only skim the top of the iceberg.
With Newt’s original and subordinate Conscious Name Directions of Seven (7), his well-documented exploits show that he is definitely not on the positive side of numbers. His grasping for wealth however he can, using the political system to do so, lands him squarely onto the (Pig), (Piggy), and (Gyp) tiers. In fairness, he does gain through honest labor. His prolific authorship and Congressional tenure show he works hard. He works hard using his intelligence and accomplishments to exploit the system for personal gain. Vast achievements, however, do not make someone a good person, merely ambitious.
His other subordinate Conscious Name Direction of Newt Gingrich equals Two (2). His marital cheating suggests that he did not learn (To Be Constant), i.e., he often chooses to (Take Back) commitments regarding relationships or ideals. (Constant, Be Two) in relationships is not his strength, showing he is on the negative side of Number Two (2). Does he consciously flip-flop on ideals based on what they will get him when combined with his other negative Sevens (7) in tiers of (Gyp), (Pig), and (Piggy)?
The Grinch’s hard demeanor and smug smirks give away that he has no compassion or heart. His record also speaks for him. Gingrich’s original Conscious Direction of negative Seven (7) is the result of not learning positive lessons of the previous Number Six (6) that are telling the truth and working hard. He does, however, work hard at accumulating wealth, e.g., his lobbying fees.
MaggieF reports at www.freerepublic.com, "Disgraced former lobbyist Jack Abramoff hit Republican presidential frontrunner Newt Gingrich for his claims that he did no lobbying on behalf of the mortgage and health care companies that paid him millions in consulting fees, calling the system of providing ‘strategic advice’ corrupt. . . . ‘I don’t want to say he’s lying, he may believe what he’s saying, but people have to understand that lobbying isn’t just going to meet with members,’ Abramoff said."
Gingrich’s $500,000 Tiffany credit line is another example of hedonistic lust. This is not someone who embraces personal austerity though he legislated for others to do so. For example, www.businessinsider.com/blackboard/newt-gingrich reports, "During Gingrich’s term as Speaker, Congress passed and President Bill Clinton signed the 1996 reform of welfare, [and] a capital gains tax cut . . . "
According to Wikipedia, "A central pledge of President Clinton’s campaign was to reform the welfare system, adding changes such as work requirements for recipients. However, by 1994, the Clinton Administration appeared to be more concerned with universal health care and no details or a plan had emerged on welfare reform. Gingrich accused the President of stalling on welfare, and proclaimed that Congress could pass a welfare reform bill in as little as ninety days. Gingrich insisted that the Republican Party would continue to apply political pressure to the President to approve welfare legislation. . . . In 1996, after constructing two welfare reform bills that were vetoed by President Clinton, Gingrich and his supporters pushed for passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, which was intended to reconstruct the welfare system. The act gave state governments more autonomy over welfare delivery, while also reducing the federal government’s responsibilities. It instituted the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program, which placed time limits on welfare assistance and replaced the longstanding Aid to Families with Dependent Children program. Other changes to the welfare system included stricter conditions for food stamp eligibility, reductions in immigrant welfare assistance, and recipient work requirements."
Nothing is wrong with working hard. However, when jobs are limited, fitness and age are factors, cutting or eliminating social safety nets is callous. Real Legislators roll up their sleeves and work out how to bring jobs home to America rather than, out sourcing them to payoff contributors while eliminating social safety nets.
I’d like legislators such as Gingrich who espouse personal responsibility doing the grunt work of building bridges, fighting in fox holes, delivering mail, and personally taking care of children. Then maybe they have the right to tell others how to live. Most Congresspersons work three days a week and spend most of their time working hard at fund-raising. Rubbing shoulders with celebrities, eating caviar, and sipping champagne is a real drag. It is the height of hypocrisy to complain as they do about it. What, they say only finger-sandwiches? I suppose that when the bottom half is scrambling for crumbs, cucumbers seem like caviar.
Even Gingrich’s former Republican Senate colleagues are coming out against him, i.e., they didn’t approve of his hypocritical leadership style. According to former colleagues, he [Gingrich] would promise one thing and do another. They seem aware of his tendency to (Take Back) commitments. Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma is vocally and unabashedly dishing Gingrich.
$300,000 of ethics fines follow the former Speaker from his days in Congress. Wikipedia reports about the fine, "Eighty-four ethics charges were filed against Speaker Gingrich during his term, including claiming tax-exempt status for a college course run for political purposes. Following an investigation by the House Ethics Committee Gingrich was sanctioned US$300,000 on a 395-28 House vote. Gingrich acknowledged in January 1997 that ‘In my name and over my signature, inaccurate, incomplete and unreliable statements were given to the committee’. The House Ethics Committee concluded that inaccurate information supplied to investigators represented ‘intentional or . . . reckless’ disregard of House rules. Special Counsel James M. Cole concluded that Gingrich violated federal tax law and had lied to the ethics panel in an effort to force the committee to dismiss the complaint against him."
Gingrich's disdainful haughtiness belies that he is not a paragon of virtue making him come across as someone who lacks personal perspective. His bloated gravitas makes him seem foolish to anyone who knows his record and sees beyond his posturing.
Newt’s Life Path is Four (4). He seems (Moved) toward positive personal change to get his way and be (Made Victorious) in material matters rather than overcoming personal angst. He works to be (Made Victorious) in personal exploits. Altruism doesn’t seem his motivation.
William Douglas of McClatchy Newspapers, writing in Newt Gingrich - Portrait of a Complicated Politician, asks probing questions. For example, "Is he [Gingrich] the undisciplined, self-absorbed House speaker who admitted that a 1995 shutdown of the federal government was prompted in part by what he perceived as a cold shoulder and shabby treatment by President Bill Clinton during a long Air Force One flight?"
