Some random thoughts on the State of Things.
I believe the problem with current American politics is that:
1) Nobody particularly likes the concept of war. People die naturally and by accident every day, and they're even murdered every day. Things decay over time or are subject to fires, floods, earthquakes, etc. However in war the actual point is to kill the enemy and break their things.
2) Americans (and I would assume almost everyone) hate having enemies. We like to get along. Even our local squabbles, we'd rather not have confrontations, we'd rather get along.
3) Despite this, even the people who are against the war in Iraq know it is the only thing we can do, and that it is only a part in a much larger war. This causes a lot of problems, semi-consciously, for those who won't admit that they understand this. They hate the necessity enough that they're ignoring that it is a necessity. "Necessary Evil". They know there are no other solutions at this point - not that we aren't willing to try them, but that the other side isn't going to accept them. Anyone who thinks they will is either a moron, or has really buried the truth deep inside their psyche.
4) Politicialns are determined to exploit this fact for their own political gain. They play upon the fact that we don't like war, and that we wish there was another solution - they even perpetuate the false impression that everyone is like us - that we all think about life and solutions the same, so our enemies must (by the way, they do this while trying to tell us that diversity is our greatest strength). By so doing, these politicians are doing the opposite of their duty. They are not leading, they are not protecting us, they are confusing us and making it more difficult to solve our huge problems.
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Friday, March 16, 2007
Open Letter to Sears
The following is a letter written to Sears based on an experience I had with them. Please note that the content has been changed to make the store and people involved anonymous in this more public venue.
I am writing to you today to express my concerns about the service and attitude I have received from Sears. I went to my local Sears. I was warmly received and worked with a good salesman. He helped me, and seemed knowledgeable. There was, however, a problem with my purchase - due to confusion about relative sizes, the wrong oven was ordered. My range hood, installed at the same time, fit nicely. The contractor took the old oven, the old range hood, and the wrong sized oven away.
So far, so good. However, everything began to unravel. I went back to the store to approve the purchase of the correct oven, which was the same price. I was informed that I would be paying a $40 trip charge due to the fact that the contractor had to go out a second time. I agreed, feeling I was partly responsible (though not wholly) for the wrong sized order.
Before the correct oven had arrived (in fact, it still has not been installed) I heard what I thought was my brand new range hood coming on all by itself. Bemused, I tried to figure out what was the problem. It turns out the contractor did not disconnect the old range hood fan, nor remove it (which I thought was part of the service - at least it says so on my contract). Since that time I have been unable to use my new range hood (needing to switch it off at the circuit breaker to keep the old fan from running loudly and continually). I contacted the contractor who said he would gladly come out and disconnect the old fan (but not remove it) when my new oven came in so they could do both things at once.
Trying to be a helpful customer, I agreed although I now have no oven and no range hood and have not for some weeks. I did, however, call my sales rep back and ask that, since the contractor was going to wait until they were coming out to install the oven to fix my range hood (and by my logic that meant they were going to make the trip to fix my range hood anyway) they shouldn't be charging Sears (who then shouldn't be charging me) for the trip charge of $40. I was told that, because they were going to be taking a big hit for the incorrectly ordered oven, my salesman's manager was unlikely to approve removal of the trip charge.
At this point I felt it only prudent to point out that it really wasn't a trip charge, it was a restocking fee. If I had been originally told it was a restocking fee I might have complained, but I would have seen the honesty and logic about it. Now that it is a trip charge for a trip the contractor had to make anyway in order to fix a problem, I feel more than a little cheated.
In addition is the fact that the contractor has no intention of actually removing the old fan from my old range hood. I can understand the attitude, because it is in a difficult place to reach and it has to be gross, but I paid the installation charge for this, which was supposed to include removing the old equipment.
I have purchased, to date, a vacuum cleaner, lawn mower, two refrigerators, an oven, a range hood, two different washers and three different clothes driers, and a dishwasher from sears, and these are the things I can just think of off my head. I believe I have purchased two televisions, various small appliances such as irons, clothing, and many other items from Sears.
At this point, I do not feel like shopping at Sears again. There are many other places to get my appliances, from Best Buy to Home Depot. I chose Sears because I believed you were the biggest outfit, one I could expect professional, inclusive, helpful installation and service from. I did not check prices, I did not shop around, I simply operated off customer loyalty. At this point I do not know what can be done to change my mind. I should not have had to write this letter at all. I do know I am going to want a new dishwasher soon, another microwave, a big-screen TV, a new lawn mower, and who knows what other things I haven't thought of yet that are going to need replacing. I doubt any of them are going to be purchased at Sears.
I am writing to you today to express my concerns about the service and attitude I have received from Sears. I went to my local Sears. I was warmly received and worked with a good salesman. He helped me, and seemed knowledgeable. There was, however, a problem with my purchase - due to confusion about relative sizes, the wrong oven was ordered. My range hood, installed at the same time, fit nicely. The contractor took the old oven, the old range hood, and the wrong sized oven away.
