Enemy of the State?

A lot of outrage is now focused on the bonuses paid out to AIG executives, a company which has received over 170 billion in bailout tax-payer money. People are angry and rightfully so.

But less known is that the bonuses were previously approved by government officials whose names include Treasury secretary Geithner, Senator Dodd, and the Obama Administration, who are now making McCarthy-style inquires for the names of the executives receiving those legally contracted and government authorized bonuses .

In a move to deal with the outrage, the house has just passed a resolution bill to tax those bonuses to a tune of 90% to get that money back. Some say that is a creative use of government, some call it thuggery, but actually, according to Article 1, section 9, clause 3 of the US Constitution it is illegal.

What congress is passing now is called a bill of attainder which is an act or legislation that singles out a person or group of persons for punishment without the benefit of a trial. Bills of attainder are forbidden. The clause was intended by our forefathers to enforce the separation of powers, a way to protect the people from basically trial by legislature.

The bill of attainder AIG executives that the house is pushing and the BO administration has verbally yet unofficially approved is an exaggerated form of Obama administration politics, to single people or groups out who are political enemies, isolate them, then attack, i.e. Milt Rosenberg, Stanley Kurtz, WGN Radio, Rush Limbaugh, Rick Santelli, and Jim Cramer. What has been whispered as unprecedented and unpresidential, has now been elevated to unconstitutional, which begs the question, who really is the enemy of the state.

Time and again the founding fathers have proven themselves to be beyond their time. The clause for the bill of attainder was written in a timeless way because they realized it would be necessary...some day. It only makes sense to look further into the thinking of the founding fathers. Here are some more interesting and still relevant quotes from Thomas Jefferson:

1. The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits.

2. The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.

3. It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world.

4. I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretence of taking care of them.

5. My reading of history convinces me that most bad governments result from too much government.

6. To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which He disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

7. To take from one because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father’s has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association—the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.

8. I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.

9. When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

10. The majority, oppressing an individual, is guilty of a crime, abuses its strength, and by acting on the law of the strongest breaks up the foundations of society.

11. To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.

And last but not least

12. The man who reads nothing at all is better than educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers.

It’s amazing how timeless and relevant the wisdom of those men continue to be. They’ve so far showed us what America is and what it stands for, and more importantly the enemies it stands against. And based on the founder’s test...we’re not looking so good.

Let’s hope that isn’t the change that was promised!
Close Read more >> Options >>
Visit Answers.com

The bailout-bonus-tax plan shows why the US is bad for business

The house has just passed a bill allowing a 90% tax on paid bonuses to bailed-out AIG executives. The bill is a response to “public” outcry that he insurance giant and other bailed out companies are mis-using taxpayer dollars.

But is it the right move, and what does this mean?

Here are some facts:

The contract for bonuses paid was made and signed over a year previously. It was legal.

Senator Chris Dodd included in the yet-to-be-read-but-passed Stimulus bill approval for the contracted bonuses.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was previously in the room last year when these bonuses were discussed.

Much of the bonuses paid went to executives in the derivatives sections of AIG which was part of the company that failed.

Here are the results:

The US Government is sending a strong message to executives of what will and will not be tolerated. That when the Government for whatever political reason disagrees with an already signed and agreed upon legal contract, they have and will use the full power of the government to nullify that contract.

Although most would agree, the bonuses are a farce and a complete misuse of taxpayer dollars, the contract made to allow such bonuses was/is legal and binding. Therefore the message that is ultimately sent to the American people and to businesses in America is that your contracts are not solid, especially when they are not in the best interests of the federal government, for whatever reason.

Case in point, over 60 billion tax-payer dollars have been sent to support banks overseas. Yet, there is an outcry over 165 million used in bonuses. The federal government passed an 800 billion stimulus bill that was unread and most going to pork projects to stave a crisis that the president has recently claimed is “not as bad as we thought,” yet the full force of the government is used to take back 165 million in privately contracted bonuses in an effort to get the money “back for taxpayers.”

Why is this thuggery? Because there is little discussion to the public at large as to how unconstitutional it is for the US government to get involved in private contracts at this level. And have made it clear, that they will control at will. Also little press has been made about the last-minute altering of a provision in the un-read-but-passed $787 billion stimulus law by Sen. Dodd to cap executive compensation for firms receiving government bailouts.