If Gingrich led impeachment against Clinton for sexual misconduct for giving him a cold shoulder, then he rightfully belongs on the (Do Venom) tier of Four (4). He did this all while embroiled in his own sexual scandal. This hypocrisy and his record of vicious tactics show he has a propensity to (Do Venom) of being vindictive.
Gingrich gets caught doing exactly that for which he complains and penalizes others for doing. Wikipedia reports, "May 1988, Gingrich (along with 77 other House members and Common Cause) brought ethics charges against Democratic Speaker Jim Wright, who was alleged to have used a book deal to circumvent campaign-finance laws and House ethics rules. During the investigation, it was noted Gingrich had his own unusual book deal, for Window of Opportunity, in which publicity expenses were covered by a limited partnership, which raised $105,000 from Republican political supporters to promote sales of Gingrich’s book. Gingrich’s success in forcing Wright’s resignation was in part responsible for his rising influence in the Republican caucus."
When anyone stands in his way, Grinch seems willing to push them aside for his place at the feeding trough, even poor children. Gingrich’s own words prove what a grinch he is. Retweeted from LeftsideAnne is a YouTube video worth watching. Unfortunately, I couldn’t get there with the URL address. Searching YouTube’s site under "You’re a Mean One, New Gingrich" will bring up the video. Gingrich’s own words say, "Young children who are poor ought to learn how to go to work . . ." Apparently, young children who are rich don’t need to learn to work. They can just inherit wealth. If, however, they are his children of his former wife they must take him to court for child support payments as www.realchange.org/gingrich.htm reported Jackie Battley Gingrich had to do.
Gingrich’s Attraction number is Eight (8) that is about being tested. Is he eager for being tested or reluctant? The first three tiers are material testing and the second three are on spiritual testing. We give up material to gain spiritually. Mr. Gingrich does not exude spirituality of someone who can forego any material luxury. He comes across like a pampered aristocrat.
He is intelligent and well spoken. At times, he shows glimmers of self-scrutiny, but only in passing without emotionally substantial introspection. Looking closely, he seems more fluff and puff than stuff, i.e., he seems rooted in materiality rather than spiritual grounding, no matter what religion he adopts. He talks a good game, but he seems steadfast in materialism, showing him grudgingly tested from his Subconscious Attraction. Meaning, only great goading will drag him from his material world.
Water seeking its own level makes those who support him more of a worry than is he. If the GOP base really wants him as President, they need to look deeper into their souls, since they profess greater spirituality than others. It seems what they really want is to hurt the current President, using someone who will deal forceful bar brawl blows. Mr. Gingrich’s negative Four (4) gives him a fighter’s disposition.
When then Speaker Pelosi and DNC Chairman Howard Dean stated that "Impeachment is off the table," for President Bush they opened the door for worse despots taking the White House.
Personally, I want the best persons as candidates, not the meanest because if he or she wins, we citizens are the losers. The problem with letting Gingrich off the hook, i.e., he’s learning his lessons as are we all, is that he wants to be the leader of the free world. Have we learned nothing? Or, is it all just a circus that the media is exploiting for ratings? For surely, grounded voters are looking for the best possible candidates too.
[If you agree with this message, please pass it along on Twitter, Facebook, e-mail, etc.]
Newton Leroy Gingrich = Seven (7)
Newt Gingrich = Two (2)
06/17/1943 = Attraction = Eight (8) and Life Path = 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.]
Up front, I’ve got to be honest. I thought for sure that because of Newt’s gigantic ego, reflected in the size of his head, he’d have a negative Nine (9) somewhere. I was wrong. However, if you’ve been following these numbers, his numbers still make sense.
The following comes from www.2012.republican-candidates.org/Gingrich/Childhood.php, explaining how he went from being McPherson to Gingrich.
"Gingrich was born in Harrisburg, Dauphin County, in Pennsylvania on June 17, 1943. His mother, 16-year-old Kathleen Daugherty and his father, 19-year-old mechanic, Newton Searles McPherson, divorced three days after the arrival of baby Newt. . . . Daugherty remarried the following year to Robert Bruce Gingrich, a soon-to-be highly decorated Lieutenant-Colonel with the U.S. Army, who officially adopted Newt and changed his last name to Gingrich after McPherson relinquished his custodial rights to the toddler."
The website, www.realchange.org/gingrich.htm details Newt’s flagrant abuse of the system for personal gain, and the abuse of his wives. It exposes his hypocrisies. Some include:
Draft Dodging: "Though he relentlessly pushes military spending and talks like a big time hawk, Gingrich avoided the Vietnam War through a combination of student and family deferments. (He married one of his teachers at age 19.)"
House Banking Scandal: ". . .Where so many congressmen wrote rubber checks on government money, Newt . . . bounced 22 himself, which almost cost him reelection in 1992. His vote for the secret House pay raise, . . . didn’t help."
Gingrich made shady and lucrative book deals with Rupert Murdoch. He used his influence to legislatively benefit Murdoch. (For details, see website at Real Change.)
For Gingrich to call another a flip-flopper, is the pot calling the kettle black. He is on record for having three wives, one with whom he cheated on while leading the impeachment charge against President Bill Clinton. Marital cheating comes under the category of lying. His personal style shows callousness toward women. He brought his wife divorce papers to examine while she was in the hospital being treated for cancer. After their divorce, Jackie Battley had to take her former husband to court to come through with support payments according to realchange.com.
Political ads now proliferate about how he takes money from special interests, how he flip-flops on issues that profit himself and those paying him for beneficial legislation. The scandals are endless. The scandals mentioned here only skim the top of the iceberg.
