Conflict is a fairly broad concept that can range from verbal disagreements with others to Freak Acts of Nature to full-blown World War. There are a lot of people who think that the concept of Conflict is an Inherently Bad Idea. And you’ve got your detractors to all of these forms of conflict, from your Mothering Maggies out there who strive to stop any and all verbal or physical confrontations between youngsters, to those who get all teary-eyed when a hurricane tears off half the roofs in a town that’s now mostly flooded, to pussi* pacifists who think that all physical violence and all war is bad and there’s nothing redeeming about being able to defend yourself or attack others who mean you harm. We should all just hug out our differences, after all. Sadly, the last time zebras and lions exchanged hugs and ‘worked on their differences’, the lion obesity rate skyrocketed and the zebra population plummeted. No idea on how that happened. I’m sure that the two phenomenon are completely unrelated.
Ordinarily, Conflict wouldn’t be such a Big Deal….if it weren’t for Weak people. Weak people have a tendency to take everything personally and toss themselves into the Shallowest Sea of Emotion the very second that they experience failure for the first time. They can’t get past the notion that anyone’s personal failings are best reclassified as being the result of some ‘nefarious’ plot that exploits their eminent suckitude. And if they can get to the point in their understanding that says, “If you aren’t good enough to succeed, you can either work to Become Better or you could just Quit, start Bitching about the State of the World, and form lame-ass mobs of similarly pathetic people whose sole aim is to cut down those who actually put in the time and effort to make something of themselves and succeeded where others failed”, they seldom choose the former path, instead choosing the latter; only to be coddled by their little pussi parents/friends/loved ones who make excuses for them, further enabling them to be hapless cretins who irritate the rest of humanity with their very existence. (I love Run-on sentences!) Instead of choosing Being Honest with Loved Ones, they’ve chosen the darker path of Being Supportive of Sissies.
Being Honest is an idea that was strangled in its sleep as the Hippy-Free Love movement gained strength in the ’60s and ’70s. It used to be that you could tell the Truth about someone and either have them fight you about it (as it was clearly ‘wrong’ and Honor dictated that the commenter be chastised) or they could take the comment on the chin and make the appropriate improvements to one’s character or existence to offset Constructive Criticism. The Hippy Free Love movement brought in these completely ridiculous and laughable notions that “Each Individual Has Worth”, “We Need to Be Nice to Others, No Matter What”, and “Peace and Love is what this world needs, man!” which brought the notion of Self-Improvement to a grinding halt.
These (and several other) notions came in under the guise of ‘Tolerance’, ‘Pacifism’, and ‘Coexistence’. We should tolerate the peculiarities and destructive behaviors of others because ‘we don’t know their story and shouldn’t pass judgment because we’re all the same! Besides, who are YOU to say what’s Right and Wrong? Morality is subjective anyway! Judge not lest ye be judged!’ ‘We should never advocate using physical violence to protect ourselves from others because violence causes pain and pain is ‘Bad’!’ ‘We should all just learn to get along and let all the vibrant colors of the rainbow of humanity exist in perfect harmony because we’re all unique and…something something….’ ah, I don’t really care how the rest of that goes. My medical doctors** advised me not to lie too frequently or else I’ll develop diarrhea of the mouth. My apologies for those who were sitting too close.
The point I’m slowly getting to is that NONE of the positions of the Free Love movement are remotely supported by Reason or Any form of Natural Law. But hell, they sound great! And they sound especially Ideal for those who
a) never want to grow up,
b) suck at everything they do,
3) want things without making the effort to work for what they want and
4) think that they’re the Center of Existence and everything and everyone should just bow to their whims with no Conflict involved. Including the labeling scheme of bullet points.
There’s only one problem. Without Conflict, Humanity grows weak. Conflict brings out Strength and eliminates Weakness. And this idea is scary for weaklings. So to counter the threat of Conflict, they rush to defend themselves with military weaponry that effectively removes the threat of Conflict….in a different fashion. The avoidance of Conflict does nobody any good and is the source of nearly every major problem in today’s society.
National Debt? Avoidance of conflict with big earning taxpayers and the reigning in of government programs that are excessive.
Invasion of Privacy by Governments? Avoidance of the conflict implicit in getting the general public to help the government in keeping the citizenry safe.
Rampant spread of Sexually Transmitted Diseases and Infections? Avoidance of the conflict that arises with quarantining the infected (you’re infringing on our rights!).
Gross Income Inequality? Avoidance of the conflict that arises with the egos of Those in Charge and Those Who Aren’t.