Already, companies are exploring options to leave the US in lieu of better tax-friendly locations. Many more future companies are excluding a US presence. And now, not only with the threat of greater taxes, is the added threat that government will impose themselves at political will only increases opportunity for foreign competitors.

What is offered by the competition? Examples include:

Corporate flat tax rates from 19% - 0%
Personal Income flat tax rates
Economy entry tax incentives/breaks
No world-wide taxation
No Sarbanes-Oxley tax costs
No Mark-to market
Lower capital gains
Fewer Union hurdles
Less Government interference, or at least a consistent policy

Change.

The 80/20 rule to World Peace.

Three’s Company was popular TV comedy that ran for 8 years in the early eighties about 2 women and 1 man living together to share rent. The basic plot for each show revolved around a misunderstanding, mis-communication and crazy attempts to get out of situations caused by the conflict. Phrases like, “It’s not what it looks like,” and “If only they would listen to my side of the story,” made their lives more interesting and their conflicts laughable.

But in real life, too many times, the situations that result are far from comedic. Families torn apart, relationships severed, communities uprooted, lives destroyed, even war. Imagine how much conflict could be avoided in relationships, work, politics, even international affairs, if the rush to judgment would be replaced with patient discernment? This is the basis for the 80/20 rule to World Peace.

The 80/20 rule to World Peace implies that 80% of world conflicts can be resolved if everyone accepted a 20% chance that they COULD be wrong.

Have you ever been in an inter-personal conflict and NOT think to yourself, “I’m right.” Have you ever continued conflict believing, “Maybe, I’m wrong?”

The problem with conflict is everyone is right, or everyone else is always wrong, which is, in fact, true, from their own perspectives. Everyone believes they are right because that is the basic way we know how to interact with our world. Every decision we make is a reaction to what we believe to be true. So not only are each of us right, but everyone does what they believe to be in their best self interests.

Atheists, Christians, Muslims, Jews all are right from each of their own perspectives. Also Russians, North Koreans, Chinese, Iranians and Americans each believe likewise.

The “I’m right,” culture leads to a world of absolutes causing people to stop listening, stop learning, and refusing to look at another perspective. This, then, leads to ignorance, intolerance, and eventually conflict.

Therefore the 80/20 Rule to World Peace asks that since EVERYONE is right, in order to give peace a chance, simply adopt an attitude towards conflict that accepts a 20% chance that MAYBE you’re not. Or, for the especially proud, like myself, an adjustment to the rule would be to accept a 20% chance that MAYBE you don’t have all the information.

From a psychological perspective, people are uncomfortable with lingering questions. We prefer to live in conclusions and certainty. Therefore judgment is quickly made based on the information that is known or perceived. The information that is not known or even in conflict is then assumed to be what is the most common or logical based on our experience so that a conclusion can quickly be made. And because we are always right, those conclusions usually become beliefs. This is what causes, misconceptions, misperceptions, and miscommunication. This is then was draws out our impulsive physical and emotional reactions to events.

So by consciously acknowledging a lack of information, “Huh?” and a willingness to linger in uncertainty for a little while, we avoid the automatic judgments, “I can’t believe you did that,” which then turns on the inquisitive side of our psyche, “What the hell are you doing?”
This is called, discernment.

It is the difference between trained and untrained, mature and immature, educated and uneducated. It is, or should NOT, be the difference between primarily logical and emotional decision-makers. But it should be included in base curriculum principles within ALL formal learning.

Should everyone accept the 20%, the result is that at least 80% of the world’s conflicts could be resolved or even avoided from playground arguments to world wars.

Most conflicts occur from one of three reasons: Pride, Desire, or Resources, translated into, “I’m right,” “I want,” “I need,” or any combination thereof, and each of them driven by absolutes.
With and openness to look at other perspectives, would the uneducated Islamic fanatic still think killing innocent infidels be a good thing? By not rushing to judgment, would the jealous husband have divorced his wife because of an assumed lover? By accepting a 20% that he didn’t have all the information, would the religiously conservative father have knowingly emotionally damaged his faith-questioning daughter?