With Newt’s original and subordinate Conscious Name Directions of Seven (7), his well-documented exploits show that he is definitely not on the positive side of numbers. His grasping for wealth however he can, using the political system to do so, lands him squarely onto the (Pig), (Piggy), and (Gyp) tiers. In fairness, he does gain through honest labor. His prolific authorship and Congressional tenure show he works hard. He works hard using his intelligence and accomplishments to exploit the system for personal gain. Vast achievements, however, do not make someone a good person, merely ambitious.
His other subordinate Conscious Name Direction of Newt Gingrich equals Two (2). His marital cheating suggests that he did not learn (To Be Constant), i.e., he often chooses to (Take Back) commitments regarding relationships or ideals. (Constant, Be Two) in relationships is not his strength, showing he is on the negative side of Number Two (2). Does he consciously flip-flop on ideals based on what they will get him when combined with his other negative Sevens (7) in tiers of (Gyp), (Pig), and (Piggy)?
The Grinch’s hard demeanor and smug smirks give away that he has no compassion or heart. His record also speaks for him. Gingrich’s original Conscious Direction of negative Seven (7) is the result of not learning positive lessons of the previous Number Six (6) that are telling the truth and working hard. He does, however, work hard at accumulating wealth, e.g., his lobbying fees.
MaggieF reports at www.freerepublic.com, "Disgraced former lobbyist Jack Abramoff hit Republican presidential frontrunner Newt Gingrich for his claims that he did no lobbying on behalf of the mortgage and health care companies that paid him millions in consulting fees, calling the system of providing ‘strategic advice’ corrupt. . . . ‘I don’t want to say he’s lying, he may believe what he’s saying, but people have to understand that lobbying isn’t just going to meet with members,’ Abramoff said."
Gingrich’s $500,000 Tiffany credit line is another example of hedonistic lust. This is not someone who embraces personal austerity though he legislated for others to do so. For example, www.businessinsider.com/blackboard/newt-gingrich reports, "During Gingrich’s term as Speaker, Congress passed and President Bill Clinton signed the 1996 reform of welfare, [and] a capital gains tax cut . . . "
According to Wikipedia, "A central pledge of President Clinton’s campaign was to reform the welfare system, adding changes such as work requirements for recipients. However, by 1994, the Clinton Administration appeared to be more concerned with universal health care and no details or a plan had emerged on welfare reform. Gingrich accused the President of stalling on welfare, and proclaimed that Congress could pass a welfare reform bill in as little as ninety days. Gingrich insisted that the Republican Party would continue to apply political pressure to the President to approve welfare legislation. . . . In 1996, after constructing two welfare reform bills that were vetoed by President Clinton, Gingrich and his supporters pushed for passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, which was intended to reconstruct the welfare system. The act gave state governments more autonomy over welfare delivery, while also reducing the federal government’s responsibilities. It instituted the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program, which placed time limits on welfare assistance and replaced the longstanding Aid to Families with Dependent Children program. Other changes to the welfare system included stricter conditions for food stamp eligibility, reductions in immigrant welfare assistance, and recipient work requirements."
Nothing is wrong with working hard. However, when jobs are limited, fitness and age are factors, cutting or eliminating social safety nets is callous. Real Legislators roll up their sleeves and work out how to bring jobs home to America rather than, out sourcing them to payoff contributors while eliminating social safety nets.
I’d like legislators such as Gingrich who espouse personal responsibility doing the grunt work of building bridges, fighting in fox holes, delivering mail, and personally taking care of children. Then maybe they have the right to tell others how to live. Most Congresspersons work three days a week and spend most of their time working hard at fund-raising. Rubbing shoulders with celebrities, eating caviar, and sipping champagne is a real drag. It is the height of hypocrisy to complain as they do about it. What, they say only finger-sandwiches? I suppose that when the bottom half is scrambling for crumbs, cucumbers seem like caviar.
Even Gingrich’s former Republican Senate colleagues are coming out against him, i.e., they didn’t approve of his hypocritical leadership style. According to former colleagues, he [Gingrich] would promise one thing and do another. They seem aware of his tendency to (Take Back) commitments. Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma is vocally and unabashedly dishing Gingrich.
$300,000 of ethics fines follow the former Speaker from his days in Congress. Wikipedia reports about the fine, "Eighty-four ethics charges were filed against Speaker Gingrich during his term, including claiming tax-exempt status for a college course run for political purposes. Following an investigation by the House Ethics Committee Gingrich was sanctioned US$300,000 on a 395-28 House vote. Gingrich acknowledged in January 1997 that ‘In my name and over my signature, inaccurate, incomplete and unreliable statements were given to the committee’. The House Ethics Committee concluded that inaccurate information supplied to investigators represented ‘intentional or . . . reckless’ disregard of House rules. Special Counsel James M. Cole concluded that Gingrich violated federal tax law and had lied to the ethics panel in an effort to force the committee to dismiss the complaint against him."
Gingrich's disdainful haughtiness belies that he is not a paragon of virtue making him come across as someone who lacks personal perspective. His bloated gravitas makes him seem foolish to anyone who knows his record and sees beyond his posturing.
Newt’s Life Path is Four (4). He seems (Moved) toward positive personal change to get his way and be (Made Victorious) in material matters rather than overcoming personal angst. He works to be (Made Victorious) in personal exploits. Altruism doesn’t seem his motivation.
William Douglas of McClatchy Newspapers, writing in Newt Gingrich - Portrait of a Complicated Politician, asks probing questions. For example, "Is he [Gingrich] the undisciplined, self-absorbed House speaker who admitted that a 1995 shutdown of the federal government was prompted in part by what he perceived as a cold shoulder and shabby treatment by President Bill Clinton during a long Air Force One flight?"
If Gingrich led impeachment against Clinton for sexual misconduct for giving him a cold shoulder, then he rightfully belongs on the (Do Venom) tier of Four (4). He did this all while embroiled in his own sexual scandal. This hypocrisy and his record of vicious tactics show he has a propensity to (Do Venom) of being vindictive.