Overpopulation? Avoidance of Physical Conflict leads to overpopulation.
Constant bloodshed in the Middle East? Spread of Antibiotic resistant Superbugs? Student loan debt? Exploding housing costs? Elevated CO2 levels from the burning of fossil fuels? Nuclear weapons? Prevalence of Stupid people? Decay of the institution of Marriage? I could go on and on… All of the issues that are threatening Humanity stem from the avoidance of Conflict. And each step that members of Society try to take to avoid facing Conflict spawns MORE problems that result in GREATER Conflict than existed before that, which in turn, spawns more problems from there and so on and so forth, like a Hydra that’s learned to self mutilate so as to create more and more heads, all of which Hunger for the flesh of Man. Great job. You’ve developed an Emo Monster that can never die that hates the concept of Strength.
“Well, gee, Damien, that sounds like you’re talking out your ass. I think you’re exaggerating or just making all this crap up.”
Okay, Negative Nancy, let’s look at some examples.
Let’s talk War.
Back in the ‘Good Old Days’ before the invention of ‘Nations’ when humanity was basically just itty-bitty tribes of no more than 20-30 individuals, Warfare was simple. All the men of the village would be sent out to engage in violence with the men of other tribes for whatever reason they might concoct (‘they worship pagan gods, their gods are weaker than ours, they’ve got better access to water and better hunting grounds, they’ve got a better parking spot at work’, who cares?). EVERY male participates in the assault….or defense of the village using crude handheld implements of their own design. So what are the consequences of this style of War?
Oh no-no-no-no, don’t go putting on your overly emotional Sad Pants and decry the loss of human life and feel anguish over the shedding of blood. Violence is a Natural part of Life. It’s kill, be killed or defend in such a way that killers come up empty-handed and seek out easier prey. Don’t believe me? Go ask gazelles if they live a Zen-like existence free of fear and violence. Humanity is just as much a part of Nature as the Zebra, the Cow, or the Tiger, so there’s really no need to separate itself from the consequences of that kind of existence. So. Let’s try again. What are the consequences of the barbarism of hand-to-hand warfare?
Well, this type of warfare eliminates the weak, the sick and the old from the tribes, duh! Speed, strength, good health, and martial prowess tend to survive and those that might be considered to be ‘drags’ on the resources of the tribe… don’t. This frees up resources that can be put to better use by those who are stronger than their limp-wristed, sickly, whiny, metrosexual cave neighbor counterparts who don’t really contribute all that much to their primitive society other than the ‘tasteful arrangement of artifacts that really make a cave, a home’. These are the people in the tribe who are only alive because nobody in the tribe wants to be ‘the bad guy’ who gets rid of someone else’s family member. So the strong members of one tribe do the dirty deed of killing the weak members of the other tribe. Both tribes benefit in the short, medium and long term. Conflict serves a function in this scenario.
And before you get all up in arms about, ‘Hey, what happens if the tribes keep fighting until one group or the other is obliterated? I mean, come on, violence only breeds violence! Your whole reasoning is flawed!’, I’m looking at the most ideal situation to encourage and Respect Martial Prowess. Respecting battle strength doesn’t come from completely eliminating all other forms of strength so that you’re the only strong one left standing. It’s respecting your opponent/enemy’s strength and Him respecting Yours. This means Finding the Right Balance. Finding the Right Balance is another Lost Concept as far as Humanity is concerned. In this case, Finding the Right Balance has to deal with not becoming a pacifist pussi (this term derives from the term pusillanimous, look it up) who relies on others to defend them because they can’t Make War themselves, but also not going to the opposite end of the spectrum whereby one immediately goes to Homicidal Butcher Mode, going to any and all lengths to kill ALL opposition. Having an enemy allows you the opportunity to test your Strength and provides the necessary motivation to keep you strong. Why else do you think Jesus said, “Love thine enemy”?
Moving on in time, War turned into simply Killing the Enemy. Strength became less important so long as Victory is Achieved. You start getting the use of bows and arrows, siege engines, catapults, etc., which removes the necessity for face-to-face combat, you develop walls to hide behind so as to avoid aggression entirely, you get the stupid decision to field only the ‘strongest’ and ‘bravest’ men to defend the city while letting the weakest pussies stay safe and cuddled up with the womenfolk and children because they’re ‘Political Leaders’, which results in a passive disaster. If you send the Strong to fight the war and leave the Weak at home, who’s more likely to survive? And get to reproduce once the war is over?
