Archive | February 2016

The Traits of Twisted Leadership in the Presidential Race of 2016

Presidential Race 2016

When a man or woman running for President has tunnel vision and only sees the way, by how they sees things, they won’t be self-critical. That means they won’t care how they hurt others. They’ll be deliberately vague by not giving details to what they say they’re going to do if elected President. They’re really good at pointing out and giving feedback on the faults of others and will lie by omission.

If the above were to happen, these candidates who are running for President, view themselves as a victim WHEN they’re held accountable. They’ll start to blame social conditions, even their own family, the past and others for what they do. Mind you, they only view themselves as a victim if it’s convenient, because they will use that view as a springboard into being irresponsible with what they say and do.

No one gets to this place in their life unless they personally view themselves as a good person. But that view is also used to avoid being responsible for their offenses. They won’t acknowledge their own destructive behavior and WILL build themselves up at the expenses of others.

These candidates won’t give any effort to do things they find boring or disagreeable. If they were ever to say, “I can’t,” they really mean they won’t. Their stubbornness not to move from that position is herculean.

Candidates like this are high rollers. If you were able to get to the core of the way they think, they’ll think living in a responsible way is unexciting and unsatisfying. They’re not people, who would obligate themselves to others, but they are ALL about obligating others to them. They will be interested in being responsible only IF they can get some sort of immediate payoff.

A Presidential candidate with the above scenario is impatient and won’t use the past as a learning tool when it gets in the way of their plans. They’ll expect others to act immediately when they demand it of them. AND, when they make decisions, they will be based on assumptions and not the facts.

If you really got to know them whenever they do have irrational fears, they will refuse to admit them. These candidates have a fundamental fear of injury or even death WHEN they aren’t in control. When they are in control, there’s no need to talk about those fears. The reality, though, is they have a profound fear of being put down and WHEN they’re held accountable, they feel lousy and experience a kind of self induced depression that makes them think everyone knows the real them.

That’s when they’ll have a compelling need to be in control of others and every situation. They’ll use any method they can to manipulate others by deceit so they can take control of their situations. These candidates will refuse to be a dependent person UNLESS they can take advantage of it.

If the truth were out there on the table, these candidates actually think they are different and better than others. They live by double standards and expect out of others what they will fail to meet themselves. They’ll come across as super-optimistic not because they want to be elected President, but because being super-optimistic cuts any fear they might have of failure. In their mind, if that fear won’t go away, they will quit at the first sign of what they consider failure.

The glue that ties this all together for this type of candidate is how they actually perceive all things and people as objects that belong to them. They have no concept of the “ownership rights” of others. Sadly, they are people who are capable of using sex for power and control.

God help the USA, if there’s anyone running for the office of President in this great land of ours that this may describe.

If anyone like this were to be elected, my question is how does this reflect on the state of the people who do the electing? Would we not be a civilization that has gone rogue?

One more thought. Everything you have read from the above description actually describes what and who twisted thinkers really are.

Think about it, would you?

Transforming Twisted Thinking Audio Book

TTTshutterstock_105290753The Transforming Twisted Thinking Audio Book is now here! I have received numerous requests to get this book into an audio format and to be narrated by me. Surprisingly, if you would you allow me to say, I could see how my voice inflections, tone and emphasis added more understanding on what twisted thinking is and how a twisted thinker could change.

Twisted thinkers can find healing in their soul and mind. This book shows how those hurt by twisted thinkers can hold the offender accountable, when there’s a decision to work on restoring a relationship with them.

If you would like to hear a sample or consider purchasing this audio book, you may find it by selecting one or both of the following sites: Amazon.com or iTunes.

Hearing this book read, as you travel by air, are in traffic or in your favorite chair where you do your reflecting, will provide a provocative and radical path to repentance that opens up new avenues for building authentic relationships.

Creating this audio book was well worth the time it took to lay down the tracks, and a joy to know that such a critical subject could and would be heard in a personal way from yours truly.

 

 

 

 

To Vote Or Not To Vote (2016)

my-voteI’m thinking through a premise about the responsibility to vote and what voting actually is. I don’t know why I haven’t weighed in on this before, but maybe it’s because I’m finally stirred up about it, at the age of 69.

To put you at rest, I’m not about to tell anyone, how they should vote in 2016. Quite frankly, it’s none of my business.

But I do want to encourage people about the power behind the act of voting, if I may. A disclaimer: All questions I raise, or that could be raised won’t be answered.

So here’s my premise: A vote isn’t a vote unless it’s made public, or somehow has an accountability factor attached to it—however that vote is registered (paper, sticks, finger print, electronic, vocal etc.).

Another thought: God created mankind in his image and one of the things that makes mankind an image bearer is to demonstrate the capacity to have volition, or make choices and vote if you will.

Throughout American history, Christian culture has always emphasized making a vote public, especially and particularly, when it comes to having relationship with Jesus. The political culture has done the same when electing officials.

The subject of voting is often about being between a rock and a hard place. Yes, the idea of trying to get it right can play into a vote, but I think it’s more about declaring ourselves, and where we’re going in what we believe.

Casting lots goes back a long way in the earth’s history.

According to Wikipedia, the first use of paper ballots to conduct an election appears to have been in Rome in 139 BC.

In Ancient India, around 920 AD, Palm leaves were used for village assembly elections. The palm leaves with candidate names, will be put inside a mud pot, for counting. This was called Kudavolai system.

The first use of paper ballots in America was in 1629 within the Massachusetts Bay Colony to select a pastor for the Salem Church. Paper ballots were pieces of paper marked and supplied by voters.

Throughout scripture voting or casting lots was a system that was accepted, even in the early church. Way back in Deuteronomy Moses called for the people to elect wise, understanding and experienced men and he would appoint them as heads in their tribes.

Again, getting it right wasn’t the thought but taking responsibility to choose was the thought.

Digest this one, would you? In John 6:70 Jesus answered them and said, “Did I not choose you, the Twelve? And yet one of you is a devil.” John 6:70 ESV

Whoa! What’s that about? Certainly not about getting it right – in the sense that his vote for Judas was about choosing men with character. But we see Jesus was responsible for his vote. It’s recorded.

Why vote for Judas to be a part of the twelve? Judas would play a part in the betrayal Jesus and in fact was prophetic. Scripture records how the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand by the mouth of David concerning Judas. How about being between a rock and a hard place there?

By not choosing Judas, Jesus would have gone against the Holy Spirit, who is a part of the same Godhead as Jesus. But he took responsibility for his vote and it became public.

Then there’s [The Crowd Choosing Barabbas] instead of Jesus, at the feast where the governor was accustomed to release for the crowd, any one prisoner whom they wanted. Matt. 27:15

Jesus submitted himself to that vote and it was public.

The power of voting is that we get to demonstrate taking responsibility and submitting at the same time to God’s plan. We happen to live in a country that gives us this honor and responsibility to vote. It’s preserved by the blood of men and women, who chose to put themselves in harms way, so we could enter into making public what we vote for.

One more time: A vote isn’t a vote unless it’s made public, or somehow has an accountability factor attached to it—however that vote is registered (paper, sticks, finger print, electronic, vocal etc.).

Thoughts?

%d bloggers like this: