O-ba-ma?

Now is the winter of our discontent
Made glorious summer by this sun of York;
And all the clouds that lour’d upon our house
In the deep bosom of the ocean buried.
Now are our brows bound with victorious wreaths;
Our bruised arms hung up for monuments;
Our stern alarums changed to merry meetings,
Our dreadful marches to delightful measures.

Time will tell.

What will happen if Obama, the Mesmerist, wins?

I am not a trained hypnotist, but I do recognize now that I’ve been in trances often. Once recently I went into a brief trance after an injury to my foot. I fainted. While in the fainting spell I found myself very far from my surroundings, I could hear the voices of my family trying to rouse me, and I thought I was sleeping and dreaming and was quite reluctant to come out of that. But, of course, I did (or I wouldn’t be writing this now!)

I recognize, as I learn about the topic, the number of times I’ve been in trances. Certainly I begin to recognize (as many writers might) the role it plays in writing — in focusing forward into the argument and the flow of words.

I’m also an amateur musician, and I can see how it relates to the focus required of one in music, but also the “letting go” that is necessary if music is to be musical.

I am looking at a record voting pattern right now in my neighborhood. I happen to live near a polling place. Never seen anything like it in my life.

The results of trance are what determines whether hypnosis has occurred. When my injury caused me to faint, to trance, I got an immediate relief from pain. And as you know pain relief is one of the uses to which the legal, benign and therapeutic use of hypnosis is directed.

As to public speaking. The problem is that people suppose that hypnotism is something new, when in fact like all naturally occurring things it is quite old. The science of “public speaking” in the ancient world is rhetoric, which was the foundation source for the study of law (and the training of an attorney today) and was also a part of pedagogy and psychology. You shouldn’t suppose that psychology is not an ancient rather than a modern science. The name derives from Psyche an ancient Greek goddess, after all. It is to our detriment that we disregard the past.

How effective are your own uses of hypnotism in your practice? Hypnotherapists in the audience.  Sometimes the magic works and sometimes it doesn’t.  Resistance to suggestion has much variability.  It has much to do with motivation.  How motivated is someone to accept a particular suggestion at a certain moment in life? As to the failure of hypnotism to cure smoking, I see that as supporting rather than hindering my argument. If I thought people could not resist the suggestion that they’ve been given, I would have no reason to write, would I? 

Indeed, perhaps they would vote the same way anyway. But it’s the complete vagueness of Obama that I find remarkable. He has turned himself into a blank slate. Both white and black, both intellectual and a regular guy. For this thing and against it at the same time (check his detractors for an interesting list of his flip flops that are quite effective). He says “change” which is the mantra word of hypnosis. Change we can believe in. Completely empty, contentless phrase — fill it with your own imagination because he has said nothing about which anyone could agree or disagree.

Reasoning is all about particular things. Science is E=MC squared. Change the terms and you get entirely different results because material reality is very specific. But Obama (even his name is mantra-like, how fortunately for him, as opposed to Soetoro his temporary name during his mom’s second marriage) — as I was saying Obama is the dream man. He is what you want him to be.

Well, we will see what he does. He cannot go on doing his seduction forever. It is not something that will hold up in a press conference or in negotiations with Congress. He has to get particular about something sometime and we’ll see then what the content is.

He has to argue for something particular sometime.

What will it be?

Surprise, surprise awaits us!

Best wishes,

ANF

Why McCain?

Why McCain?  Well, for starters I like McCain.  He’s very down to earth.  He has also been bipartisan avant la lettre and long before Obama invented a kind of pretend bipartisanship.

I say this as someone who had looked carefully and objectively at Obama as a candidate.  Before I learned about his history in the Illinois legislature, I thought he sounded like a very reasonable and sensible candidate.  At first.  However, he doesn’t hold up well under careful scrutiny.  Too much naivete about foreign policy.  Too many very ultra-left-wing associations back in Chicago – and while we’re at it — not nearly enough candour about those associations. 

Is Obama embarrassed about Ayers, Wright and ACORN?  The latter is very revealing.  His having been a “community organizer” sounds so innocuous.  His having worked with ACORN does not sound so innocuous.  Indeed, it puts his “casual” affliation with William Ayers into an entirely new and not very flattering light — unless you are uber-left — in which case it’s perhaps a badge of honor.  What is it, one wonders, to Obama himself?  Hmm.  Something he is not willing to parade in prime time.  And that alone speaks volumes.

Is McCain too closely tied to Bush?  Well, not for those of us who are pretty okay — most of the time — with President Bush.  The chief quarrel that the Left has with Bush seems to be Iraq.  And Obama has been very forthright in reminding us how thoroughly he was against Iraq from the very start.  And that’s fine. 

But that was then, and this is now.  We went to war with Iraq, and the pressing question is not whether we should have gone to war or not.  That question really is a day late and many dollars short. The pressing question is whether we win in Iraq or not.  Winning matters.   But “win” is not a word I have heard Obama use (please correct me if I’m wrong). 

But I want to see America win in Iraq, to build on everything it has won so far.  Indeed, I wonder if Obama envisions an American military winning in any war.  The Democrats are not famous for their advocacy of war, yet sometimes war is necessary.  Sometimes, I suppose, it is “the answer” one might say in contrariness to a popular bumper sticker.  My question is would Obama be able to acknowledge that this is so — and more to the point, would he recognize when that might be the case, and more to the point still: does he recognize that this is true now?

The war in Iraq is fact now.  The question is do we win or lose. 

And that’s reason numero uno why I’m voting for McCain.  Because I think we should win.

PHOTO CREDIT CLICK.