Uh oh! Crazy, lazy eye Charlie who’s too weak to wield any kind of weapon now gets to breed with the lonely widowers of the village because the Mighty, Manly Mikes of the village took out a dozen men each during their Final Stand. This is the first stage of Conflict Avoidance. And Humanity already starts to suffer the loss of strong genetics.
Then, you transition to Modern warfare with the use of firearms, missiles, nuclear weapons and drone strikes, which is basically the most chickens#it method of making war (aside from suicide bombings) in human history. There is no Strength in this method of warfare, there is no physical challenge to test one’s mettle against, this is simply “Hey, guy, if you’ve got better technology and no moral restrictions, you win!” *Ahem* Israel *Ahem*
Now, you’ve moved the distance even further back between you and the enemy to the point where you don’t have to see and feel the impact of taking another individual’s life. Killing is completely indiscriminate and to hell with physical strength and battle prowess. There is no respect for your enemy’s strength, they’re simply in the way of your ambitions. Which means that Finding the Right Balance has turned into F&ck those Rotten Bastards.
This method of war has allowed craven career politicians to apply for 5 different draft deferments during the Vietnam War and still be instrumental in pushing for Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as the Vice President. This method of warfare has managed to go so far into the territory of indiscriminate widespread killing that the majority of the world has viewed the most active user and abuser of these weapons of war (America) as The Greatest Evil on Earth. It’s allowed the U.S. to become hopelessly overpopulated by sickly, shallow, weak, stupid and incompetent cretins who don’t know what suffering, hard work, and loss is all about. Each technological advance instituted in the name of ‘Keeping Our People Safe’ ultimately allows for the progressive accumulation of greater and greater weakness and the concentration of Power in the hands of Physically, Mentally, and Morally Weak Leaders. So…..basically the Congress of today.
This statement has probably got a lot of Pro-gun/Pro-War people’s panties in a bunch at this point, and if it hasn’t, then here, let me add some gas to the fire. You see, Pro-gun/Pro-War people think that because they have technology and engineering marvels that they’re ‘tough warriors’ when really they’re old, fat, slow, sickly cretins with indiscriminate Killing Power in their hands. You aren’t Strong because you carry a firearm, you aren’t tough because you can pull a trigger and you aren’t a hero or a warrior because you can hit someone with a bullet. In this, guns are like tattoos, you’re still the same douchebag you were before you got one. Only now, you just think you’re bigger, badder, more unique, more inspiring, and tougher than you were before. Any dumbass punk can take a gun and kill people with it. It’s how you get school shootings, church rampages and gang wars. There’s no Strength in that, there’s no skill required and there should be no pride in it. Guns and Technology give fangs to the Weak and Power and Refuge to the Overtly Corrupt.
Once you start accepting the premise that Victory Must be Attained at Any Cost, you’ve accepted the notion that Morality no longer has a role in the decision making process of torturing, poisoning, mutilating or killing other people. Look at the recent technological push into drones and drone strikes and see how THAT’S playing out. The number of innocent lives destroyed as ‘collateral damage’ has grown exponentially since drones have entered military use. (And using the term ‘collateral damage’ is one of the wormiest horses#it verbal gymnastics efforts out there. Call it what it is: ‘the indiscriminate murder of innocent men, women and children to kill 2 guys who you can’t even be sure were even there but have deemed to be a ‘threat’’. The CIA and the Pentagon don’t have to prove that someone is a threat before ‘neutralizing’ them, they just have to have reasonable suspicion that they might have some kind of tendency or leanings towards extremism or come into contact with those who might become ‘extremists’ to justify ‘offing’ someone.)
Once you grant your leaders the ability to wage war and kill other people without putting themselves or others at risk, you grant them the capability to eliminate ANYONE who’s a ‘threat’ to them from the comfort of their reinforced underground secret bunkers. How long do you think it’s going to be before they decide that You and Yours are The Threat to America’s Way of Life? And let’s be clear, when they say ‘America’, they don’t mean the country that was founded on the principles of Freedom, Democracy, Liberty, and Reason. Their America is the one where They Make the Rules and Decisions without sacrificing anything of their own and get to dictate to you the terms by which your cooperation will be appropriated. I mean, they aren’t exactly putting their own money, bodies or children on the line here. It’s part of the reason that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have gone virtually unmentioned in the media in the past 5 years, why veteran benefits have fallen off the radar, why veteran suicide rates stateside were/are at a rate of 22/day, and why the U.S. national debt has exploded to $14 trillion dollars in that same time. $800-900 billion dollars a year for a military budget times 10 years equals $8-9 trillion dollars. (You didn’t think it really got that big because so many drughead welfare mommies were milking The System when welfare annual budgets run in the hundreds of Millions of dollars annually, did you? Learn math. Don’t be dumb.)
