Four Elements of Success

Over the past several weeks, I have written on an array of topics: the Theocratic and Socialistic Wars, U.S. trade deficit, Danish/Muslim cartoon conflict, freedom of speech, port security, and the oppression of the minorities by the moral majority as well as the angelic librarians guarding and protecting our way of life within the confines on their shelves.

This week I want to discuss the ever eluding mysteries of how to be successful. There are four elements, which I find, in every successful individual. And those are as followed: passion, labor, faith, and love.

Firstly, Passion: It is what gives one the strength to make the first firm step in the direction of his or her goal, prize, and/or future. Passion lights the fire as well as maintains it.

Some may question, "Why is not a dream the root of that which is successful?" And I will answer, "I have dreamt, since I was knee-high to a midget grasshopper, to be an astronaut, but I lack the passion to invest my life into that endeavor. So, will I be the first man to walk on Mars—highly, doubtful."

Secondly, Labor: One will have work—many kinds and many styles. Physical labor is the first form that comes to mind, but mental labor is equally important, if not more so.

Scott Crawford, former store manager of my hometown Wal-Mart, told me, when I worked there during the summer of 2001, that "you get paid according to what you know." So, he encouraged all the young, high school employees to find something that they could dig into and in his words, "get an education, for one can only reap from his labors and his alone."

Thirdly, Faith: Each morning one arises to greet the newfound day, one must have the faith to say in a strong and confident tone, "Today is going to be better than the last."

Faith could be in a higher entity or not; that is a personal decision, which will be made on one’s own. The faith I speak of, however, is the faith in one's abilities and that is what keeps one coming back for more.

Finally, Love: That is love of the road one walks, the people one walks it with, and the ones one has at home waiting upon his or her return. The love of the ones who kindle the flames in one's absence is the evening star that shines so bright that it lights the footpaths one chases at the day's end.


I had many issues I wanted to talk about, but I did not see a reason to waste a good, long researched column right before spring break. I hope it is nice short, up-lifting column.

Can I Ask a Question?

Is it just feasible that a substantial portion of white Americans and/or moral majority view the minorities in this country as somewhat of inferior, lowbrow indentured servants waiting upon approval of civil liberties--which are due, but are reneged on--after years of asinine oppression?

I understand that is a mouthful of a question as well as quite a loaded one to boot. However, I cannot help but to look around and see pompous bigots swearing by their own dull-minded morality.

Firstly, there has, since the origins of human societies, been something, be it skin color, religious beliefs, national origins, and/or financial statuses, to divide the masses.

Sadly, racism was and is a dividing line in America. It is apart of American history and continues, with no signs of ceasing, to affect American current events. Furthermore, it is something that stands flatfooted on our shores, laying a damp overcast on the welcoming smile of our own Lady Liberty, and yet even sadder, laying a still harsher wake-up call to the dreams of the minorities in this county.

Nonetheless, within the last hundred years, America has progressed in the areas of racism and other discriminations; however, there are battles that are still raging.

Secondly, and crazy enough, religious morality harbours many, if not all, of these discriminations, basically, the “Us” and “Them” factor. That is, the whole mentality that “We’re better than you. We know something you don’t.”

From religious scriptures came the justification for the ideology of slaves, the owning of one individual as one might own a dog. Do not get me wrong, mankind has always brutality treated his fellow man. This goes back before articles of faith were even copied down in any form of a written language.

What I mean though is that religious scriptures justify the practice of slavery and the disdain against anyone that disagrees with the text. America’s history, moreover, shows the battle that modern civilizations have had to wage to cleanse itself of an obtuse, written-in-God’s-own-hand, moral bigotry.

Thirdly, once again, the war flags wave high: the moral majority using their religious scriptures to justify their discrimination of another minority, homosexuals. Of course, this is a battle that has been fought against this group in the past, but now the religious majority, feeling these people pose more of a threat than previously, are unleashing there influences into politics.

If these people (homosexuals) do not wish or ask to be a practitioner of a faith, whereby, their so-called “sexual deviance” would be an abomination to some higher deity, then the morally self-righteous should quit thrusting their own holier-than-thou beliefs on these people’s backs. Due to the same freedoms that give to you, the religious majority, the right to be the way you are and the way you choose, so the freedoms belong to the minorities as well.

Finally, the majority blindly forgets sometimes--that is, actually, a substantial part of the time--to act as if they were the minority; that is, to consider themselves outnumbered and still wake each day to face the onslaught of fear, misunderstanding, and persecution.


This week's column was spurred by two elements: the reading of another Parthenon columnist's comments about Brokeback Mountain and the reading of Nathaniel Hawthorne's short story, Young Goodman Brown. It is one thing to realize our differences and embrace as well as poke fun at them, but the blindsided disdain of another because of a difference that they, themselves, cannot control is beyond stupidity. In my humble opinion, it is the shittiest display of a fuck worthy education.

Economy Needs Foreign Investments

Democrats decry whatever the Bush Administration does and once again are pretending to be something they are not--sincere and wise. Of course, several strong issues exist that Americans should rightfully question the president on and demand change for, but this Port Security issue is not one.

For those who do not yet know, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) received approval of a transaction by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), a multi-agency body that was established in 1975 to evaluate the national security implications of foreign acquisitions.

The transaction encompasses the purchase of six U.S. seaports for $6.8 billion by the UAE-based Dubai Ports World from another foreign company, the London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co.

Irwin M. Stelzer, director of economic policy studies at the Hudson Institute, paraphrased the president by saying the UAE “has arrested several key al Qaeda operatives, welcomed visits by American naval vessels, provided landing rights for U.S. aircraft at its strategically located airport, and cooperated in the inspection of cargoes headed for American ports.”

Furthermore, Thomas L. Friedman, columnist of the New York Times, wrote, “Many U.S. ports are run today by foreign companies, but the U.S. Coast Guard still controls all aspects of port security, entry and exits; the U.S. Customs Service is still in charge of inspecting the containers; and U.S. longshoremen still handle the cargos.”

He added, “The port operator simply oversees the coming and going of ships, making sure they are properly loaded and offloaded in the most cost-effective manner.”

America has a long history of welcoming foreign investment and ownership to her shores. So why is this an issue?

The Associate Press stated, only 25 such investigations have been conducted “among 1,600 business transactions reviewed by the [CFIUS] since 1988.” What makes this issue this time different than the overwhelming majority of these transactions?

With literally no security risk, the answers to these questions are very simple and unbelievably sad: race and nationality as well as Democrats (and some Republicans) needing to appear tough in an election year. The opposition to this port transaction only cares about its own well-being, not America’s

As I remember Democrats are against racial profiling--criticizing the President when someone of Arab background or appearance is stopped and questioned, even if his or her coat is extraordinarily heavy.

Friedman stated, “If there were a real security issue here, I'd join the critics. But the security argument is bogus and, I would add, borderline racist.” So, I am not the only person that sees the race connection.

Friedman wrote, “As a country, we must not go down this road of global ethnic profiling--looking for Arabs under our beds the way we once looked for commies. If we do--if America, the world's beacon of pluralism and tolerance, goes down that road--we will take the rest of the world with us.”

In conclusion, just because a business is located in an Arab country or any other country should not hinder that company from investing in America. America’s economy thrives because of foreign investments and at the same time the American economy drives the Global economy. Therefore, if we stop supporting foreign investments, we hurt the world at large as well as ourselves.


Here is week Six. I liked it, but I feel I used Thomas L. Friedman a little too much. So far I find it scary if the American people follow the Democrats on this political war against the President: where he says something and they have to say the opposite. To stop investments based solely on race and nationality is asinine.