Gingrich gets caught doing exactly that for which he complains and penalizes others for doing. Wikipedia reports, "May 1988, Gingrich (along with 77 other House members and Common Cause) brought ethics charges against Democratic Speaker Jim Wright, who was alleged to have used a book deal to circumvent campaign-finance laws and House ethics rules. During the investigation, it was noted Gingrich had his own unusual book deal, for Window of Opportunity, in which publicity expenses were covered by a limited partnership, which raised $105,000 from Republican political supporters to promote sales of Gingrich’s book. Gingrich’s success in forcing Wright’s resignation was in part responsible for his rising influence in the Republican caucus."
When anyone stands in his way, Grinch seems willing to push them aside for his place at the feeding trough, even poor children. Gingrich’s own words prove what a grinch he is. Retweeted from LeftsideAnne is a YouTube video worth watching. Unfortunately, I couldn’t get there with the URL address. Searching YouTube’s site under "You’re a Mean One, New Gingrich" will bring up the video. Gingrich’s own words say, "Young children who are poor ought to learn how to go to work . . ." Apparently, young children who are rich don’t need to learn to work. They can just inherit wealth. If, however, they are his children of his former wife they must take him to court for child support payments as www.realchange.org/gingrich.htm reported Jackie Battley Gingrich had to do.
Gingrich’s Attraction number is Eight (8) that is about being tested. Is he eager for being tested or reluctant? The first three tiers are material testing and the second three are on spiritual testing. We give up material to gain spiritually. Mr. Gingrich does not exude spirituality of someone who can forego any material luxury. He comes across like a pampered aristocrat.
He is intelligent and well spoken. At times, he shows glimmers of self-scrutiny, but only in passing without emotionally substantial introspection. Looking closely, he seems more fluff and puff than stuff, i.e., he seems rooted in materiality rather than spiritual grounding, no matter what religion he adopts. He talks a good game, but he seems steadfast in materialism, showing him grudgingly tested from his Subconscious Attraction. Meaning, only great goading will drag him from his material world.
Water seeking its own level makes those who support him more of a worry than is he. If the GOP base really wants him as President, they need to look deeper into their souls, since they profess greater spirituality than others. It seems what they really want is to hurt the current President, using someone who will deal forceful bar brawl blows. Mr. Gingrich’s negative Four (4) gives him a fighter’s disposition.
When then Speaker Pelosi and DNC Chairman Howard Dean stated that "Impeachment is off the table," for President Bush they opened the door for worse despots taking the White House.
Personally, I want the best persons as candidates, not the meanest because if he or she wins, we citizens are the losers. The problem with letting Gingrich off the hook, i.e., he’s learning his lessons as are we all, is that he wants to be the leader of the free world. Have we learned nothing? Or, is it all just a circus that the media is exploiting for ratings? For surely, grounded voters are looking for the best possible candidates too.
[If you agree with this message, please pass it along on Twitter, Facebook, e-mail, etc.]
Saturday, December 3, 2011
Too Much Information or Not Enough?
We are getting "Future Shock" (ed) from an information overload. The book by futurist Alvin Toffler published in 1970 described maladies of today long before home computers drove us onto Al Gore’s Internet highway.
We ignore hundreds of millions of blogs, tweets, websites, etc., simply because too many exist. Amazon has, at my last counting, 837 separate books on numerology. Probably, all of them are different definitions too. Do you think I’m in an uphill battle?
I’ve gotten wise to what must be porno sites that use pretty females to lure tweeters into them with clever witticisms that all sound alike. Then comes the bait of the really filthy "pick-up line" phrase. I suspect that if recipients don’t know what it means, and I don’t, it won’t matter. Also, if one doesn’t follow or get it, which I didn’t, they get "unfollowed" very quickly. I felt quite insulted until I figured out what must be the gig. Another cue is clicking the sites to check them out, "User does not exist" comes up. Hum?
Initially, I thought young actresses wanted a mentor of a former actress, so followed my Twitter feed. When they didn’t find me on the IMDb website, became discouraged, thinking I was some phoney. I was a 99-seat waiver darling [my term] of critics. It’s a long story. 99-seat waiver work involves stage plays. See! I know the lingo. Of which several reviews a year for many years in trades and newspapers brought me notice. Not having kept clippings, I have no record that is even true. Old reviews don’t even exist in Cyberspace since it was so long ago. My only paid work other than print ads and bit/extra parts (depending on the medium) was one Super Bowl "Hey Charger" commercial in 1975. I think it was 1975. My Nun who was hot for the Dodge Charger doesn’t show up on searches. Jamie Farr and Paul Link don’t come up either for their work on that ad campaign. They must have been in an alternate reality too. So, essentially, we don’t exist, but I know they do. Removing "a former actress" from my Twitter bio might restore credibility and discourage "fishers." Or, is it phishing?
I actually do read Twitter tweeters whom I follow. It isn’t a number game of how many I have to validate my existence, of which I have few, so I’m kept humble. I also drop Twitters I’ve followed, but who tweet, nothing other than where they are going and what they are doing. Except my real friends—though I’m beginning to consider some virtual friends as real. Am I headed for a padded room yet? So, how can I complain when I stop following too?
See how easy it is? I’ve already overloaded you with too much information or TMI?
This got me to thinking about the overload of information. Short-story—long, I worked as an actress when only three networks existed. Yes, I am that old. Let’s leave it there, shall we? With so many news organizations spewing their particular dogmas, our heads are spinning. What and who do we believe when validating every piece of information is impossible?
We rely on online news organizations of people we don’t know. We’ve never seen most of their faces until they show up on cable "news" programs. At least we knew what the big three news anchors looked like.
