"The more we train to see ourselves as such a meditational deity, the less bound we will feel by life's ordinary disappointments and frustrations. This divine self-visualisation empowers us to take control of our life and create for ourselves a pure environment in which our deepest nature can be expressed." -Lama Yesheit's
http://buddhism.kalachakranet.org/images/green_tara1.jpg
I have begun to explore the interesting world of Buddhism. My main goal for this exploration is to not let it be just another passing fad or phase in my life. I find the ideals of Buddhism very calming and affective on my life, and, so many times before I have found something that helps me and then given it up in the hectic nature of my world. I don't try to give things up, they just fizzle out because so many other things override them.
To me, that's the beauty of Buddhism ideals, I read a quote in a book I'm reading I don't remember it exactly but it was something to the nature of..."To me, there is no more important being on this earth than myself." I thought about this a lot, because I have lead my life in an in between place for a long time. Trying to be totally selfless, and give for other people with the hopes of getting back. At the same time, doing things primarily that make me happy too. I have had this profound guilt about everything in my life and I think it's because I haven't adopted this notion. This notion that, there should be no one more important to me, than me.
Another notion of Buddhism though is that if you are always kind to yourself and in tune with your own thoughts and needs, this will project on those around you. A kind of inner peace that enlightens all those around you and who you love. How better can you give back to those you love, than by being free and happy enough within yourself to be the best and give the most to others. I feel that if someone tries too hard to please everyone around them, and themself, the conflict that is created makes mush out of the person. That person is useless to them self and those around them.
So, this is my official, documented statement that I will not let these ideas fall by the wayside, and I will continue to know that to me, there is no one more important, than me.
: ) Peace : )
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Monday, December 29, 2008
Oh the wonder
I hate saying, we'll see, and I don't know if anyone agrees with me...but being in your middle to late twenties brings that phrase a whole lot.
We'll see what happens when I'm done with school.
We'll see what happens in my love life.
We'll see where I live next.
We'll see. We'll see. We'll see.
Maybe it never ends though....
gahl, maybe I should just start focusing on what's going on right now, then I don't have to say We'll see, I can just say...I see...I see I am watching re-runs of project runway that I've seen 10 times, but there's nothing else on, and chatting on gmail with old work friends, and doing laundry, and getting sleepy.
We'll see what happens when I'm done with school.
We'll see what happens in my love life.
We'll see where I live next.
We'll see. We'll see. We'll see.
Maybe it never ends though....
gahl, maybe I should just start focusing on what's going on right now, then I don't have to say We'll see, I can just say...I see...I see I am watching re-runs of project runway that I've seen 10 times, but there's nothing else on, and chatting on gmail with old work friends, and doing laundry, and getting sleepy.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
A statement to ponder
"Those polls have consistently shown me much further behind than we actually are. It all depends on the voter turnout ... we're doing fine. We have closed in the last week." he [McCain] said.
The reason I put this up as a statement to ponder is because if you read into what he is actually saying it is kind of suspicious. If it all truly depends on voter turn out, then, what happens if a lot of people fulfill their patriotic duty? Obama wins or you win? What exactly is McCain trying to say here. If less people come out to vote, he will win? Or vica verca?
I have become increasingly frustrated by the overarching message from the McCain campaign. That we can't trust Obama. Accusations fly about Obama's ties to terrorism and corruption, all being immediately, factually refuted. The accusations are dangerous, and are creating fear amongst people who could, in all reality, probably benefit more from Obama's objectives than from McCains in the long run.
In addition, the accusations created by the McCain campaign are now running wild and getting into the heads of people in a way that literally puts Obama's life in jeopardy. Although now the McCain campaign tries, a little too quietly in my mind, to put a stop to the outlandish claims people are now making...the kindling is doing exactly what it was put there to do, start the fire.
Accusations made by Obama toward the McCain campaign have not been so factually refuted, in fact the campaign has skirted around one major issue.
-McCain said there were times he has broken with the Bush administration, but added: "So do we share a common philosophy of the Republican Party? Of course."
For the entirety of his campaign McCain has been promising himself as a maverick, not to be compared to the Bush administration. But, behind the scenes he is using donations from the Bush administration for his campaign and taking advice and direction from members of the Bush administration in his campaign. In addition, now in the last week of the campaign he is leaning closer to admitting his agreement with the philosophies of the Bush administration.
