Think Globally, Act Locally - Take Care of Business in Your Hometown

Former Secaucus Mayor Dennis Elwell Convicted of Bribery

I went to a Protestant seminary that is considered liberal. That means that liberals AND conservatives could go there. If it was a conservative seminary, then it would mean ONLY conservatives could go there. My understanding/experience of religious conservatives is that they are intolerant of ideas and concepts they do not agree with.
Religious liberals maintain they are tolerant of ideas and concepts they do not agree with, but they make it clear that they believe their ideas are superior to yours if you disagree with them.
Since my main interest is in the exchange of ideas it matters not to me if people agree with me, but whether they are capable of having an open and intelligent dialogue. I don't have everything figured out, and I strongly distrust anyone who claims they have ANYTHING figured out.
In this spirit, when some of my liberals friends in class one day got all vexed over Third World Debt, I pointed out that being manipulated to spend time, emotion, energy caring about something thousands of miles away benefited the systems that allowed the conditions they were upset about to exist in the first place.
The biggest impact a person can make is locally, in their own hometown. I am more concerned about the former mayor where I live being convicted of bribery (see photo above) than I am Casey Anthony.
I would suggest that if a banker lives in your hometown has contributed to the environment that has created massive debt in the third world, that you picket his house. If the local politicians that go to your church are found to be corrupt, make them stand before the congregation and explain their behavior.
Better yet, vote them and their cronies out of office. That's what happened here in Secaucus. All of the former mayor's cronies on council have been defeated. The various town officials that have embezzled town funds are being indicted and removed from their positions.
In a reaction to the way the high school principal and school supt. treated a high school student who questioned school policies, the town voted down the school budget by a wide margin. Secaucus is one of the few localities in the state that had regularly voted for its school budget, even if it meant tax increases.
Corruption in New Jersey is rampant, but in a movement that transcends partisan politics, voters are working to clear out the miscreants. If they are successful, it will be because they have spent time and energy working on the local level rather than worrying about the latest distractions on FOX News, CNN and other national media outlets.

Insurance Companies Are the Problem

People are upset about the health care legislation called, by its critics, 'ObamaCare.' They are upset because insurance companies have spent billions of dollars telling them they are upset. Therein is the problem. Monkey hear, monkey speak. Insurance companies treat us like a bunch of dumb monkeys because they think we are a bunch of dumb monkeys.
And most of the time, they're right.
My job as a Heretic is to point out concepts and ideas beyond the traditional and orthodox. With regards to insurance companies, the orthodox positions work well - for insurance companies - but work horribly for everybody else.
Part of this is because insurance companies hire people really good at math and most of us suck at math. Simply put, insurance companies (I'll call them Leeches) make money by bringing in more money in premiums than they pay out in benefits. A lot more money.
We need to over simplify the insurance situation to create a level of understanding, knowing it's actually much more complicated.
Say you spend $100 on car insurance, $300 on health insurance, $50 on life insurance, and $50 on homeowner's insurance a month. That's $500 a month. For a year, $6,000. Here's where the math comes in (probability). The Leeches have figured out the probabilities involved in paying out premiums.
They know that most people, for example, that pay car insurance will not have accidents. If someone does have an accident, the Leeches know how high to push the deductibles so they still make a bundle in profits.
If we took that $6,000, saved it for, as they used to say, a 'rainy day' we would be in much better shape. What about catastrophic cases? My answer is to find out what we did before the Leeches convinced all of us we needed them.
The answer lies in the collective. In rural areas, it's called 'barn raising.' Insurance companies are not the answer. They are the problem. They have spent billion dollars buying legislators and judges so their services are required by law.
The Leeches have destroyed capitalism. They have destroyed the marketplace. They have destroyed supply and demand. Instead, we have extortion perpetuated and perpetrated on us by our government. This extortion is sustained by bribery - i.e. the billions of dollars the Leeches spend on campaign contributions.
Are you upset at ObamaCare? OK, but what is the solution? My guess is whatever solution you will offer has already put in your minds and mouths by the Leeches. They've spent billions of dollars to make it so. It's my job to help you get your own voice, your own thoughts, back where they belong.
You can think for yourself. You can take care of yourself. You don't need an insurance company to put you 'in good hands,' to be 'like a neighbor.' We need each other.

What's in Your Wally? Credit Card Plundering and Pillaging

Watching my hometown college football team streaming on my computer this past weekend, I was subjected to a credit card commercial too many times to count.

You may have seen the commercial. It's one in a series of 11th century Norsemen (sometimes called Vikings) attempting to assimilate in modern culture. The commercials are funny. They are entertaining.

Then you ask yourself the question, what do Norsemen have to do with credit cards? The commercials all end with a catch phrase designed to get you to put one of their credit cards in your wallet.