. . . Me, too! . . . I also suspect people who don’t put pictures in their bios of being really ugly, hiding their real identity, or really Internet inept. However, when someone uses Tipper Gore’s picture for a phoney Twitter site, ANYTHING is possible! We can see how easily con artists dupe people into sending strangers from places they’ve never lived bank account numbers for inheritances of people they’ve never met. Do they and the Viagra spam ever end?! You’d think Viagra would have a built-in audience. Honestly, life was simpler with only three channels.
Again, what and who do we believe? We rely on major television and radio networks, cable, and known on-line sites to give truthful information. When those entities have agendas, can we believe them?!
We must sometimes rely on gut instincts. When gut instincts are lacking from lack of an experiential life, we might as well give up and go fishing. No, not phishing—fishing, fishing.
Number One (1) has (Adjust) as its initial tier and word pattern. This lesson must be so important, so, not to become a (Jackass) who will (Just Ask) for answers that it is the very first tier. Although, "I’d rather ask questions and look stupid than not ask and be stupid." Since, "Dust cannot cling to thin air," we might not comprehend answers to our questions anyway, if having no frame-of-reference. Therefore, adjusting to a myriad of life circumstances and getting life’s questions answered by others must be a balancing act between the two.
Programing citizens to believe propaganda, was much easier with only three networks to spew it. Imagine when we had fewer sources of information. For example, with only "The Ten Commandments" and one sacred Book, programing people was a cinch. We just accepted that those documents confirmed reality. Yet, with information coming from infinite sources blanketing the planet, we still do.
Not to mention the other Commandments that we don’t seem to scrutinize thoroughly either, but forgiving our fathers and mothers is easy when we must honor them, unconditionally.
Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you. [This text is from an updated version that didn’t use Thee, Thou, and Thy.]
Besides parents getting free farmhands to work long hours, did this mean, honoring them no matter what? Did brutality, drug addiction, or incest matter to the person who fashioned that Commandment? Or, did he just lack insight and foresight of the pitfalls of that commanded edict? Honoring parents under all circumstances may just be enabling them to continue bad behavior as well passing it onto offspring. Gee, how is it that this planet is becoming so screwy?
When giving adults a behavior pass, it becomes easier to comprehend why people overlooked and ignored Sandusky’s actions. When we are to honor parents/adults unquestionably, this is a prescription for the Sandusky scandal and coverup. Abuse of women, children, and those who weren’t like "us," has occurred for aeons. Modern times now question past precepts and now we disparage such actions. Whoever wrote "The Ten Commandments" was unaware of human nature and how it would evolve from such decrees.
We must ask what kind of person really wrote The Ten Commandments, and just how naive was Charlton Heston? I mean Moses. Are the ones who fashioned that document the same kinds as those in the United States Congress who fashion laws to benefit themselves and hurt citizens?
Many, who were young adults during the era of three networks, protested to end the Vietnam War. Those in the Occupy movements are now doing so to end political thievery. It seems the time has come to wake up to injustices.
Does this, 2011 Four (4) year, allow for being (Moved) to make changes and be (Made Victorious) over wrongheaded thinking? So, though we are "Future Shock" (ing) ourselves into stupors, perhaps, too much information is better for making decisions than little information where we couldn’t make them, properly, either.
There, I said it. So, go ahead and "unfollow" me. It’s only my one opinion of many.
We ignore hundreds of millions of blogs, tweets, websites, etc., simply because too many exist. Amazon has, at my last counting, 837 separate books on numerology. Probably, all of them are different definitions too. Do you think I’m in an uphill battle?
I’ve gotten wise to what must be porno sites that use pretty females to lure tweeters into them with clever witticisms that all sound alike. Then comes the bait of the really filthy "pick-up line" phrase. I suspect that if recipients don’t know what it means, and I don’t, it won’t matter. Also, if one doesn’t follow or get it, which I didn’t, they get "unfollowed" very quickly. I felt quite insulted until I figured out what must be the gig. Another cue is clicking the sites to check them out, "User does not exist" comes up. Hum?
Initially, I thought young actresses wanted a mentor of a former actress, so followed my Twitter feed. When they didn’t find me on the IMDb website, became discouraged, thinking I was some phoney. I was a 99-seat waiver darling [my term] of critics. It’s a long story. 99-seat waiver work involves stage plays. See! I know the lingo. Of which several reviews a year for many years in trades and newspapers brought me notice. Not having kept clippings, I have no record that is even true. Old reviews don’t even exist in Cyberspace since it was so long ago. My only paid work other than print ads and bit/extra parts (depending on the medium) was one Super Bowl "Hey Charger" commercial in 1975. I think it was 1975. My Nun who was hot for the Dodge Charger doesn’t show up on searches. Jamie Farr and Paul Link don’t come up either for their work on that ad campaign. They must have been in an alternate reality too. So, essentially, we don’t exist, but I know they do. Removing "a former actress" from my Twitter bio might restore credibility and discourage "fishers." Or, is it phishing?
I actually do read Twitter tweeters whom I follow. It isn’t a number game of how many I have to validate my existence, of which I have few, so I’m kept humble. I also drop Twitters I’ve followed, but who tweet, nothing other than where they are going and what they are doing. Except my real friends—though I’m beginning to consider some virtual friends as real. Am I headed for a padded room yet? So, how can I complain when I stop following too?
See how easy it is? I’ve already overloaded you with too much information or TMI?
This got me to thinking about the overload of information. Short-story—long, I worked as an actress when only three networks existed. Yes, I am that old. Let’s leave it there, shall we? With so many news organizations spewing their particular dogmas, our heads are spinning. What and who do we believe when validating every piece of information is impossible?
We rely on online news organizations of people we don’t know. We’ve never seen most of their faces until they show up on cable "news" programs. At least we knew what the big three news anchors looked like.