Obama has never once faltered from his beliefs or his message, that he proposes a change from the current direction of our government and the philosophies that are driving all Americans farther and farther away from a common goal. I have such a hard time understanding why people can find any reason to fear Barack Obama. I have dug and dug and tried to find any thing pointing towards uncertainty or unpredictability or danger that lurks in the depths of Obama's character and found nothing. Nothing but ridiculous claims with no factual basis.
I get sad thinking about the state of our society currently, so split, so divided. And, it's even being seen within the Republican party now. There are talks of a "civil war" amongst conservatives.
-"A civil war that is simmering will break out into the open if McCain loses, and the party will have to decide what they want to be in the post-Reagan world," said Gloria Borger, a senior political analyst for CNN.
"It's an argument that has been echoed by a string of conservatives -- including David Brooks, George Will, Kathleen Parker, and David Frum -- who believe Palin exhibits a poisonous anti-intellectual instinct of the party that threatens to ultimately destroy its foundations."
"Reagan had an immense faith in the power of ideas. But there has been a counter, more populist tradition, which is not only to scorn liberal ideas but to scorn ideas entirely. And I'm afraid that Sarah Palin has those prejudices," said Brooks, a conservative columnist for the New York Times
Personally I think what our country needs right now is a chance to take a step back and start looking at the real problems we face together as a society. A chance to wipe our heads clear of the right/left battle, and look at where we can move forward toward the common good.
I am not against Republicans, I am just against an individualized society, and unfortunately there are individuals in the party who have supported causes that completely under minded the common good and the middle class and the under served communities.
So, if in fact McCain's statement is correct and, it all depends on voter turn out, then I would hope that the voters come out in hoards and make a statement loud enough for everyone to notice that, it is time for a real, fundamental, change in our society.
The reason I put this up as a statement to ponder is because if you read into what he is actually saying it is kind of suspicious. If it all truly depends on voter turn out, then, what happens if a lot of people fulfill their patriotic duty? Obama wins or you win? What exactly is McCain trying to say here. If less people come out to vote, he will win? Or vica verca?
I have become increasingly frustrated by the overarching message from the McCain campaign. That we can't trust Obama. Accusations fly about Obama's ties to terrorism and corruption, all being immediately, factually refuted. The accusations are dangerous, and are creating fear amongst people who could, in all reality, probably benefit more from Obama's objectives than from McCains in the long run.
In addition, the accusations created by the McCain campaign are now running wild and getting into the heads of people in a way that literally puts Obama's life in jeopardy. Although now the McCain campaign tries, a little too quietly in my mind, to put a stop to the outlandish claims people are now making...the kindling is doing exactly what it was put there to do, start the fire.
Accusations made by Obama toward the McCain campaign have not been so factually refuted, in fact the campaign has skirted around one major issue.
-McCain said there were times he has broken with the Bush administration, but added: "So do we share a common philosophy of the Republican Party? Of course."
For the entirety of his campaign McCain has been promising himself as a maverick, not to be compared to the Bush administration. But, behind the scenes he is using donations from the Bush administration for his campaign and taking advice and direction from members of the Bush administration in his campaign. In addition, now in the last week of the campaign he is leaning closer to admitting his agreement with the philosophies of the Bush administration.
Obama has never once faltered from his beliefs or his message, that he proposes a change from the current direction of our government and the philosophies that are driving all Americans farther and farther away from a common goal. I have such a hard time understanding why people can find any reason to fear Barack Obama. I have dug and dug and tried to find any thing pointing towards uncertainty or unpredictability or danger that lurks in the depths of Obama's character and found nothing. Nothing but ridiculous claims with no factual basis.
I get sad thinking about the state of our society currently, so split, so divided. And, it's even being seen within the Republican party now. There are talks of a "civil war" amongst conservatives.
-"A civil war that is simmering will break out into the open if McCain loses, and the party will have to decide what they want to be in the post-Reagan world," said Gloria Borger, a senior political analyst for CNN.
"It's an argument that has been echoed by a string of conservatives -- including David Brooks, George Will, Kathleen Parker, and David Frum -- who believe Palin exhibits a poisonous anti-intellectual instinct of the party that threatens to ultimately destroy its foundations."
