Someone please tie my shoes...

Holding a solid conservative view on the world certainly infringes on my ability to be congenial. I can't help but approach the multitude of decisions and obligations presented in everyday life from a deductive point of view. It's a simple remedy really. Recognize a difficulty. Identify the problem. Assess your options. Address the problem. There is no reason, in most cases, to seek counsel or solutions from an outside source. Life is an ongoing conveyer belt of such scenarios. The self—sufficient among us recognize these challenges and face them in stride.

If the water is too cold in the shower, we turn the nozzle a bit. If we have a couple beers in a local tavern and start singing to our friends, we apologize and cut back on the libations. If the cheese on our pizza is too hot to eat, we wait until it cools a little. These are all examples of simple reasoning. However, 'simple' is a relative term.

It's that 'personal responsibility' thing; a cliché of a phrase, certainly. Yet, like most things very familiar, the true meaning gets lost in the mundane. And, as those setting policy continuously barrage the public with legislation and laws aimed at protecting their constituency, what they are really doing is numbing society to the necessity of using their collective brains. What's worse is that we let them.

PepsiCo, owner of Pizza Hut, is the target of numerous lawsuits every year when someone burns the roof of his mouth on a hot slice. I used to be involved in such cases, and one thing became clear on every single case. The plaintiff in such action was completely convinced that they had no culpability in the act. You can't help but bask in wonder at such a position. Of course, with every law suit there is always a lawyer explaining to their client that they were wronged. That's no excuse. These folks have absolutely no ability to accept that they hold any responsibility for anything. The very concept of no personal responsibility and self—sufficiency does not only manifest itself in our legal system. It's everywhere.

Following the recent general election there were many disappointed Americans. Their candidate lost. The most reasonable among them would take such a result in stride. Perhaps they would vent a little. Maybe a pledge to redouble their efforts or analyze their failings would be in order. But, who are these namby—pamby simpletons who are running to therapists to solve their internal strife

Call it what you will. Post—election Selection Trauma (PEST) or Post Election Selection Depression (PESD) is, quite frankly, a joke. It's embarrassing that there are individuals out there who willingly grasp at such a self—proclaimed fragility. Rob Gordon, Executive Director of the American Health Association, describes this malarkey as a short term affliction. However, in his opinion,

'PESD is like any other mental health disorder which essentially, left without treatment can lead to catastrophic consequences.' 

Bull hockey. PESD, which is not worthy of a classification, is nothing more than a display of prima donnas. These are individuals who have conditioned themselves to ignore veracity. Instead of bucking up and accepting this thing called life, they convince themselves that, once again, someone else is needed to solve their problems for them.

We should place shame on the medical community for dignifying such idiocy with legitimate discourse. Treatment for such absurdity should last as long as it would take the "stricken" to read the sign on the door; 'If you are here about the election...grow the hell up and eat some ice cream or something.'

The list of 'symptoms' attributed to PESD or PEST are listed as follows:

  • Feelings of withdrawal
  • Feelings of isolation
  • Emotional anger and bitterness
  • Loss of appetite
  • Sleeplessness
  • Nightmares
  • Pervasive moodiness, including endless sulking

    Tell me in all honesty that these 'symptoms' don't read like those associated with Yankee fans last month. Personally, being a Phillies fan, I have been dealing with these 'symptoms' most of my adult life. However, I don't need to go to a psychiatrist to learn that the team needs better hitting and more consistent pitching. And, I don't need someone with a medical degree to tell me how to deal with it. Then again, I'm not a liberal. I have a rugged individualism that allows me a few curse words at the sports section, and the ability to put reality in perspective.

    That attitude of passive helplessness and internal weakness is one of the primary  characteristics breeding within the liberal mentality. If there is a predicament, someone else will solve it for them. If not everyone has healthcare, government will fix it. If I can't afford to support a family, I will have one anyway, and support it through 'entitlements yet to be received.' If I can't get into a school based on my grades and performance, I will take advantage of the color of my skin or peddle a personal history sob story.