So, I'm supposed to use your credit card because you have entertaining commercials? Is that how it works?

I would have stopped thinking about the commercials except for a seminary professor who told me about a BBC documentary on the melding of Freudian psychological theories with Madison Avenue. Most commercial campaigns after the 1940s have a strong psychological component designed to get us to buy products we don't need with money we don't have.

What are Norseman known for? Pillaging and plundering. They did a lot more, but most of what they did has not entered the cultural psyche. The pillaging and plundering is part of our cultural psyche.

My theory is the commercials are designed to get us to feel good about being pillaged and plundered. They are such friendly, funny Norsemen, aren't they?

Let's look at the math involved in the credit card plundering.

The standard credit card for this company has a 24.9 interest rate and $19 annual fee.

The card for young adults has a 19.8 interest rate and $39 annual fee.

The lowest rate is for the Prestige card, ostensibly not everyone has enough prestige to get this one, with an 11.9 percent rate and no annual fee.

Let's compare this with the amount of money you would receive for depositing money in their bank.

The rates range from 1.1 percent to 1.75 percent. Let's put this in simple terms. When you use a credit card, you are borrowing money. To do this, if you borrow $100 you will pay $120 with 20 percent rate.

If you save at this bank, at 1.5 percent, you will earn $1.50 from $100. The difference, called profit, between $20 and $1.5 is $18.5. In other words, when you give the bank $100 they give you a buck and half and they make eighteen and half dollars when they loan your money to some one else.

That, in other times, was called plundering. Your wallet has been pillaged. Today, we call it funny and entertaining. Banks and credit card companies spend billions of dollars mounting campaigns designed to pillage and plunder the wealth of working people.

Have they succeeded? Who cares, they're such funny commercials.

Memories of Hazel, My Grandmother

We are all born of a woman. And the woman who gave birth to us was also born of a woman. My mother's mother name was Hazel, grandma Hazel to me and my siblings. She was matronly and kindly. She baked cookies. She mussed my hair and called me 'Butch.'

Like many women of her generation who raised families during the depression years of the 1930s, she had it rough. As a young woman before she married, she was a telegraph operator. In another time, she could have been a successful career woman.

Like many families in the Great Depression, she and her family were poor and when her husband was laid off, they got poorer.

But they raised their own food, grandma made every one's clothes and she stayed home while her husband looked for work. Like many people, he got a job in the military buildup to the Second World War, working in a factory that made missiles.

When her husband died when I was two years old, grandma was devastated. I remember mom and dad worrying about her. She never remarried. We visited her at least once a month when we were little. Then we moved away.

In the later years of her life, we moved again to be closer to her. I remember visiting her with mom and eating pie at her favorite restaurant. She liked pie.

I remember her telling me how important it was to be kind to people. She said just because people got older didn't mean they got nicer. If they were mean when they were young, they were mean when they were old.

Be kind to people, she would tell me as she mussed my hair. Every time we visited she would tell me how much her husband had loved me and how much she loved me. Then we moved again. She died a few years later and I didn't get to go to the funeral.

When mother died I had a dream and grandma was in it. I was in the hallway of a convention hall. In one of the rooms they were having a banquet. I looked through the windows of the door and saw mother on the stage, she was the guest of honor. I looked to the side and there was grandma, sitting on a bench, smiling.

"You can't go in there, you know," she said.

I nodded and then did something I had never done in a dream. Instead of passively letting the dream flow by me, I forced myself to interact and speak. I wanted to tell grandma something. It was difficult, but I managed to speak.

"I love you, grandma."

"I know, Butch. I love you, too."

I woke up from my dream and felt at peace. At peace with my mother dying, at peace with missing grandma's funeral.

All of us are born of woman. Many of us have lost mothers and grandmothers. Through these losses we can gain wisdom. The wisdom grandma Hazel imparted was simple, "Be kind when you're young and be kind when you're old."

She worked hard her whole life. She lost the love of her life. But nothing she experienced ever stopped her from being kind.

Every once in a while, when all the negative stuff in politics and in our culture gets me down, I think of grandma Hazel. And then I go out and try to be kind to everyone I meet.

An Ethical Response to the Rutgers Suicide

What is an appropriate response to the tragedy of the suicide at Rutgers University? Using the framework of intentional ethics as a guide, to aim for the highest ethical response it is recommended we seek to understand (intention) for others (motivation) a constructive action (result).

One item that needs to be understood is that planting a camera for the purpose of spying on other people is a perverse action. It doesn't matter if you're boring holes in a change room, rest room, shower, or bedroom, it is perverse. This action on the part of the two Rutgers students needs to be understood as an invasion of privacy issue.