"Reagan had an immense faith in the power of ideas. But there has been a counter, more populist tradition, which is not only to scorn liberal ideas but to scorn ideas entirely. And I'm afraid that Sarah Palin has those prejudices," said Brooks, a conservative columnist for the New York Times
Personally I think what our country needs right now is a chance to take a step back and start looking at the real problems we face together as a society. A chance to wipe our heads clear of the right/left battle, and look at where we can move forward toward the common good.
I am not against Republicans, I am just against an individualized society, and unfortunately there are individuals in the party who have supported causes that completely under minded the common good and the middle class and the under served communities.
So, if in fact McCain's statement is correct and, it all depends on voter turn out, then I would hope that the voters come out in hoards and make a statement loud enough for everyone to notice that, it is time for a real, fundamental, change in our society.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
You know what I think is really weird?
I think it's really weird that when I cook with fresh garlic, and get the tiniest bit on my fingers, they smell like garlic for days, sometimes even a week!
Now, is that because I have a very sensitive sense of smell, or has that happened to anyone else?
Now, is that because I have a very sensitive sense of smell, or has that happened to anyone else?
Thursday, September 25, 2008
"The sky's not blue, but it's sunny!"
I just said that to one of my co-workers after she said, "Looks like it's clearing up out there." Although this was definitely one of those lame office conversations that usually don't require much thought or provide much meaning to my day, I was intrigued by this quote.
I think it's kind of the quote to live by in the parameters of my life. Given that I have chemical imbalances in my brain that cause me to get obsessive about the "bad" things in my life. I like a quote that doesn't make me feel abnormal for not being able to live by it like, "look at the bright side" and "think of life with a glass half full."
Sometimes those sayings just piss me off..which is not the purpose obviously. I usually just end up feeling guilty that I can't be more of a "bright side" or "glass half full" kind of person.
So, I like my saying..."the sky's not blue, but it's sunny."
It makes me feel ok for recognizing the , "not so great" things about what's going on around me....but it gives me that hint of optimism that I suppose is necessary in life.
I think it's kind of the quote to live by in the parameters of my life. Given that I have chemical imbalances in my brain that cause me to get obsessive about the "bad" things in my life. I like a quote that doesn't make me feel abnormal for not being able to live by it like, "look at the bright side" and "think of life with a glass half full."
Sometimes those sayings just piss me off..which is not the purpose obviously. I usually just end up feeling guilty that I can't be more of a "bright side" or "glass half full" kind of person.
So, I like my saying..."the sky's not blue, but it's sunny."
It makes me feel ok for recognizing the , "not so great" things about what's going on around me....but it gives me that hint of optimism that I suppose is necessary in life.
Thursday, September 11, 2008
For those not in the Parker Family e-mail group
Deepak Chopra on Palin, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepak_Chopra
An interesting perspective:
Friday, September 5th, 2008
Sometimes politics has the uncanny effect of mirroring the national psyche even when nobody intended to do that. This is perfectly illustrated by the rousing effect that Gov. Sarah Palin had on the Republican convention in Minneapolis this week. On the surface, she outdoes former Vice President Dan Quayle as an unlikely choice, given her negligent parochial expertise in the complex affairs of governing. Her state of Alaska has less than 700,000 residents, which reduces the job of governor to the scale of running one-tenth of New York City. By comparison, Rudy Giuliani is a towering international figure. Palin's pluck has been admired, and her forthrightness, but her real appeal goes deeper.
She is the reverse of Barack Obama, in essence his shadow, deriding his idealism and exhorting people to obey their worst impulses. In psychological terms the shadow is that part of the psyche that hides out of sight, countering our aspirations, virtue, and vision with qualities we are ashamed to face: anger, fear, revenge, violence, selfishness, and suspicion of "the other." For millions of Americans, Obama triggers those feelings, but they don't want to express them. He is calling for us to reach for our higher selves, and frankly, that stirs up hidden reactions of an unsavory kind. (Just to be perfectly clear, I am not making a verbal play out of the fact that Sen. Obama is black. The shadow is a metaphor widely in use before his arrival on the scene.)
I recognize that psychological analysis of politics is usually not welcome by the public, but I believe such a perspective can be helpful here to understand Palin's message. In her acceptance speech Gov. Palin sent a rousing call to those who want to celebrate their resistance to change and a higher vision.
Look at what she stands for:
--Small town values -- a denial of America's global role, a return to petty, small-minded parochialism.
--Ignorance of world affairs -- a repudiation of the need to repair America's image abroad.