What this is NOT is an abolishment to faith. Rather it is a willingness to accept an attitude of humility that MAYBE I don’t know everything and an openness to seek further information, to gain a broader perspective, to make more informed decisions. Basically, don’t rush to judgment.

The truth is, conflict will always exist. But reducing it would be a huge help. With discernment comes a life where conflict, like a comedy, can be a lot more laughable. But, don’t take my word for it, there is a 20% chance I could be wrong…

The fall of Rahm and the political destruction of a world power

“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste….meaning to do things that you think you could not do before.” Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.

In taking advantage of the crisis to push an agenda instead of dealing with it, the current administration has allowed the economy to fall further, the currency to be destabilized, and put the United States at greater threat than the cold war.

The economic battle with China which pushed the value of the dollar to new lows and the current economic crisis were bad enough to weaken the strongest economy in the world. Now, the new administration continues to ignore those threats to national security by piling on incredible and unnecessary debt, simply to push an agenda of ideology instead of strengthening the economy.

Irresponsible is ignoring the grumblings of those who continue to finance the US, exploiting what is naively assumed to provide unlimited debt, as well as to dismiss those who seek and can obtain the demise of our political and economical power.

Calls for a new world currency are not new, however those calls have now gained a voice in the world economy and with the continued fiscal irresponsibility of the US government now have a legitimate case to bring against further use of the dollar as the world standard.

Despite the possibility of economic Armageddon and a threat to national security, the Obama administration only furthers its agenda with requests for more unnecessary federal funding of which is not only unsustainable, but will force inflation to historic heights.

Change can be a good and necessary thing. However, smart leadership would recognize not only when it is needed, but also when it is appropriate. Maybe continually charging the American people the largest debts in history amidst one of the most difficult economic times in recent history isn’t the best play. The US voted for an undefined, un-vetted change. Hopefully, unlike the last great empire, we’ll get a chance to not do it again.

Stealing Charity

President Obama is now attacking the Charitable giving of Americans. His new federal budget, if passed, will greatly affect tax-deductions on giving in lieu of greater tax revenues for the federal government.

In questioning the wisdom of this among other tax hikes proposed while dealing with a world-wide economic crisis, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner shared that the reductions are insignificant and only affect a small amount of giving.

Insignificant, maybe, but with huge ramifications.

The US is the LARGEST donor to charity in the world including both domestic and foreign giving. Among domestic programs include universities, churches, private schools, sports programs, the arts, medical and technical research, social programming, public service such as ambulances, even police and firemen have charitable fundraisers, and the list goes on and on.

What the administration fails to understand is that charity for Americans isn’t just something that “WEALTHY people do, ” it is one of the biggest international distinctions about who we are.
The biggest influencers of our lives outside of family probably isn’t school or government programs, but things like summer camps, sports clubs, churches/religious communities, big brother/big sister type programs, even education development and political movements, ALL are made possible through Charity.

Jimmy Carter’s group eradicated things like the guinea worm which killed many in Africa, made possible through charity.

The fight against racism, cancer, organizations promoting women’s rights, Green peace, political groups, even my peewee football league; charity.

America has established an atmosphere of charity unparalleled in the world that is not only rewarded by the government but established as a part of our culture because of its support.
Those who give as altruists are rewarded, encouraged and thanked.

Those who give who aren’t altruists are rewarded, encouraged and thanked.

This has created the most holistic programs/organizations/institutions in the world – religion, education, sports, arts, social development, aid, recovery programs, etc.

And as most in the charity industry understand, giving isn’t just about collecting money, it is an exercise in faith and community involvement.

In attacking this, the administration is now saying that what these things are no longer important to American society. Instead of the people deciding what to support, they are taking your money and putting it where they think it should go.

We have an idea of what will be supported, by simply reading the stimulus and omnibus packages. If you’re not happy with what Washington is doing with your money, imagine what they will do with your charity.

People are key to Problem Solving

Problem solving today is less about finding solutions and more about convincing the powers that be to want to solve them.

