Insomnia is a dangerous thing. It taps you on the brain and says, "Hey, I cannot tell you why, but I need you to come with me for a little while." And you get up, go looking for Marley's ghost and rattling chains, then stretch out in front of the TV and let osmosis take over.
My nocturnal journey had two destinations: CNN's "Piers Morgan Tonight" and MSNBC's "The Last Word". At my first stop I listened to Penn Jillette (of the magic act Penn & Teller) try to discuss his atheism with Morgan who was having none of it. I listened as Jillette patiently countered Morgan's assumptions about him, and as Morgan laid out his emotional investment in the issue. All was well, or as expected, until Jillette said the following: "I love proselytizing." He went on to use the example of the Jehovah's Witnesses who go door-to-door touting their beliefs. This is where I come up against it as I am not all that comfortable with proselytizing. It goes back to childhood experiences which I do not care to elaborate on at this juncture, but this did make me question my own degree of open-mindedness or evolution, if you will. Yes, you absolutely should be able to be who you are with everyone, without having to delve into a closet full of masks for all groups or occasions, without having to "soften the blow of you" to certain people in your social orbit. As a blogger and writer, this is a wall I bang my head on nearly daily.
My second stop found Chris Hayes of "The Nation" standing in for the unexplainably attractive Lawrence O'Donnell on "The Last Word". Chris was interviewing a lesser known candidate for the Republican nomination for POTUS, Buddy Roemer (R-LA). And Roemer was making a hell of a lot of sense on campaign finance reform. He has limited his endorsers to contributions of $100 max and he gave examples of "checks setting the agenda" on both sides--Republican and Democratic. He went on to explain that "liberals" would prefer the issue be solved with spending limitations, "conservatives" with disclosure dictates--which would plow the field for a "good debate" in his opinion. After that segment, Chris said, in a short commentary, that giving Rick Perry attention for his Bernanke comment is exactly what the candidate is hoping for, that it is part of his strategy.
So I'm left with dueling late-night lessons: "Say everything" and "Say little or nothing". For if I put my money on Penn's philosophy of telling my truth always then won't I, at times, speak before the facts are in, before considering all the facets of opinion, before deciding whether or not I'm playing the part of the pawn? How do you not over-think it all; how do you not end up just "screwing yourself into the ground" as I like to put it?
Or you could take this approach: There are times when I know I "say my truth" by saying nothing at all, for there are times when the path toward enlightenment and growth is to just "let it ride". The challenge is to try to guess which situation is which--a talkie or a silent--for at least a majority of the time. We all remember times we wish we'd spoken up and times we wish we'd have shut up. Perhaps there's some use in sorting that list for yourself, in pondering which circumstance you tend to find yourself in most and which of those choices most bothers you.
For my part, I'll continue to struggle happily along with my head-vs-wall routine. The bruises do tend to heal pretty quickly and, with proper care and forgiveness, the X-rays are staying fairly normal. Anyway, none of us are what we seem: We are so much more than that.
No comments:
Post a Comment