    Somewhere along the way the concept of fighting one's own battles has given way to what could be referred to Socialism of the Individual. Instead of tapping the strength and ingenuity of the individual, these sorry saps are satisfied in seeking a communal bailout. In reality, the individual becomes a microcosm of socialism. This state of mind, unfortunately, bears poisonous fruit. It is the same mentality which champions the court of international opinion. They end up being more concerned with what the European Union has to say on foreign policy than what their own mind is telling them. Simply put, they have no confidence in their own opinions. They have insufficient self—esteem to form a resolute judgment. And, now, they are copping—out on the most basic of everyday run—of—the—mill emotions and are looking to be coddled to overcome simplistic inanity.

    What's really depressing, and worthy of serious concern is ability of the courts to transpose the simplest of problems into legislation and bad law. For example, an individual in New Jersey can, actually, file a dram shop claim on his own behalf.   In other words, a person can have too much to drink at a bar, injure himself, and then blame the bar for over—serving him.

    In Florida, a bar/restaurant can be held responsible for serving an alcoholic. How the Florida restaurateur or bartender is supposed to know of this 'confidential medical condition' is beyond anyone's grasp and not conclusively defined

    In New York, you can't join parents into a law suit as a third party defendant for failure to supervise the activities of their own minor child.  So if a parent isn't paying attention, and the minor runs out in front of a car, that minor is absolved of liability, and parent is insulated.  The vehicle operator, however, has no such luxury despite the absence of any wrongdoing.  These examples are just a sampling of how our courts, and the people who drive this legislation, are satisfied to place blame on anyone as long as that 'anyone' isn't the individual holding the smoking gun.

    This mindset plays into the helpless traipsing to Dr. Feelgood over an undesired election result. This frame of mind, also, plays into the inability to use that God—given intellect that many seem to be saving for a rainy day. Instead of learning from adversity, there are way too many people wondering who is going to tie their shoes for them.

    Whether it is for money, perceived legitimacy, or political gain, there are too many takers out there willing to tie them, rather than giving these sorry sacks a kick in their complacency.

  • Holding a solid conservative view on the world certainly infringes on my ability to be congenial. I can't help but approach the multitude of decisions and obligations presented in everyday life from a deductive point of view. It's a simple remedy really. Recognize a difficulty. Identify the problem. Assess your options. Address the problem. There is no reason, in most cases, to seek counsel or solutions from an outside source. Life is an ongoing conveyer belt of such scenarios. The self—sufficient among us recognize these challenges and face them in stride.

    If the water is too cold in the shower, we turn the nozzle a bit. If we have a couple beers in a local tavern and start singing to our friends, we apologize and cut back on the libations. If the cheese on our pizza is too hot to eat, we wait until it cools a little. These are all examples of simple reasoning. However, 'simple' is a relative term.

    It's that 'personal responsibility' thing; a cliché of a phrase, certainly. Yet, like most things very familiar, the true meaning gets lost in the mundane. And, as those setting policy continuously barrage the public with legislation and laws aimed at protecting their constituency, what they are really doing is numbing society to the necessity of using their collective brains. What's worse is that we let them.

    PepsiCo, owner of Pizza Hut, is the target of numerous lawsuits every year when someone burns the roof of his mouth on a hot slice. I used to be involved in such cases, and one thing became clear on every single case. The plaintiff in such action was completely convinced that they had no culpability in the act. You can't help but bask in wonder at such a position. Of course, with every law suit there is always a lawyer explaining to their client that they were wronged. That's no excuse. These folks have absolutely no ability to accept that they hold any responsibility for anything. The very concept of no personal responsibility and self—sufficiency does not only manifest itself in our legal system. It's everywhere.

    Following the recent general election there were many disappointed Americans. Their candidate lost. The most reasonable among them would take such a result in stride. Perhaps they would vent a little. Maybe a pledge to redouble their efforts or analyze their failings would be in order. But, who are these namby—pamby simpletons who are running to therapists to solve their internal strife

    Call it what you will. Post—election Selection Trauma (PEST) or Post Election Selection Depression (PESD) is, quite frankly, a joke. It's embarrassing that there are individuals out there who willingly grasp at such a self—proclaimed fragility. Rob Gordon, Executive Director of the American Health Association, describes this malarkey as a short term affliction. However, in his opinion,

    'PESD is like any other mental health disorder which essentially, left without treatment can lead to catastrophic consequences.' 