Take for example the out of control legal costs that could easily be solved with a version of “loser pays.” It would lower the number of frivolous lawsuits, which lessen malpractice suits, which would eventually lower medical costs, which would lead to more affordable healthcare. But since our government is made up of trial lawyers, i.e. Sen. Edwards, that law will never be passed.

The new Stimulus Package proposed by President Obama presents another example. No economist or politician has or can show definitively how the new plan creates even an ounce of economic stimulus. The powers that be are NOT concerned with solving the crisis as much as taking advantage of it.

The proposed $900 Billion “Stimulus” which the House has approved and is claimed will pass the Senate, is estimated to ultimately cost somewhere around $7.5 TRILLION. *

That's about $25.000 for every man, woman, and child in the US.

Since the approval does not lock in allocation of funds, here is a novel idea. It’s OUR money, so let's get serious about stimulating the economy. Let's get serious about CHANGE, and give it to... ourselves.

Wouldn't this help the economy? For those non-system thinkers, let’s take a look.

If everyone receives 25k that means a family of say 5 receives 125.000...tax free! What happens?

1. Public calms down
2. People with bad mortgages start to pay them off, property value goes back up, value in bad Fannie paper goes up, financial institutions which invested in the bad paper raise in value, banks start to loan to companies, companies can pay for daily expenses and begin to hire again.
3. People without bad loans buy!! Company revenues rise, jobs return, money starts flowing.
4. Crisis over!!

But wait...Add to that...for the first few months, CANCEL Capital Gains TAX – watch what happens....

1. Investment activity in the market goes up (especially for those who just received 100k!!)
2. Confidence in market goes up
3. Company values go up
4. People start making money
5. Companies hire more
6. More people make money, which spend more, which means more jobs, more money, bla, bla , bla,
7. Banks and Companies are friends again. Bosses and employees are happy again and most importantly my landlord and I are friends again!! :-)

So the answer is logical, but is it realistic?

People are the key to problem solving, whether that be leaders willing to solve or in case of the stimulus letting the public solve it for themselves.

* http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Economy/story?id=6332892&page=1

The Solution to the Economic Crisis? Ask House!!

The economic crisis brings to bear the importance of understanding systems in development problem-solving because when properly used, even such a world calamity like this can be quickly and easily solved.

Take an average episode of House. A patient comes in with heart problems, lung problems, kidney failure, he’s coughing blood, and his eye pops out. In the end, House gives him a simple injection, repairs any necessary physical damage and the body begins to heal itself.

House uses a systemic approach to problem solving. Rather than treat every ailment that comes along, he uses the symptoms (and sometimes causes them) to identify the malfunctioning system which then exposes the cause.

Treating the symptoms,( i.e. replacing a kidney, implanting a pace maker) may provide short term relief, but is much more costly and still doesn’t address the cause. Whereas replacing missing whatever mineral, repairs the system which expands the lungs, which gets the heart pumping normally, which improves circulation, which relaxes eye muscles, etc.

The economy, like a body, is a cooperation of various parts, driven by profit (greed) and balanced with loss (risk), which when working together creates a strong whole. The crisis happened when poison (subprime loans) was introduced into a system in which the threat of loss was removed by politicians who refused to regulate causing economy to react, adjust and eventually malfunction. Basically banks stopped lending, businesses faced closure, people lost jobs, selling stopped, which gave businesses less money, and the circle continues.

The medicine of choice was a 700 billion bailout (to start) to save hurting businesses and banks. The question is if money is the solution and is it addressing the cause or simply treating symptoms? Let’s see, regulation and oversight still do not exist, the greed is redirected to handouts, hoarding replaces lending, the bad loans aren’t eradicated, but the balance brought by the threat of loss is.
If this were a hospital, a malpractice suit would ensue. But the priority right now is survival.

The solution is easy, we have the wrong people in the wrong system. We have finance wizards solving a money problem. Yet money isn’t the problem since we just injected over a trillion into the economy. We need systems people solving a people problem.

Why waste a lot treating symptoms of a system, when a simple injection would do; which is basically what the defectors in the House have said all along.