. . . Me, too! . . . I also suspect people who don’t put pictures in their bios of being really ugly, hiding their real identity, or really Internet inept. However, when someone uses Tipper Gore’s picture for a phoney Twitter site, ANYTHING is possible! We can see how easily con artists dupe people into sending strangers from places they’ve never lived bank account numbers for inheritances of people they’ve never met. Do they and the Viagra spam ever end?! You’d think Viagra would have a built-in audience. Honestly, life was simpler with only three channels.
Again, what and who do we believe? We rely on major television and radio networks, cable, and known on-line sites to give truthful information. When those entities have agendas, can we believe them?!
We must sometimes rely on gut instincts. When gut instincts are lacking from lack of an experiential life, we might as well give up and go fishing. No, not phishing—fishing, fishing.
Number One (1) has (Adjust) as its initial tier and word pattern. This lesson must be so important, so, not to become a (Jackass) who will (Just Ask) for answers that it is the very first tier. Although, "I’d rather ask questions and look stupid than not ask and be stupid." Since, "Dust cannot cling to thin air," we might not comprehend answers to our questions anyway, if having no frame-of-reference. Therefore, adjusting to a myriad of life circumstances and getting life’s questions answered by others must be a balancing act between the two.
Programing citizens to believe propaganda, was much easier with only three networks to spew it. Imagine when we had fewer sources of information. For example, with only "The Ten Commandments" and one sacred Book, programing people was a cinch. We just accepted that those documents confirmed reality. Yet, with information coming from infinite sources blanketing the planet, we still do.
Not to mention the other Commandments that we don’t seem to scrutinize thoroughly either, but forgiving our fathers and mothers is easy when we must honor them, unconditionally.
Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you. [This text is from an updated version that didn’t use Thee, Thou, and Thy.]
Besides parents getting free farmhands to work long hours, did this mean, honoring them no matter what? Did brutality, drug addiction, or incest matter to the person who fashioned that Commandment? Or, did he just lack insight and foresight of the pitfalls of that commanded edict? Honoring parents under all circumstances may just be enabling them to continue bad behavior as well passing it onto offspring. Gee, how is it that this planet is becoming so screwy?
When giving adults a behavior pass, it becomes easier to comprehend why people overlooked and ignored Sandusky’s actions. When we are to honor parents/adults unquestionably, this is a prescription for the Sandusky scandal and coverup. Abuse of women, children, and those who weren’t like "us," has occurred for aeons. Modern times now question past precepts and now we disparage such actions. Whoever wrote "The Ten Commandments" was unaware of human nature and how it would evolve from such decrees.
We must ask what kind of person really wrote The Ten Commandments, and just how naive was Charlton Heston? I mean Moses. Are the ones who fashioned that document the same kinds as those in the United States Congress who fashion laws to benefit themselves and hurt citizens?
Many, who were young adults during the era of three networks, protested to end the Vietnam War. Those in the Occupy movements are now doing so to end political thievery. It seems the time has come to wake up to injustices.
Does this, 2011 Four (4) year, allow for being (Moved) to make changes and be (Made Victorious) over wrongheaded thinking? So, though we are "Future Shock" (ing) ourselves into stupors, perhaps, too much information is better for making decisions than little information where we couldn’t make them, properly, either.
There, I said it. So, go ahead and "unfollow" me. It’s only my one opinion of many.
Monday, November 28, 2011
More Aspects of Number Six (6)
The letters beneath Six (6) make up six tiers when shuffling the initial letters (fox) as the first tier and direct word pattern (Fox). They are (fox) (fxo) (ofx) (oxf) (xfo) (xof). The previous post, Numbers Are a Mirror, reviews the honesty aspects of this number as the (fox) and (fxo) tiers that (Fix Only) (Fox Of) its negative qualities. The aspect of honesty came from the definition of the animal or beast, the Fox. Foxes are adept deceivers, using cunning to get what they want.
Interestingly, the (fox) tier falls beneath Number Six (6), and is a direct word pattern (Fox). The Christian anti-Christ has the 666 as the mark of the Beast. Were those who fashioned the Anglo-Saxon alphabet aware of this?
I’m not going to go into how I uncovered word patterns in this posting, but some other aspects that form the definition of Six (6). For that detailed information, refer to my book, No Nonsense Numerology—The Code.
(Ask For) is the word pattern from the (xfo) tier. (Ask For) means wanting something and asking for it. In the framework of the entirety of numbers, referring to always wanting things makes it a material number. Those with Six (6) in any Significancy can become dependant upon materialism for validation when operating under negative aspects of this tier. To (Ask For) things can surely be embracing life rather than being greedy. Those who always (Ask For) things, however, are in jeopardy of becoming greedy in the following Seven (7) if they do not overcome the tendency.
Materiality in a physical world is for learning and achieving. It becomes detrimental when used as emotional validation. In the past, parents taught their children to push away from the table. Is this practice out-of-date?
Some in positions of power, privilege, and prestige are probably secret green-eyed monsters who work diligently to gobble up everything they can. Helping them to recognize this, seems what the Occupy movement is attempting to do. Understanding the psychological origins of their greed is necessary to help them make positive change. Often some will try to save or restore their own Life Forces at the expense of others. This seems like what the 1% is doing to the 99%.
Jealousy can plague people on the (Ask For) tier when others have what they want. Jealousy not only hurts green-eyed monsters, but those at whom they direct their (Ire) that is a negative tier of Nine (9). Envy separates friends and siblings, putting wide gulfs between them. Surely other actors will concur with one thing I learned as an actress because far more jobs were lost than won: What’s mine is mine, and what isn’t — isn’t.