--Family values -- a code for walling out anybody who makes a claim for social justice. Such strangers, being outside the family, don't need to be heeded.
--Rigid stands on guns and abortion -- a scornful repudiation that these issues can be negotiated with those who disagree.
--Patriotism -- the usual fallback in a failed war.
--"Reform" -- an italicized term, since in addition to cleaning out corruption and excessive spending, one also throws out anyone who doesn't fit your ideology.
Palin reinforces the overall message of the reactionary right, which has been in play since 1980, that social justice is liberal-radical, that minorities and immigrants, being different from "us" pure American types, can be ignored, that progressivism takes too much effort and globalism is a foreign threat. The radical right marches under the banners of "I'm all right, Jack," and "Why change? Everything's OK as it is." The irony, of course, is that Gov. Palin is a woman and a reactionary at the same time. She can add mom to apple pie on her resume, while blithely reversing forty years of feminist progress. The irony is superficial; there are millions of women who stand on the side of conservatism, however obviously they are voting against their own good. The Republicans have won multiple national elections by raising shadow issues based on fear, rejection, hostility to change, and narrow-mindedness.
Obama's call for higher ideals in politics can't be seen in a vacuum. The shadow is real; it was bound to respond. Not just conservatives possess a shadow -- we all do. So what comes next is a contest between the two forces of progress and inertia. Will the shadow win again, or has its furtive appeal become exhausted? No one can predict. The best thing about Gov. Palin is that she brought this conflict to light, which makes the upcoming debate honest. It would be a shame to elect another Reagan, whose smiling persona was a stalking horse for the reactionary forces that have brought us to the demoralized state we are in. We deserve to see what we are getting, without disguise.
An interesting perspective:
Friday, September 5th, 2008
Sometimes politics has the uncanny effect of mirroring the national psyche even when nobody intended to do that. This is perfectly illustrated by the rousing effect that Gov. Sarah Palin had on the Republican convention in Minneapolis this week. On the surface, she outdoes former Vice President Dan Quayle as an unlikely choice, given her negligent parochial expertise in the complex affairs of governing. Her state of Alaska has less than 700,000 residents, which reduces the job of governor to the scale of running one-tenth of New York City. By comparison, Rudy Giuliani is a towering international figure. Palin's pluck has been admired, and her forthrightness, but her real appeal goes deeper.
She is the reverse of Barack Obama, in essence his shadow, deriding his idealism and exhorting people to obey their worst impulses. In psychological terms the shadow is that part of the psyche that hides out of sight, countering our aspirations, virtue, and vision with qualities we are ashamed to face: anger, fear, revenge, violence, selfishness, and suspicion of "the other." For millions of Americans, Obama triggers those feelings, but they don't want to express them. He is calling for us to reach for our higher selves, and frankly, that stirs up hidden reactions of an unsavory kind. (Just to be perfectly clear, I am not making a verbal play out of the fact that Sen. Obama is black. The shadow is a metaphor widely in use before his arrival on the scene.)
I recognize that psychological analysis of politics is usually not welcome by the public, but I believe such a perspective can be helpful here to understand Palin's message. In her acceptance speech Gov. Palin sent a rousing call to those who want to celebrate their resistance to change and a higher vision.
Look at what she stands for:
--Small town values -- a denial of America's global role, a return to petty, small-minded parochialism.
--Ignorance of world affairs -- a repudiation of the need to repair America's image abroad.
--Family values -- a code for walling out anybody who makes a claim for social justice. Such strangers, being outside the family, don't need to be heeded.
--Rigid stands on guns and abortion -- a scornful repudiation that these issues can be negotiated with those who disagree.
--Patriotism -- the usual fallback in a failed war.
--"Reform" -- an italicized term, since in addition to cleaning out corruption and excessive spending, one also throws out anyone who doesn't fit your ideology.
Palin reinforces the overall message of the reactionary right, which has been in play since 1980, that social justice is liberal-radical, that minorities and immigrants, being different from "us" pure American types, can be ignored, that progressivism takes too much effort and globalism is a foreign threat. The radical right marches under the banners of "I'm all right, Jack," and "Why change? Everything's OK as it is." The irony, of course, is that Gov. Palin is a woman and a reactionary at the same time. She can add mom to apple pie on her resume, while blithely reversing forty years of feminist progress. The irony is superficial; there are millions of women who stand on the side of conservatism, however obviously they are voting against their own good. The Republicans have won multiple national elections by raising shadow issues based on fear, rejection, hostility to change, and narrow-mindedness.