Education: To Think or What to Think....That is the Question

Education is the key and cornerstone to each and every society and the answer to the world’s social problems. The choices made by both people and societies are made based on learned perceptions and beliefs. Yet, if those choices do not lead to solutions, rather perpetuate negative development…than education is no longer the answer but the problem leading to the conclusion that the learning has been less about education and more about indoctrination.

Indoctrination is instilling a set of beliefs and information from a specified point of view. Anytime value or judgment is attributed to presented information it is indoctrination; right and wrong, good and bad, etc.

Education is the development of skills to interact with information/beliefs in order to develop your own. Information and values on information are presented without judgment.

The attributes of indoctrination include controlled information and values to a set pre-defined result. Information is easily presentable and therefore easily measured through recall. The methodology of learning is memorization and therefore the skill set achieved is remembering. The outcome of indoctrination encourages imitation and therefore progress is actually devolving.

The attributes of education are controlled information with various values to a personally defined result. Information is experienced and measured through problem-solving. The methodology is understanding or application of information developing discernment. The outcome of education leads to innovation and therefore an evolution of information.

I’m not against indoctrination, success breeds success and in many cases it is necessary when there is a lack of experience or areas where there are few role models.

However, indoctrination alone hinders development restricting free thought, experimentation and personalization. It is also a problem when educators take it upon themselves to impart values and replicate themselves in someone else’s children.

A 5th grade teacher was just filmed in the US criticizing her students’ presidential choices. Central European Universities haven’t publicized a new idea in decades. Students of the Koran come out of some schools promoting violence even though the scriptures support the opposite.

In developing nations, do we want to ignore progress only to repeat the last generation?

Do you want your children learning about Social Justice from Bill Ayers?

Is the person you’re learning from the person you want to be?

It is the goal to learn how to think….or what to think?

If answers to the above are “No,” then it is necessary to perform due diligence on your learning institutions to see if the presentation of information is value-based.

EVERYONE does what they believe to be in their best self interests. Belief is limited to access to information and perception. So, if the progress that is expected is not happening or happening in directions they seem to go away from self-interests, look in the key development institutions. Either the information is not available, or indoctrination is.

Who's "The Man" now?

Congrats goes out to the success of Barak Obama and therefore equal opportunity. Unfortunately that also means Affirmative Action took a hit, sending those who choose to hide incompetence behind claims of racial inequality running for new excuses to fail.

What the election also does is reaffirm to American Citizens and to the world abroad that the “Land of Opportunity” gives the hope to achieve, not the disenchantment to complain.

Affirmative Action and many groups like it may have good intentions in helping all to reach the “American Dream,” but their methodologies such as racial quotas and non-universal testing only enflames the influence of discrimination rather than lessening it.

I am a second generation immigrant. My father came to the US, learned the language, studied at school, adjusted to a completely new culture, worked hard to achieve his dream, and now retires watching his own children succeed.

Growing up, I don’t recall EVER hearing him use cultural differences as an excuse. Of course there was ridicule, of course there was resistance, of course there were problems, but that was NEVER something that would deny him of his goals.
We were raised to work hard, do our best, use our heads, and never give up. We were also raised not to expect or even wait for life to “give us a break,” “help us out,” or “always be fair,” but to take what life gives you…both good and bad…to make yourself better.

For my father, or his children, there were no government hand outs, no skewed or weighted measuring systems, nor did we expect it. And we’d probably reject them even if we did qualify just out of sheer pride.
Because the truth is, the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights IS our Affirmative Action. It WAS built to level the playing field. And it IS what makes the U.S. the Land of Opportunity.

Many questioned the unparalleled support that was given to Barack Obama by the mainstream media. Yes he did run an incredible campaign and the opposition was less than inspiring, but the lack of scrutiny in letting the public know about who he is instead of immortalizing him was laughable.

So much so, that the only explanation I can find is that the influence of Affirmative Action is so ingrained in society, that well…I guess he needed help! And how unfair to also give equal time to the old white man.

Regardless, Barak Obama is our next President and of course for the sake of our country and the world of which it is highly influential, I wish him well.

However, where Affirmative Action goes wrong, although it may help one get a position by enhancing qualifications or handicapping others, it certainly doesn’t guarantee performance.