So far, so good. However, everything began to unravel. I went back to the store to approve the purchase of the correct oven, which was the same price. I was informed that I would be paying a $40 trip charge due to the fact that the contractor had to go out a second time. I agreed, feeling I was partly responsible (though not wholly) for the wrong sized order.
Before the correct oven had arrived (in fact, it still has not been installed) I heard what I thought was my brand new range hood coming on all by itself. Bemused, I tried to figure out what was the problem. It turns out the contractor did not disconnect the old range hood fan, nor remove it (which I thought was part of the service - at least it says so on my contract). Since that time I have been unable to use my new range hood (needing to switch it off at the circuit breaker to keep the old fan from running loudly and continually). I contacted the contractor who said he would gladly come out and disconnect the old fan (but not remove it) when my new oven came in so they could do both things at once.
Trying to be a helpful customer, I agreed although I now have no oven and no range hood and have not for some weeks. I did, however, call my sales rep back and ask that, since the contractor was going to wait until they were coming out to install the oven to fix my range hood (and by my logic that meant they were going to make the trip to fix my range hood anyway) they shouldn't be charging Sears (who then shouldn't be charging me) for the trip charge of $40. I was told that, because they were going to be taking a big hit for the incorrectly ordered oven, my salesman's manager was unlikely to approve removal of the trip charge.
At this point I felt it only prudent to point out that it really wasn't a trip charge, it was a restocking fee. If I had been originally told it was a restocking fee I might have complained, but I would have seen the honesty and logic about it. Now that it is a trip charge for a trip the contractor had to make anyway in order to fix a problem, I feel more than a little cheated.
In addition is the fact that the contractor has no intention of actually removing the old fan from my old range hood. I can understand the attitude, because it is in a difficult place to reach and it has to be gross, but I paid the installation charge for this, which was supposed to include removing the old equipment.
I have purchased, to date, a vacuum cleaner, lawn mower, two refrigerators, an oven, a range hood, two different washers and three different clothes driers, and a dishwasher from sears, and these are the things I can just think of off my head. I believe I have purchased two televisions, various small appliances such as irons, clothing, and many other items from Sears.
At this point, I do not feel like shopping at Sears again. There are many other places to get my appliances, from Best Buy to Home Depot. I chose Sears because I believed you were the biggest outfit, one I could expect professional, inclusive, helpful installation and service from. I did not check prices, I did not shop around, I simply operated off customer loyalty. At this point I do not know what can be done to change my mind. I should not have had to write this letter at all. I do know I am going to want a new dishwasher soon, another microwave, a big-screen TV, a new lawn mower, and who knows what other things I haven't thought of yet that are going to need replacing. I doubt any of them are going to be purchased at Sears.
Monday, March 05, 2007
Musicians playing Fear Instinct Instruments
Liberal messages work on most people by striking emotional chords and instinctual reactions on the knee-jerk level. By this very definition I must admit that there is something behind them. If we didn't have these emotional chords to play or these instincts, the messages wouldn't work.
What must be done is to examine why we have these chords and instincts, and how they are being used. It was said well by libertarian author Frank Herbert in his classic book Dune (paraphrase) Your awareness may be capable of controlling your instincts. Your instinct is to free yourself from a trap. An animal will chew its own hand/paw off to escape the hunter who laid the trap. A human will wait for the hunter, eliminate a threat to its kind, and use the proper tools to free itself from the trap.
A quick (sorry, I know they never are) aside into emotional chords. There are many chords to be played. You can play someone's emotions to soothe, to excite, to please, to arouse, to incite, etc. Most often chords are played in an impersonal group setting in order to incite someone or a group of someones into action. This can be done in any number of ways, from pleasure to fear. For political activism, positive emotions rarely spur people into extraordinary action, so negative emotions are used. Successful campaigns have been waged by playing on emotional chords that make us feel intellectual, informed, and reasonable - and they have had stunning success (smoking, for one). Unfortunately, once the professionals, those who are really good at this kind of manipulation, have been successful, amateurs who haven't got the patience or talent of professionals attempt to emulate them. Since they lack the skill, they go for more direct, offensive, bullying methods and switch from a passive fear with a lot of intellectual debate (whether based on fact or not) to active fear with no intellectual debate and made-up facts.
So, when I talk about emotional chords, I'm talking about the far-end negative chords that are being played upon so regularly today.
By and large, most of us like to avoid uncomfortable confrontations. We'd rather start from a position of strength and through the power of reason and our own oratory skills convince the other side we are right and have them join us. Preferably without raised voices, making friends rather than enemies, gathering supporters and allies so that people look around and say "wow, he's a real persuasive guy."
Activists play upon the assumption (and I believe they're right) that most of us would be terrified out of our wits (and possibly out of our bladders) to find ourselves in an actual combat situation. I was nearly mugged once, and I still feel shaky about it even though I escaped the situation unscathed, without loss, and without actually running away. I can't imagine what it would feel like to know that within range there were people with guns, rockets, and explosives who would love nothing better than to kill me, and that to defend myself I couldn't just find a clever way out of the situation, but might have to actually shoot someone dead. I don't know how I would react, and I am thankful it is unlikely I will ever be in that situation.