Getting back to point…. All it takes is one disagreement with your ‘leaders’ and you’re blackballed, blacklisted, labeled an extremist/terrorist, your assets are confiscated/frozen, your family’s and personal privacy is violated without your knowledge or consent, your Constitutional Rights violated and then you’re left to realize in your secret CIA, FBI or local law enforcement prison cell (if they don’t just send a drone out with an early ‘Christmas present’ for you) that you’ve bought Fascism into this country because it dressed itself up as ‘Patriotism’.
You’ve let fear of Conflict push you to the far edge of the self preservation spectrum. And those consequences are coming to get you. Seriously.
Let’s switch over to another example of Conflict Avoidance…. Relationships. I mean, maybe I was just making that crap up, after all. You should always test your theory multiple times to insure you aren’t just being blindly stupid or completely full of crap. It’s not just a good idea in Science, but in the ‘Real World’ too.
I like watching people. And no, NOT in the creepy, “Hey, I’ve got a Van with tinted windows, a pair of binoculars and a box of Kleenexes’ kind of ‘watching’. I like watching the dynamics of people’s relationships with others. Doesn’t matter to me if I’m watching a couple argue heatedly about where they’re going to dinner after a movie’s gotten out or watching business underlings placate their Napoleonic bosses, I find them all to be wildly entertaining….for a while.
What I don’t find particularly amusing is this dumbass notion that relationships should have Zero conflict. I’m talking about the syphilitic notion that Snow White and Prince Charming live happily ever after with no conflict and no arguments. Just the two of them vapidly staring into each other’s eyes until they eventually starve to death in their own bodily waste because they forgot to take care of necessary bodily functions and get jobs. It’s just so….boring……and dangerous. Somewhere in the Pop Culture Manifesto this Idiotic Idea came into being that relationships need to be filled with ‘peace and harmony and perfect cuddly wubblies’. It’s required that a partner be a complete and utter supporter of any and every hare-brained idea that pops into someone’s mind. And since the overwhelming majority of people are lazy, excuse riddled morons, they’re naturally going to aspire to the lowest possible form of human behavior that they can get away with.
“Sorry, babe, but If you can’t let me ‘fully express my sexuality’ upon you, then you’re entrapping me and trying to force me to conform to your outdated models of decency, self respect and maturity. Screw you, I need to find someone who ‘loves me for who I am’. I have a sexual addiction that I ‘can’t control’ and you just can’t seem to accept that part of me. I can’t help that I want to dress up as a clown, wear ass-less chaps and put assorted vegetables inside you while I ride around on your back. I was born this way! It’s a ‘chemical imbalance’ and a ‘genetic predisposition’, my neuro-psychiatrist says so! And you know how psychiatrists never ever lie, right? Oh. And I’ve been banging your friends behind your back. See ya!”
Or “Honey, if you can’t handle/love me at my worst, then you sure as hell don’t deserve me at my best! I’m a strong woman who needs a ‘real’ man to handle me and if you can’t man up to the challenge, then you deserve all the times I slept with your friends. Whateva’, I do what I want! It’s my body and I’m a ‘sexually liberated woman’. I’m a queen who needs me a king!”
Everyone knows that this is just flat out stupid drivel coming from the mouth of a 20-60 year old child. This is an obvious issue with the avoidance of Conflict. The first Conflict has to do with the notion of Ego. In these situations these jerkoffs feels the need to ‘win’ against the other individual. Clearly, these kinds of people are trying to justify their own desires to subjugate others in such a manner so as to destroy the other individual’s inherent desire for respect and a marginally equal footing in their relationship. One person gets to dominate the relationship dynamics and the other is forced to submit. And not in any truly desired fashion. So to address this conflict, the little puling child will either try to force their will on the other person or play passive-aggressive games to put the other individual off balance enough that they finally capitulate and assume a submissive role. Failing that, these little brats just decide to leave the relationship, forcing their sane partner to actively question the validity of their desire for respect from prospective mates. Which really isn’t that insane in the first place.