Accomplished people like Condilezza Rice, JUD Clarence Thomas, John Thompson, Meg Whitman, even Oprah didn't need a lot of help to get them to their success. Are they the exception or the rule?

Obama brings the national spotlight to equal opportunity. And regardless of how he does, the US should finally be balanced to equality based solely on performance. There should be no more excuses.

Because “The Man” is a different man…and it’ll be interesting to see who is blamed now.

Power over Fear

When I was 10 years old, my parents took me to a night seminar on the evils of Rock n Roll. The presentation was mostly about demons, drugs, and death; aligning it with Rock using media, marketing and music played backwards. The driving beat of the drums, the screaming guitars, all language of the devil trying to seduce to the dark side.

I was an energetic, imaginative child. You can imagine what this did to my psyche.

Once home, I went immediately to bed, and when the lights turned off…it was on! I started to see things. Shapes would form in the middle of my cluttered floor. The Beatles were hiding under my bed, KISS and Meatloaf would show up in my closet. I froze. I was scared to the point of sickness. I was so petrified, that even though my bathroom was 10 feet from my bed, I not only vomited in my bed, but laid in it for the rest of the night.

Fear is an incredibly powerful emotion. Based primarily on the avoidance of pain, it affects an incredible portion of our lives. Imagine the choices that would be different if fear weren’t a factor.

Would that relationship have ended…or better yet….started? Would you have been so worried? Would money still be in that rising stock? Would you be independently self-sufficient? Would life feel fulfilled instead of left wanting? Would that pain feel so bad? Would we be fighting that war?

There are two types of fear. One based on understanding and respect, such as with fire, your father’s anger, or Al Franken in the Senate. The other is the emotional “fight or flight” response caused from a lack of knowing or a lack of control that hits when entering a dark room, your teenager not coming home on time, or talking to the cute stranger across the room.

It is not that the dark room, missing child, or possible rejection are not real issues. But it is how we deal with the issue that is important. We could let emotion take over and react irrationally, or get control to respond intentionally and strategically.

The War in Iraq is hated by those who view it as a response to fear, yet seen as ingenious by those who view it as strategic. The fearful Michal Moore’s of the world see fear, and run, emboldening fringe religious groups. The Bush’s saw opportunity and changed an ideological face-less war against US citizens to a land grab on non-US soil against professionals. The strategic response also gave opposition who previously had nothing to lose, consequences which make them think.

Everyone feels fear. Control over fear is a result of the assurance.and confidence that comes from knowledge or control. What alleviates that fear in the dark room? Light. The mother worrying all night? A phone call. Talking to that beautiful girl across the room? A comforting smile or an introduction from a friend.

Ever met a micro-manager, an over-protective parent, a jealous partner? They have immature behavioral responses to gaining assurance, they are afraid. Maturity comes from understanding and experience.

However, sometimes life doesn’t provide light, there is no phone call, or you are alone. Sometimes you’re thrown into unknown situations and forced to respond.

In my early days in Eastern Europe, I found a place to get corrective eye surgery at a fraction of the western cost. I mentioned it to a friend who agreed to do it with me. Although not knowing what to expect, we were emboldened to try. We knew there would be pain, but in the middle of the night, the healing pain felt like KILLING pain. I panicked. Lost my mind, thought my eye was destroyed. The pain got unbearable. I wanted to run, rip off the bandages and do……something! Then my friend shouted out from the next room, “Hey, did you feel that??”

There was something in the knowledge of shared experience that calmed me. The fact that he was going through the same thing, somehow assured me that this was normal. We both didn’t know exactly and had no experience, but doing it together, we were stronger, and with that strength came peace. So we both went back to sleep.

I think that’s why the Psalmist in need would sing: “Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death…I fear no evil for You are with me, your rod and your staff …they comfort me.” He found something/someone to believe in, that would take him through the dark places. His faith, would alleviate his fear and help him continue his path.

So the question is…what important decisions are coming up? What are the decisions based on? Are you sacrificing relationships, opportunities, fulfillment simply to avoid the unknown? React strategically with assurance, instead of emotionally for avoidance. Abandon yourself to your faith and enjoy the peace that surpasses all understanding. It's better than sleeping in vomit.