It is only natural to assume most people think as we do, and to be probably right. But I also believe that, if push came to shove, if I were a young, strapping man again, I would gladly take up arms, find that strength within me, and defend my country. I can easily see myself picking up a gun and deliberately shooting someone in the head if they were threatening my wife or children with direct, immediate, believable harm. And I don't even have to be young and strapping to see myself doing that.
The fact is that we have these animal instincts and emotional chords because it may be vital, in the first instant, to do whatever it takes to buy a second instant in which to think. Unfortunately, the instincts and chords that are being constantly played are always fear-based, and we're being asked to form opinions about (or even make decisions in the voting booth upon) long-range issues that require more than our first instant, instinct-driven, knee-jerk reactions and fear-based emotional chords. It is important for us to calm ourselves, let the fear wash over and through us, until only we remain and we can look at a situation with reason. It may be that the first course of action that presents itself to our panic-stricken mind is only going to lead to something worse. Not until we actually absorb the facts and the greater situation can we see the danger that lurks down that path (or recognize that there is no danger so we can take that path safely).
So the next time someone causes a fear-based, instinctual, knee-jerk reaction, realize you may be the unwitting instrument under someone's skilled fingers. Come to peace with yourself and see if there isn't a still, calm voice within that represents a higher, more intellectual, more honest and encompassing instinct.
Yes, I am saying that it is actually the liberals who are the fear-mongers. They are selling it in wholesale onslaught, and they're aiming for your knees.
What must be done is to examine why we have these chords and instincts, and how they are being used. It was said well by libertarian author Frank Herbert in his classic book Dune (paraphrase) Your awareness may be capable of controlling your instincts. Your instinct is to free yourself from a trap. An animal will chew its own hand/paw off to escape the hunter who laid the trap. A human will wait for the hunter, eliminate a threat to its kind, and use the proper tools to free itself from the trap.
A quick (sorry, I know they never are) aside into emotional chords. There are many chords to be played. You can play someone's emotions to soothe, to excite, to please, to arouse, to incite, etc. Most often chords are played in an impersonal group setting in order to incite someone or a group of someones into action. This can be done in any number of ways, from pleasure to fear. For political activism, positive emotions rarely spur people into extraordinary action, so negative emotions are used. Successful campaigns have been waged by playing on emotional chords that make us feel intellectual, informed, and reasonable - and they have had stunning success (smoking, for one). Unfortunately, once the professionals, those who are really good at this kind of manipulation, have been successful, amateurs who haven't got the patience or talent of professionals attempt to emulate them. Since they lack the skill, they go for more direct, offensive, bullying methods and switch from a passive fear with a lot of intellectual debate (whether based on fact or not) to active fear with no intellectual debate and made-up facts.
So, when I talk about emotional chords, I'm talking about the far-end negative chords that are being played upon so regularly today.
By and large, most of us like to avoid uncomfortable confrontations. We'd rather start from a position of strength and through the power of reason and our own oratory skills convince the other side we are right and have them join us. Preferably without raised voices, making friends rather than enemies, gathering supporters and allies so that people look around and say "wow, he's a real persuasive guy."
Activists play upon the assumption (and I believe they're right) that most of us would be terrified out of our wits (and possibly out of our bladders) to find ourselves in an actual combat situation. I was nearly mugged once, and I still feel shaky about it even though I escaped the situation unscathed, without loss, and without actually running away. I can't imagine what it would feel like to know that within range there were people with guns, rockets, and explosives who would love nothing better than to kill me, and that to defend myself I couldn't just find a clever way out of the situation, but might have to actually shoot someone dead. I don't know how I would react, and I am thankful it is unlikely I will ever be in that situation.
It is only natural to assume most people think as we do, and to be probably right. But I also believe that, if push came to shove, if I were a young, strapping man again, I would gladly take up arms, find that strength within me, and defend my country. I can easily see myself picking up a gun and deliberately shooting someone in the head if they were threatening my wife or children with direct, immediate, believable harm. And I don't even have to be young and strapping to see myself doing that.
The fact is that we have these animal instincts and emotional chords because it may be vital, in the first instant, to do whatever it takes to buy a second instant in which to think. Unfortunately, the instincts and chords that are being constantly played are always fear-based, and we're being asked to form opinions about (or even make decisions in the voting booth upon) long-range issues that require more than our first instant, instinct-driven, knee-jerk reactions and fear-based emotional chords. It is important for us to calm ourselves, let the fear wash over and through us, until only we remain and we can look at a situation with reason. It may be that the first course of action that presents itself to our panic-stricken mind is only going to lead to something worse. Not until we actually absorb the facts and the greater situation can we see the danger that lurks down that path (or recognize that there is no danger so we can take that path safely).
So the next time someone causes a fear-based, instinctual, knee-jerk reaction, realize you may be the unwitting instrument under someone's skilled fingers. Come to peace with yourself and see if there isn't a still, calm voice within that represents a higher, more intellectual, more honest and encompassing instinct.
Yes, I am saying that it is actually the liberals who are the fear-mongers. They are selling it in wholesale onslaught, and they're aiming for your knees.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)