Obama's call for higher ideals in politics can't be seen in a vacuum. The shadow is real; it was bound to respond. Not just conservatives possess a shadow -- we all do. So what comes next is a contest between the two forces of progress and inertia. Will the shadow win again, or has its furtive appeal become exhausted? No one can predict. The best thing about Gov. Palin is that she brought this conflict to light, which makes the upcoming debate honest. It would be a shame to elect another Reagan, whose smiling persona was a stalking horse for the reactionary forces that have brought us to the demoralized state we are in. We deserve to see what we are getting, without disguise.
Explode me Brain
So, last night in class I had to decide on a "vision" for a social program I will hypothetically set up during the semester. Well, this ended up stressing out my brain more than it maybe should have.
I knew that I wanted to set up a program to address community health in low socioeconomic communities. I knew that I wanted my program to introduce fitness and nutrition education and practices in these communities.
My professor then said, think bigger, think...what would a perfect world look like to you in terms of community health. So then I said, well, individuals in these communities living healthier lifestyles. He said, how about, All individuals living healthier lifestyles. Then I thought, how about that...why limit these ideas to one population of people?
This got me thinking about the whole American population and how many times we segregate without trying at all. By wanting to help low socioeconomic communities with their health, I was placing them in the category of "unhealthy" while leaving middle and high class communities in the category of "healthy."
Dang! Obviously I didn't mean to, but I was being the benevolent researcher. The girl who wants to come into a community I know hardly anything about and change how they do things because I say it will be better for them.
At this point, I started thinking about politicians. How these people stand in front of a crowd and shout out how they will change things to be "better" for the American people.
One candidate may be talking to one group of people, another candidate to another group of people. And then these two groups of people sit and argue about what is best for the American people. All the while...who are these American people we are arguing for? Are they us? Are they the low socioeconomic community that "needs us to help?"
One thing I know for sure is that I don't want government, or anyone else to decide what is best for me without thoroughly consulting me first. So, why is it ok for government to do that to whole communities of people? Well, because that looks like "social service" and sounds good and makes people feel good about themselves for doing it.
What should it look like? I don't know yet, I need to let these thoughts simmer for a while since they just recently boiled over. Obviously I don't think it is wrong to care about another community, seemingly, less privileged and in need of help. I think people just need to go one step further in giving the decisions about "what kind of help" to the people experiencing the problem. Which, is the whole purpose of a community organizer....so maybe this brings me all the way back to my vote for Obama.
That's all for now.
I knew that I wanted to set up a program to address community health in low socioeconomic communities. I knew that I wanted my program to introduce fitness and nutrition education and practices in these communities.
My professor then said, think bigger, think...what would a perfect world look like to you in terms of community health. So then I said, well, individuals in these communities living healthier lifestyles. He said, how about, All individuals living healthier lifestyles. Then I thought, how about that...why limit these ideas to one population of people?
This got me thinking about the whole American population and how many times we segregate without trying at all. By wanting to help low socioeconomic communities with their health, I was placing them in the category of "unhealthy" while leaving middle and high class communities in the category of "healthy."
Dang! Obviously I didn't mean to, but I was being the benevolent researcher. The girl who wants to come into a community I know hardly anything about and change how they do things because I say it will be better for them.
At this point, I started thinking about politicians. How these people stand in front of a crowd and shout out how they will change things to be "better" for the American people.
One candidate may be talking to one group of people, another candidate to another group of people. And then these two groups of people sit and argue about what is best for the American people. All the while...who are these American people we are arguing for? Are they us? Are they the low socioeconomic community that "needs us to help?"
One thing I know for sure is that I don't want government, or anyone else to decide what is best for me without thoroughly consulting me first. So, why is it ok for government to do that to whole communities of people? Well, because that looks like "social service" and sounds good and makes people feel good about themselves for doing it.
What should it look like? I don't know yet, I need to let these thoughts simmer for a while since they just recently boiled over. Obviously I don't think it is wrong to care about another community, seemingly, less privileged and in need of help. I think people just need to go one step further in giving the decisions about "what kind of help" to the people experiencing the problem. Which, is the whole purpose of a community organizer....so maybe this brings me all the way back to my vote for Obama.
That's all for now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