Another item that needs to be understood is that an 18-year old's awareness that their actions can have negative consequences for others is not well developed. It is not surprising that all three adults involved were eighteen. It is a dangerous age, as the freedom they experience is not matched by awareness and consideration of others.

This is a development issue. It's not a hate crime. The actions by the two students demonstrate obliviousness to what effect the invasion of privacy would have on a vulnerable person living in a homophobic society. It is doubtful the two Rutgers students were homophobic. But they were clueless.

The motivation of an appropriate ethical response should be what can be done for others? What can we as a society do for other 18 year olds?

As a pragmatist, it matters not to me where ideas come from if they work. The Mormon church has an outstanding program for young adults. They go on a mission for two years. They develop a sense of awareness for people outside of their own culture. After two years of mission, they go to college or pursue their careers with new-found maturity.

A program of national service for two years (no exemptions) would serve a similar purpose. Young people could work in nursing homes, homeless shelters, or drug clinics. There should be military options as well.

How will we pay for it?

A country that throws away billions of dollars that are never accounted for does not need to ask that question. The money is there, the priorities are not. It is a matter of wanting to do what is best for others, and not just the top two per cent.

Intentional Ethics Explained

As a Heretic, I spend a lot of time dismantling orthodox ideas that don't work. Essentially, I'm a pragmatist, but that gets lost in the furor created by discrediting orthodox positions that don't pass muster.

From my perspective, if an idea, concept or theory doesn't work, it should be jettisoned in favor of something that does.

The motivation for creating intentional ethics was my desire to provide ethical concepts that work. This evolved into formulating a system that can be applied to any situation by anybody. Like any new idea, it will take time and testing to be used effectively.

The saying "the path to hell is paved with good intentions" was a starting point. What is a good intention? What is a bad intention? I felt these terms needed to be redefined. So I redefined them.

Adopting the more neutral language of mathematics was the first step. The next step was listing from highest to lowest four possible intentions. The highest intention would be to understand. The lowest intention would be the desire to eliminate.

The next highest intention would the intention to desire and the second lowest would be the intention to use force.

In order from highest to lowest, the intentions are:

4) To understand

3) To desire

2) To force

1) To eliminate

In my first year at seminary, I shared these intentions with classmates and professors, hoping for critical feedback. A Harvard-trained professor with a PhD in Psychology was fascinated by the intentions and suggested I look into motivations and their connections to intentions.

This led to the second phase of intentional ethics, combining motivations and intentions. I described three possible motivations.

3) For others

2) For self and others

1) For self

Good discussions followed. Several people pointed out that a motivation for others may always contain selfish aspects. They may be right. Altruism is rare, and may not exist in any pure form, the discussion went. I included it as the highest motivation based on my theory it is easier to attain if one has the intention to understand beforehand.

The result of the interactions between intentions and motivations produce results that can either be constructive or destructive. Assigning the higher value to constructive results creates the following table.

INTENTIONS/MOTIVATIONS/RESULTS

4) To understand

3) To desire; 3) For others

2) To force; 2) For self, others; 2) Constructive

1) To eliminate; 1) For self; 1) Destructive

There are 24 possible results (4x3x2x1). Twelve of the results would be ethically acceptable and twelve would unacceptable.

To illustrate the intention to understand for others to produce a constructive result, I suggest we look at Robert Kennedy's speech in Indianapolis the night Martin Luther King Jr. was killed.

You can find it on YouTube or follow the link to my Facebook page. Discussion will follow.

The Birth of a Heretic

My mother enjoyed telling the story of my getting banned from Sunday School when I was five years old.

One Sunday at church, Mom and Dad were met by a teacher who told them that I wasn't allowed in Sunday School because I was disruptive.

Mom asked how I was being disruptive.

The teacher replied that I was asking questions she couldn't answer.

My mother replied "What kind of teacher do you think you are if you can't answer a five-year old's questions?"

This didn't go over well. After a conference with the senior minister, my parents were told I had to sit with them in the main sanctuary.

Like many five-year olds, I understood Santa Claus didn't bring presents, the Tooth Fairy didn't leave money under pillows, storks did not deliver babies and parents either didn't know what they were talking about - or they lied about most things.

I had now learned that adults in positions of authority punished you when you pointed out they weren't making sense.

This lesson is reinforced in elementary school and high school. By the time we reach our twenties, we pretty much don't trust anyone.

When faced with the prospect of becoming adults, and realizing the received information we have been given is either inaccurate, distorted, or wrong, we have to decide what kind of an adult we will be.

Will we become an adult who is 'comfortably numb' in our ignorance or will we become 'truth seekers?'

I decided to become a 'truth seeker.' I had no idea that would lead to being branded a 'heretic.'

When I went to seminary, I was still in 'truth seeking' mode. Surely, seminary would be a place where Truth resided.