    Bull hockey. PESD, which is not worthy of a classification, is nothing more than a display of prima donnas. These are individuals who have conditioned themselves to ignore veracity. Instead of bucking up and accepting this thing called life, they convince themselves that, once again, someone else is needed to solve their problems for them.

    We should place shame on the medical community for dignifying such idiocy with legitimate discourse. Treatment for such absurdity should last as long as it would take the "stricken" to read the sign on the door; 'If you are here about the election...grow the hell up and eat some ice cream or something.'

    The list of 'symptoms' attributed to PESD or PEST are listed as follows:

  • Feelings of withdrawal
  • Feelings of isolation
  • Emotional anger and bitterness
  • Loss of appetite
  • Sleeplessness
  • Nightmares
  • Pervasive moodiness, including endless sulking

    Tell me in all honesty that these 'symptoms' don't read like those associated with Yankee fans last month. Personally, being a Phillies fan, I have been dealing with these 'symptoms' most of my adult life. However, I don't need to go to a psychiatrist to learn that the team needs better hitting and more consistent pitching. And, I don't need someone with a medical degree to tell me how to deal with it. Then again, I'm not a liberal. I have a rugged individualism that allows me a few curse words at the sports section, and the ability to put reality in perspective.

    That attitude of passive helplessness and internal weakness is one of the primary  characteristics breeding within the liberal mentality. If there is a predicament, someone else will solve it for them. If not everyone has healthcare, government will fix it. If I can't afford to support a family, I will have one anyway, and support it through 'entitlements yet to be received.' If I can't get into a school based on my grades and performance, I will take advantage of the color of my skin or peddle a personal history sob story.

    Somewhere along the way the concept of fighting one's own battles has given way to what could be referred to Socialism of the Individual. Instead of tapping the strength and ingenuity of the individual, these sorry saps are satisfied in seeking a communal bailout. In reality, the individual becomes a microcosm of socialism. This state of mind, unfortunately, bears poisonous fruit. It is the same mentality which champions the court of international opinion. They end up being more concerned with what the European Union has to say on foreign policy than what their own mind is telling them. Simply put, they have no confidence in their own opinions. They have insufficient self—esteem to form a resolute judgment. And, now, they are copping—out on the most basic of everyday run—of—the—mill emotions and are looking to be coddled to overcome simplistic inanity.

    What's really depressing, and worthy of serious concern is ability of the courts to transpose the simplest of problems into legislation and bad law. For example, an individual in New Jersey can, actually, file a dram shop claim on his own behalf.   In other words, a person can have too much to drink at a bar, injure himself, and then blame the bar for over—serving him.

    In Florida, a bar/restaurant can be held responsible for serving an alcoholic. How the Florida restaurateur or bartender is supposed to know of this 'confidential medical condition' is beyond anyone's grasp and not conclusively defined

    In New York, you can't join parents into a law suit as a third party defendant for failure to supervise the activities of their own minor child.  So if a parent isn't paying attention, and the minor runs out in front of a car, that minor is absolved of liability, and parent is insulated.  The vehicle operator, however, has no such luxury despite the absence of any wrongdoing.  These examples are just a sampling of how our courts, and the people who drive this legislation, are satisfied to place blame on anyone as long as that 'anyone' isn't the individual holding the smoking gun.

    This mindset plays into the helpless traipsing to Dr. Feelgood over an undesired election result. This frame of mind, also, plays into the inability to use that God—given intellect that many seem to be saving for a rainy day. Instead of learning from adversity, there are way too many people wondering who is going to tie their shoes for them.

    Whether it is for money, perceived legitimacy, or political gain, there are too many takers out there willing to tie them, rather than giving these sorry sacks a kick in their complacency.