When others have what, I’d like, I compare the path they might be on to what I might be on. Life once forced me onto a journey that put me into perilous situations. While on it, I had a dream one night about a little girl who needed help and love. On my birthday, I moved into an apartment building where I saw this little girl playing on the sidewalk. She was my next door neighbor. I got to save her from a terrible ordeal. If I’d had the life that I wanted that could never have happened.
I didn’t need to tell myself that a god placed me there to validate my dire journey. It was what it was. The job got done.
One gives for the sake of it because it is the thing to do, not because it makes him feel good: as a soldier gives his life or his limbs for his country, he did not like giving his life or his limbs.
When life doesn’t reward us as we feel that we deserve, adopting maxims and ideologies often help put deprivation into perspective by stepping us back to see the bigger picture. The person we dearly love may do better and be happier with another. The job we want may be done better by someone else. Or, the job might even be done worse to teach the employers a lesson they refused to see otherwise. The person we loved may realize genuine love with the loss of it when choosing the wrong person.
When we perfect ourselves and our skills, losing our desires seems unfair. Learning selflessness, however, keeps us on the positive side of numbers when moving onto the (Why Pig) and (Why Gyp) tiers of Seven (7).
(Ask Of) is another word pattern from the (xof) tier. To (Ask Of) oneself, to become better is a higher aspect of Six (6). However, when asking others to do so, one can become domineering and tyrannical, making it a pitfall of this tier. Asking oneself to become better is probably the practical objective of this word pattern. Those who operate as (Ask Of) Sixes (6) are attempting to become better people. This is surely laudable. The trick, however, is not to condemn and bully others while doing so, but operating with a genuinely generous heart free of guilt or conditions.
When embracing positive personal change, the codes in No Nonsense Numerology—The Code can validate our success. Of course, when we realize that we are on negative tiers, we might want to discount these definitions of numbers. This is human nature. We are all, however, most likely bouncing between the positive and negative. If we embrace positive change, we can raise our vibrations as the last Number Nine (9) shows we can do in its (I Rise) tier.
No number is superior to another. Each teaches its own lesson, or validates how well we are doing, giving us an opportunity and direction toward favorable change.
[If you agree or enjoy these posts, I hope you will Tweet, Facebook, E-mail, etc., them. My motive is the same as yours: to have a better world. If you have ever published via POD, you know that no money is in it.]
Interestingly, the (fox) tier falls beneath Number Six (6), and is a direct word pattern (Fox). The Christian anti-Christ has the 666 as the mark of the Beast. Were those who fashioned the Anglo-Saxon alphabet aware of this?
I’m not going to go into how I uncovered word patterns in this posting, but some other aspects that form the definition of Six (6). For that detailed information, refer to my book, No Nonsense Numerology—The Code.
(Ask For) is the word pattern from the (xfo) tier. (Ask For) means wanting something and asking for it. In the framework of the entirety of numbers, referring to always wanting things makes it a material number. Those with Six (6) in any Significancy can become dependant upon materialism for validation when operating under negative aspects of this tier. To (Ask For) things can surely be embracing life rather than being greedy. Those who always (Ask For) things, however, are in jeopardy of becoming greedy in the following Seven (7) if they do not overcome the tendency.
Materiality in a physical world is for learning and achieving. It becomes detrimental when used as emotional validation. In the past, parents taught their children to push away from the table. Is this practice out-of-date?
Some in positions of power, privilege, and prestige are probably secret green-eyed monsters who work diligently to gobble up everything they can. Helping them to recognize this, seems what the Occupy movement is attempting to do. Understanding the psychological origins of their greed is necessary to help them make positive change. Often some will try to save or restore their own Life Forces at the expense of others. This seems like what the 1% is doing to the 99%.
Jealousy can plague people on the (Ask For) tier when others have what they want. Jealousy not only hurts green-eyed monsters, but those at whom they direct their (Ire) that is a negative tier of Nine (9). Envy separates friends and siblings, putting wide gulfs between them. Surely other actors will concur with one thing I learned as an actress because far more jobs were lost than won: What’s mine is mine, and what isn’t — isn’t.
When others have what, I’d like, I compare the path they might be on to what I might be on. Life once forced me onto a journey that put me into perilous situations. While on it, I had a dream one night about a little girl who needed help and love. On my birthday, I moved into an apartment building where I saw this little girl playing on the sidewalk. She was my next door neighbor. I got to save her from a terrible ordeal. If I’d had the life that I wanted that could never have happened.
I didn’t need to tell myself that a god placed me there to validate my dire journey. It was what it was. The job got done.
One gives for the sake of it because it is the thing to do, not because it makes him feel good: as a soldier gives his life or his limbs for his country, he did not like giving his life or his limbs.
When life doesn’t reward us as we feel that we deserve, adopting maxims and ideologies often help put deprivation into perspective by stepping us back to see the bigger picture. The person we dearly love may do better and be happier with another. The job we want may be done better by someone else. Or, the job might even be done worse to teach the employers a lesson they refused to see otherwise. The person we loved may realize genuine love with the loss of it when choosing the wrong person.
When we perfect ourselves and our skills, losing our desires seems unfair. Learning selflessness, however, keeps us on the positive side of numbers when moving onto the (Why Pig) and (Why Gyp) tiers of Seven (7).
(Ask Of) is another word pattern from the (xof) tier. To (Ask Of) oneself, to become better is a higher aspect of Six (6). However, when asking others to do so, one can become domineering and tyrannical, making it a pitfall of this tier. Asking oneself to become better is probably the practical objective of this word pattern. Those who operate as (Ask Of) Sixes (6) are attempting to become better people. This is surely laudable. The trick, however, is not to condemn and bully others while doing so, but operating with a genuinely generous heart free of guilt or conditions.
