Esoteric Man

If it’s true that, as Anais Nin says that “We don’t see things as they are, we see them as we are” certain aspects of the the way things are, are complicated by the way things were in our lives. It would’ve been difficult for me to evaluate an advertising executive that was trying to sell my wife on radio ad space, for example, because he dressed like every guy I hated in high school.  

The guy’s checkered pants reminded me of one of my many arch rivals in high school. The checkers were multi-colored, of course, but some of those colors were pink. I hated this ad exec, like I hated my arch rival. The ad exec wore sensible shoes, chic eyeglasses, and he wore his hair in a coif. He was also a people person that knew how to relate to the folks. I hated him before he said his twentieth word.

Hipster“I don’t even have cable!” was the most memorable thing this nouveau hipster said to punctuate the fact that he didn’t watch TV. “I only have Netflix, because my kid enjoys some show, but that’s the only reason.”

“Wow!” is what we were supposed to say, “You’re so esoteric, and philosophical! You’re what they call a with it dude!” The hipster mentioned the specific show his kid watched, but I can’t remember what it was. I couldn’t remember it two seconds after he said it.

He was a flood of useless information about himself. He was on the edge of his seat wondering what he was going to say next.  He was a serious man that didn’t take himself too seriously, but he could get out of control at times too, and he knew that I knew that’s just the way he was, even though I never met him before.

“I don’t drink soda! It’s gross!” he said to initiate the preferences portion of our conversation that would be delightfully informal. He found his preferences to be very esoteric and philosophical. He found this portion of our conversation to be a personal touch that was essential to completing the sale. This portion of the conversation gave schlubs like me a point where we could relate with one another. He was being real for me to sell himself in the manner all salesmen know is fundamental to obligating customers to fork over a dollar.

He decided he was losing me at one point in our conversation, so he decided to focus his energy on me. His energy was directed at talking more often, when it should’ve been focused on talking less. This esoteric ad exec struck me as the type that has always been able to talk himself out of a pickle. His modus operandi (M.O.), I can only assume, was focused on creating more chaos in the minds of his clients, so that they didn’t have time to consider if a sale would be beneficial or not. I think he watched the tactics that law enforcement officials use in a drug bust. Break in, crash things, smash things, and scream a bunch of things at high volume to dismantle the central nervous system of the alleged perpetrators, so they don’t know what is going on, until they can be secured.  

I’m not sure if this ad exec decided to disregard transitions in his stories, or if he wasn’t a fella that employed transitions, but his stories began to arrive in such a flurry that I lost my place in his stories a number of times, and I ended up forgetting almost everything he said. He was turning red at various points, and he began yawning in others. This suggested to me that his brain wasn’t receiving enough oxygen, but it was obvious that he preferred an oxygen depleted brain over a lost sale.

“Wow! You must really be smart,” those without control of their sardonic nature would say to the list of this man’s preferences. This is the response he expects to elicit from a TV watching, soda drinker Neanderthal, but he didn’t get it this time. This time, he got a guy who stared at him with silent ambivalence, waiting for him to get back to the whole reason I came to him for in the first place.

“Ya’ know?” was the only transition that this man didn’t completely abdicate. It was the only form of punctuation this man had left to let his listener know that a sentence was complete. He mixed in a couple “Ya’ know what I’m saying?” questions to prevent losing me with redundancies, but that was the extent of his variation.

“Yes!” I replied to put a verbal foot on the floor and keep his transitions from spinning out of control. I almost screamed it once, but the parental, patience practice of counting to ten was all that prevented the from the outburst.

He engaged in an “aren’t we guys stupid?” chat that everyone considers fun. When that didn’t achieve the desired result from me, he flipped to the “we’re all really stupid anyway” pop psychology, gender neutral nuggets, and the two of us were supposed to laugh heartily at those, because we could both relate to dumb people humor. It reminded me of a heavy metal band’s lead singer attempt to reach his audience by mentioning the fact that he actually rode in a motorized vehicle on the paved roads of my home town. “Today as we were driving down MAIN STREET…” YEAH!!!

He was a nicknames feller. Even though he didn’t apply such nicknames to me, I’m quite sure that he calls more than one male in his life “dawg”. He probably also calls a couple of them “Bra!” and he bumps fists with them as he works his way past their cubicle. I don’t know if he has any authority in his place of work, but if he does, I’m sure he asks all his peeps to call him by his first name, because he’s an informal fella that wants informal relationships with all of his peeps. I’m sure he has an open-door policy, and that all his top performers are “rock stars!” He’s a people person that’s not afraid to let his hair down.  If one of his peeps has a name that begins with a B, I’m sure he calls them ‘B’, or ‘J Dawg’ if their name starts with a J. He’s also the esoteric guy in the office that conforms to group thought when he’s called upon to do so. I’ve been around his type so often that I can pick them out of a closet from fifty yards away. They all have nihilist beliefs in private, and they don’t bow to the man, until that man is in the room, and then they turn around to insult “the dude” when he walks away.

We didn’t talk politics, but I’d be willing to wax Brazilian if it’s proven to me that we see eye to eye on anything.  He’s the type that seeks “a third way” of governing. He doesn’t want to be labeled, he wants to be perceived as open-minded, and he pities simpletons that have been conditioned to believe that there are actually very few forms of government to choose from, and in those forms there is only going to be one of two political parties in this country to run it. Their type knows of another way. They don’t have specifics, but they feel sorry for those of us that have bought into the system. They are open-minded. They are extraordinarily intelligent. They are thoughtful. They are wonderful. And we are wrong when we attach labels to them, because they are “truly” so much more than that.