The second aspect of Conflict in this relationship dynamic has to do with the Internal Conflict of imposing a degree of self restraint on One’s Own Self in order to allow the relationship the possibility to grow. This part is decidedly difficult with society’s ‘take whatever you want from whoever you want’ mentality of today. People are forced to two extremes here as well. Either suppress EVERYTHING about yourself to fit in with Neurotic, Controlling partners or decide to not suppress anything because it ‘crimps your style’ and become that Neurotic Partner. So, you get bland dishrags of people who have no personality or spine or you have complete trainwreck sluts and rutting peckers who lack any semblance of self control and respect for their partners and demand that everything be done according to how they want things to be.
And Yes, I’m Slut Shaming. To say that shaming someone for their behavior is a ‘bad’ thing, typically means that you’re arguing the negative: that there’s something to ‘be proud of’ in regards to that same behavior. There’s really nothing to be proud of, if you’re tripping on every crack in the sidewalk and landing on a different Rogue Penis. And there’s nothing to be proud of when you’re scamming on drunk girls who have daddy abandonment/low self esteem issues just to get your weiner wet. You’re doing the sexual equivalent of clubbing crippled baby seals. It doesn’t take a lot of effort, skill, strength, or ability. All you need is just the willingness to reach out and take advantage of the obvious weaknesses in others. The sooner that people come to that realization, the better off we’ll all be. Boys like situations that make their wee-wees feel ‘good’, girls like attention from others. It’s not rocket science, folks.
You know, now that I think about it, the whole notion that personal relationships have the two conflicts of Ego Dominance and Self Restraint might apply to nearly all relationships. Hmm. I better talk this out in private. And by talk, I mean type. And by ‘private’, I mean here, where only you and I can read it. Let’s look at workplace relationships that are supposed to be ‘platonic’ (though that seldom ends up being the case, as far as I can tell….being handsome, chiseled, charming, intelligent and single turns you into the office bug zapper. Such a bright light that’s sooo enticing ends up attracting unwanted attention from pests before too long.).
So you’ve got the typical workplace. You’ve got your boss, his/her boss above them and you’ve got your coworkers. Now, what’s the best workplace environment? I’m not talking about back massagers and free candy and coke machines, since back massagers are ridiculously expensive and coke is a drug that leads to addiction and greater health issues further down the line. (And that diet variety is just revolting.) No, I’m talking about what kind of relationship dynamic is best for a company? Is it one where you have some fascist wanker who sits on top, denigrating and mocking others for their efforts, ignoring the legalities involved in workplace compensation, ignoring the suggestions of their underlings who are clearly more intelligent, handsome/beautiful and possessed of a greater business savvy, and generally just being an abrasive, passive-aggressive/aggressive-aggressive, insecure cretin around the office who has ONLY managed to make it into their positions by being whiny enough and arrogant enough to make the ‘right’ impression on the wrong people? Is that the model you want to facilitate growth, knowing full-well that this will only push people with good ideas and good work ethic underground or out of the company?
No! Good ideas come from a little bit of conflict. Conflict allows others the opportunity to see options that might exist to resolve company inefficiencies or weaknesses. Having some Pompous Dick in Charge making it known that its ‘His/Her Way or the Highway’ only insures that those with something legitimate to offer will see that Highway as a Beacon to a Better Life.
What about the other side of the equation? Is it better to have some mild, milk-water boss who rarely asserts any authority or direction? One who habitually changes their mind based on the loudest voice in the office, who cringes from confrontation and avoids resolving conflicts because he/she doesn’t want to ‘be mean’ and ‘hinder the professional growth’ of their employees?
This isn’t optimal either. You get Tammy and Melissa pulling each other’s hair and sabotaging each other’s work on a daily/weekly basis in a bid to gain favor, you get Tom, Dick and Harry wasting company time on 3 different equally detrimental program packages that neither satisfy the client’s needs nor work with your current tech arrangement because they hate each other and don’t want to collaborate, you’ve got Billy and Betty wandering off for half the day doing God-Only-Knows-What and projects start falling behind. Nothing gets done because everyone’s a Lone Wolf and the Office becomes complete Bedlam. And sooner or later, Billy or Betty is either going to go to HR and start discussing ‘Sexual Harassment’ litigation, you’ll have to pay the cleaning staff more to clean up random spills of ‘bodily fluids’, or you’ll have to resolve emotional outbursts/workplace violence that are a direct result of their crumbling personal/professional relationship that should never have been allowed to continue in the workplace.