When embracing positive personal change, the codes in No Nonsense Numerology—The Code can validate our success. Of course, when we realize that we are on negative tiers, we might want to discount these definitions of numbers. This is human nature. We are all, however, most likely bouncing between the positive and negative. If we embrace positive change, we can raise our vibrations as the last Number Nine (9) shows we can do in its (I Rise) tier.
No number is superior to another. Each teaches its own lesson, or validates how well we are doing, giving us an opportunity and direction toward favorable change.
[If you agree or enjoy these posts, I hope you will Tweet, Facebook, E-mail, etc., them. My motive is the same as yours: to have a better world. If you have ever published via POD, you know that no money is in it.]
Friday, November 25, 2011
Numbers Are a Mirror
. . . And sometimes we don’t like looking into that mirror of self-reflection. When having Number Six (6) in the Attraction Significancy, this can show us that we are in denial. Of course, if having Six (6) as the Attraction number, we probably are oblivious to this denial. Why is this? Lying of the (Fox Of) nature is a negative trait of Six (6). One thing Six (6) teaches along with working hard, is honesty.
Often people, who have negative character traits, avoid facing themselves by simply clearing out cobwebs of negative behavior or thought patterns. What are negative thought patterns? They might be resentfulness of what others have or have done. They are demons we can’t release from our minds. We all have these beasts banging around in our brains from time to time. Nothing is wrong with recounting past events as that’s how we face them, but letting these events plague us hinders progress.
Ways that people avoid facing that they aren’t as perfect as they’d like is to do good works. What can be wrong with this? Nothing. But, this doesn’t make the beast of bad thought patterns or behavior disappear. It remains, lurking behind every calculated word to avoid popping out in meanspirited words and ways.
People pray harder or join spiritualist groups and activities. They might get into spiritual healing. However, if they are trying to heal others but have ailments of their own, whether psychological or physical, they may transfer their maladies. They may sincerely want to do good works to pay penance for past deeds. Yet, do they do the deeds for the sake of them, or to feel better about themselves so they will to enter a state of grace? Are they trying to ensure they’ll get to their version of heaven? This is getting something in return for something or bargaining with the soul.
When we give, is it from guilt or do we give freely with no strings? Giving out of guilt is still doing so for something, which is to relieve a guilty conscience. If everything has a vibration, does giving-out-of-guilt taint the gift?
I’ve read and heard that a place exists in the dimension above the earth plane meant specifically for purging corrupted psyches. Maybe this is from where the notion of purgatory comes, but convoluted to fit dogma. This is only secondhand information so we’ll know for sure when we get there, but the psychology of it makes sense. When our subconscious is free of cobwebs, we can genuinely be ourselves. I’ve also heard that this place of purging is very unpleasant and many prefer doing good works to being there, so become guides. If their psyches are still corrupted, their good works can get misdirected, causing more confusion and doing more harm than good. While trying to raise their vibrations, some may only be lowering them. It seems that getting rid of baggage might make vibrations lighter and "flying," easier.
In this world, Arthur Janovs’ book "The Primal Scream" comes closest to understanding and implementing the technique of clearing the psyche of distortion. An institute exists called The Primal Center in Santa Monica, California. I only read the book with great satisfaction.
Whoever aligned the final placement of the English Anglo-Saxon alphabet knew the human psyche. They made a blueprint to show us to ourselves if only we have the guts to look into the mirror. Saying, "I’m sorry," with genuine contrition is one of the most difficult things for humans to do. When it is genuine, who could not forgive? Without it, nothing has really changed.
Often people, who have negative character traits, avoid facing themselves by simply clearing out cobwebs of negative behavior or thought patterns. What are negative thought patterns? They might be resentfulness of what others have or have done. They are demons we can’t release from our minds. We all have these beasts banging around in our brains from time to time. Nothing is wrong with recounting past events as that’s how we face them, but letting these events plague us hinders progress.
Ways that people avoid facing that they aren’t as perfect as they’d like is to do good works. What can be wrong with this? Nothing. But, this doesn’t make the beast of bad thought patterns or behavior disappear. It remains, lurking behind every calculated word to avoid popping out in meanspirited words and ways.
People pray harder or join spiritualist groups and activities. They might get into spiritual healing. However, if they are trying to heal others but have ailments of their own, whether psychological or physical, they may transfer their maladies. They may sincerely want to do good works to pay penance for past deeds. Yet, do they do the deeds for the sake of them, or to feel better about themselves so they will to enter a state of grace? Are they trying to ensure they’ll get to their version of heaven? This is getting something in return for something or bargaining with the soul.
When we give, is it from guilt or do we give freely with no strings? Giving out of guilt is still doing so for something, which is to relieve a guilty conscience. If everything has a vibration, does giving-out-of-guilt taint the gift?
I’ve read and heard that a place exists in the dimension above the earth plane meant specifically for purging corrupted psyches. Maybe this is from where the notion of purgatory comes, but convoluted to fit dogma. This is only secondhand information so we’ll know for sure when we get there, but the psychology of it makes sense. When our subconscious is free of cobwebs, we can genuinely be ourselves. I’ve also heard that this place of purging is very unpleasant and many prefer doing good works to being there, so become guides. If their psyches are still corrupted, their good works can get misdirected, causing more confusion and doing more harm than good. While trying to raise their vibrations, some may only be lowering them. It seems that getting rid of baggage might make vibrations lighter and "flying," easier.
In this world, Arthur Janovs’ book "The Primal Scream" comes closest to understanding and implementing the technique of clearing the psyche of distortion. An institute exists called The Primal Center in Santa Monica, California. I only read the book with great satisfaction.
Whoever aligned the final placement of the English Anglo-Saxon alphabet knew the human psyche. They made a blueprint to show us to ourselves if only we have the guts to look into the mirror. Saying, "I’m sorry," with genuine contrition is one of the most difficult things for humans to do. When it is genuine, who could not forgive? Without it, nothing has really changed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)