When he eventually swerves into the whole reason I came to see him in the first place, I’m gone. I’m beyond listening. He thinks he’s warmed me up with his ‘look at me’ chatter, that he considers good bedside manner, but in reality I’ve begun to feel so sorry for him, and his pointless attempts to sound interesting, hip, funny, likable, intelligent, esoteric, philosophical, and personable, that I’ve missed the first two minutes of his presentation.

“We guys don’t seek medical attention.”  He smiled after that one. He thought that was polite guy, fun chatter. He surveyed my reaction. He told me he enjoyed sports, and then he asked me if the San Diego Chargers were still in existence. I normally would’ve enjoyed such ignorance of my arena, but I realized that I didn’t care if he knew anything about the Chargers, the NFL, sports in general, or anything else. This was a huge accomplishment for this guy, whether he knows it or not, for as anyone who knows me knows, I get off on personal preferences. I want to know what books a person has read, what movies they like, what music they enjoy, and what restaurants they frequent. I love top ten lists, the reasons why one ranks one over another, and the why’s and how’s that underlie those decisions. This, I have been informed, is one of my more annoying attributes. This esoteric ad exec didn’t have to face any of my more annoying attributes, because he managed to achieve a nearly unprecedented place of me trying to avoid the subject of personal preferences. I just wanted him to stop talking.

The quiet types have something to hide, is an agreed upon truth that we’ve all come to accept in one form or another. It could be true, in some cases, but I’ve experienced a number of quiet types that simply don’t know what to say or when to say it. I’ve met other quiet types that have been slapped back for saying what they think so often that when they have a thought on a particular matter, they’re frozen by the fear that you’ll find something out about them if they voice their opinion, so they usually find it more comfortable to say nothing. When a person talks and talks, we naturally assume they are as advertised. We assume that they’re the “open book” they’ve told you they are so many times that they can only be trying to convince themselves. They are an extrovert that is conversant on so many topics that we can’t think of anything else that they could possibly be hiding, until we walk away from them with the realization that they never really said anything. They just said a whole lot of nothing on nothing topics. It’s called obfuscation and misdirection. It’s an art form we consider endemic to the world of magicians, but talkers can display a talent for this art form too. They just don’t use their hands…as much.

Nancy Pelosi: ‘I could’ve arrested Karl Rove!’

In the wake of Chairman Darrell Issa’s eighteen month investigation of the Fast and Furious scandal, a frustrated Nancy Pelosi says that her sessions of Congress could’ve arrested Karl Rove if they wanted to do so.

“I could have arrested Karl Rove on any given day,” Former speaker of the house Nancy Pelosi said on Wednesday, The Huffington Post reports. “I’m not kidding. There’s a prison here in the Capitol.  If we had spotted him in the Capitol, we could have arrested him.

“Oh, any number of charges could have been brought against Rove,” Pelosi said in reference to a presumed call for more specificity. “But there were some specific ones for his being in contempt of Congress.”{1}

Ms. Pelosi doesn’t provide specifics of course, because she doesn’t have any.  This is typical of Democrats to make wild, scandalous charges against Republicans without providing specifics.  It is made all the more common by a media that fails to hold them to account for the open-ended charges they make.  In this particular exchange, it appears as though someone asked her for furtherance, but was it to hold her accountable for these wild charges, or was it because they wanted some information that they thought she had against the former Senior Advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff.  Whatever the case there, a good reporter would’ve said, “Come on, you can’t just make a charge like that without some specificity.  It hurts your cause.”

She says that she didn’t bring charges against the man Democrats hated worse than George W. Bush himself, because “It doesn’t serve our country, and it undermines the true purpose of contempt of Congress.”  Anyone who believes that Pelosi wouldn’t have stopped all proceedings to put Karl Rove in jail, if she had a substantial charge against him, just hasn’t been following politics very closely over the last six years.  How many times was Karl Rove called by Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald to testify on the Valerie Plame case?  Five times?  Pelosi, and the rest of the Democrat party, would’ve proudly shut Congress down if they thought they could get Rove in jail for one day.

“It’s just the irresponsibility of the Republicans,” Pelosi says speaking of Darrell Issa’s investigation of Eric Holder and the Fast and Furious scandal. “We want jobs. Why are they spending this time doing this?”  Anytime a Democrat gets into trouble, Pelosi, Schumer, and Reid want to “get back to the job that the American public sent them into office to do.”

“Why aren’t we focusing on creating jobs?” they ask.  Why weren’t you, in the Congress, and the Senate, and President Obama focused on “creating” jobs when you controlled everything in Washington?  Why did you waste so much time, and political capital, on creating a massive health care bill that only the most partisan believed would create jobs or help the economy in any way?  No, Nancy Pelosi, Reid, Schumer, and President Obama spent their time, and political capital, trying to help the Democrat party by ostensibly creating a more dependent America that would rely more on Democrats.  They wanted complete control over 1/6ths of the economy to distribute wealth and feed into their agenda.  Though some may have believed the health care bill would help the nation, through ideological constraints, few would deny that helping the Democrat party was the driving force.