The first day in Systematic Theology the professor laid out the concept of an Omnipotent and Omniscient Higher Power. At that point, I remembered the question I had asked as a five-year old.

The professor asked if anyone had questions. Nobody did at first. Everybody seemed to be happy with the concepts. I raised my hand.

An affirmative nod from the professor gave me permission to speak.

"If the Divine is all powerful and all-knowing, and if everything is created by the Divine, and if everything created by the Divine is Good, it follows that the Divine created Evil and the Devil. Further, it requires us to understand Evil and the Devil to be Good, since it was created by the Divine and the Divine can only create that which is Good," I stated.

The professor shifted uncomfortably in her seat. She got up and erased everything she had written on the board. She silently wrote something on the board. The class gasped.

"If we are to follow Mr. Barker's reasoning, then either our concepts are wrong," she paused and pointed to what she wrote on the board, "or that is our reality."

She then erased what she had written on the board.

"As we are Christians, we can't talk discuss that possibility," she concluded.

At the end of the semester, the professor refused to grade the paper I turned in because it did not echo Orthodox Christian doctrines or use Orthodox Christian sources.

Again, the lesson learned in Sunday School was repeated. You will get punished if you do not accept the positions of authority figures.

Next: Mrs. McLaughlin's Big Dictionary, Let the Punishment Fit the Crime

How I Got to Bluefield Part Two: The Interview with Tom Colley

Over the phone, Tom Colley said to get to Bluefield "Go to Princeton and take a left."

It's a beautiful drive from Blacksburg to Bluefield. Rolling hills. No other cars. Must be where all those commercials are filmed showing only one car on the road.

I noticed the train tracks. The research I had done on Bluefield before coming up for the interview stated that Bluefield was primarily a railroad town. I like trains, so that was a plus.

The building looked newish. Tom Colley's office was on the second floor. Can't remember if I took the stairs or elevator. Jim Terry, then editorial page editor, was in his office by the elevator, smoking.

I walked into the newsroom. Since this was morning, the composing people weren't there yet. I don't think Frank Sayles, the managing editor, was there yet, either.

Some one sitting in a glass office got up from his desk when I wandered in. He turned out to be very tall. He was also smoking.

"Shoot, I'm gonna have to start smoking again to work here," I thought to myself. I had quit when I was fourteen and really didn't want to start again.

"I'm Tom Colley" he said in that deep voice of his, extending his hand outward (and downward cuz I'm not 6'10). We walked into his office. I was relieved he hadn't offered me a cigarette. The prospect of coughing through an interview frightened me.

That reminds me, Curt Barber lost a contact lens while Tom and I were interviewing him. We hired him, anyway. But that was later, sorry.

In the interview, Tom asked me a question (we were on first name basis already) that I couldn't answer.

"How do you feel about those stories you wrote?"

I knew he talking about the Virginia Tech stories that had gained national attention, not the high school track meets. I didn't have an answer.

"Uh, ... pretty good," I said hesitantly, thinking I had just blown the interview.

Tom deliberately put out his cigarette, squishing it in the ash tray as if to punish it. He cleared his throat, clicked his teeth and pursed his lips in and out like he did when he was going to say something important.

"Wrong answer, young grasshopper," was what I thought he was going to say. But he said nothing. He just looked at me for awhile.

"When can you start?" he finally said.

"Two weeks."

"Why not start tomorrow?"

"I'd like to give the paper two weeks notice."

Tom lit another cigarette. This time, by the way he looked at me, I felt I had given him the right answer.

"OK," he said. We shook hands and I went back to Christiansburg.

The publisher at the Messenger was so mad at me for going someplace else, she told me to pack my things and get out immediately. She didn't want to look at my 'disloyal' face for another minute, much less two weeks.

I was now working for the Bluefield Daily Telegraph and moving to Bluefield.

But I couldn't stop thinking about the question I couldn't answer Tom Colley. I realize now many of the questions Tom asked me were ethical questions. The question I couldn't answer wasn't just an ethical question, it dealt with how I felt about ethics.

I was too young and inexperienced to appreciate the depth of the question, and the mind that asked it. The feelings about what happened to people in the aftermath of those times has haunted me for years.

Getting older helped put those events in a different perspective. I decided I really wanted to talk about these ethical issues with Tom, and our shared experiences (I spent a lot of time in Bluefield getting mad at Tom). I went to the Bluefield Daily Telegraph website to send him an email.

The lead story was Tom's obit. I was stunned. I couldn't believe it. I was mad at myself for not doing something sooner. Now it was too late.

I wanted to go that Denny's across the street, eat crappy food and tell him I understood why he asked me that question in the interview. I wanted to tell him I finally had an answer.

Part Three: The Answer to the Question