In the first scenario, you’ve got the Boss who can’t Check his/her Ego enough and maintain the necessary self restraint to not be a complete Asshat who pushes the best and brightest to leave the facility, allowing for a startup to form that destroys the company from without via all those brilliant ideas that he/she never nurtured. In the second scenario, you’ve got the Boss who can’t Check the Ego of their staff and refuses to instill any restraint on office behavior because they don’t want to hinder creativity. They end up sacrificing productivity for excessive freedom which pushes them into the ground. If you can find the Right Balance between perfectly rigid structure and limitless creativity, you’ll maintain the success and innovation that a company needs in order to grow. There. (Now you’ve gotten the short and sweet (not to mention free) education on Proper Management Practices. Naturally, there are other aspects of Management that I didn’t cover but we’ll get to that in due time. This rant is about Conflict, not Business, so hold your horses.)
Now, in both of these examples, it should be abundantly clear that Manager Despot’s method of eliminating ALL conflict is bad for business. It should also be abundantly clear that Manager Doormat’s method of avoiding all conflict is equally bad for business. So, Conflict is a good thing. Too much leads to chaos, too little leads to totalitarianism and stagnation. Both groups are the same in that they believe that Conflict is a Bad thing. They just take two different approaches in how to deal with Conflict that are both equally bad for business.
Once you expand this understanding to the greater realm of Society, you can see where this will all be heading. Those who gain power do so by either being born in a position of authority and merely have to maintain it (*ahem* George Bush *ahem*) or Eliminating/Avoiding Conflict. One doesn’t have to prove their Strength to become A Political Leader. All you have to do is have the funding, the organization and the support of enough weak people who are scared of The Alternative to make it happen. Once you’re there, it’s a cakewalk to keep your throne. Simply get rid of anyone who’s critical of your rule and either ignore the words of those that you can’t get rid of or simply denounce them as Un-American. Your adoring fanbase will even cheer you on as you lead them further into ignorance. I mean, come on! It’s worked for every president and Congressman in the past 30 years and look where that’s taken us! Why fix something that isn’t broken***?
All great feats and deeds come from Conflict. All knowledge comes from an individual or a group’s conflict with their own lack of understanding about the world around us. It pushes people to ask the most powerful and dangerous of questions: “Why?”
I’ve been asking everyone who shuns conflict and violence this very question: ‘Why is it a good idea to eliminate and remove conflict from our lives? Because it’s ‘scary’? Because it means that one might Lose? That the lie of ‘equality’ might be exposed for what it truly is?’ and have never really gotten a good answer. Just that ‘we should all get along and embrace all our differences’.
Conflict has been just as much of the Human condition as breathing has been. And yet society shuns it now that everything is required to be ‘easy’ and ‘non-threatening’. And we’ve done THAT so that there are no ‘losers’ or people who could be upset by failure or pain. We’ve been converted to the foolish notions that ‘we’re all equal and there’s no need to better ourselves or compete with others because it’s all meaningless’. We’ve gone from being intrepid explorers braving the Utterly Unknown with nothing but our wits and determination to guide us to whimpering whiners who cringe from the slightest sharp word or challenge in less than 200 years.
This is just another reason why Humanity is Doomed.
*pussi is a term that I’m formalizing as a derivative of the term pusillanimous: lacking courage, fortitude, strength and resilience. So if you see the term ‘pussi’, it will refer to anyone that I observe to be completely lacking in the traits that are required to indicate that one is an Honorable and Upstanding Man or Woman. This definition will be fleshed out as we journey onward.
**The only Doctors I see are Dr. House, Dr. Mallard, Dr. Watson and Dr. Beverly Crusher. The rest are just overpaid gatekeepers to the pharmacy, as near as I can tell. I haven’t decided if I’m willing to see this Dr. Who character. If I’m going to a doctor, I want Answers, not more Questions and a doctor whose name is a Question is a warning sign that I just can’t ignore.
***Oh. It’s broken. It’s fine except for the, you know, U.S. National Debt of $18.33 Trillion and $16.91 Trillion in Total U.S. Personal Debt that nobody wants to discuss or legitimately address with legislation, the overwhelming partisan bickering that occurs in government (both at the national and state levels), two wars that America is still not done with, while having several others on the horizon, the overwhelming distrust/hatred that the majority of the Russian, Asian and Arab worlds have for Americans/Westerners, the GROSS income inequality and racial tensions that are brewing up domestic discord and the outright anger/distrust of an excessively powerful government by a growing % of Americans. None of that counts as being ‘broken’. Those are just works in progress! Relax, budday!