Perspectives

HEALTH CARE AND SOCIALISM

A Letter to the Editor from Todd P.

By Shepherd Hoodwin

 

Dear Editor,

 

I am a concerned citizen who loves this country so much that I want to secede from it. The reason is that I’m sick and tired of socialism! It is creeping into every part of American life. Health care is only the latest. The world was much better off when the government stayed out of people’s business.

 

Socialism has taken over education, for instance. Why is the government spending MY money to educate other people’s kids?* Public education never did me any good. Why does everyone need to be able to read anyway? How hard is it to turn on a television? You just click the biggest button on the remote. Once you find Fox News, there’s not much else you need to do. Even meathead libs can do it.

 

(*I actually heard that recently from a caller to a talk show, on an NPR station!-SGH)

 

Socialists are always crying about helping the poor. What about helping corporations who do so much more for us every day? For example, if it wasn’t for Big Corporations, we wouldn’t have Chili Cheese Fritos. Clearly, Big Corporations are way better than Big Government.

 

Now Obama, who’s not even a citizen, wants to socialize our roads with his so-called “stimulus package.” Big Government, keep away from my Interstate Highway System! I like it fine just the way it is. In fact, I don’t need roads at all–I have a two-ton four wheeler; I’ll drive anywhere I damn well please. And I don’t need your stimulus package, either. Mine is plenty big. At least the ladies don’t complain.

 

The government can’t do anything right, like those levees in New Orleans that broke. President Bush was right not to throw good money after bad by trying to fix them. I don’t even want the government pumping my drinking water and then charging me for it–I can pump my own. And what do we need with fancy government sewage systems? If pansy-kneed liberals don’t like the smell of sewage flowing through the streets, they need to toughen up. Also, why are my tax dollars being spent on libraries for books about homosexuals and farm animal fornicators? They can buy their own books–there’s sections for them in every adult bookstore.

 

I’m especially angry about socialized defense. Before Big Government, if people wanted to invade another country, they practiced self-reliance and did it themselves. They’d get a bunch of guys together, a few “spears ‘n beers,” hike however far it was or maybe ride a horse, row a canoe, or mush a dog sled, and attack. It was good exercise, other than for those who got killed, and they didn’t need any new-fangled equipment. Today, people have gotten soft and rely on government welfare for the military-industrial complex.

 

I admit that it’s a bit harder to invade a Middle Eastern country than the next town, but if the government didn’t interfere, the free market would do its magic and things would work fine. For example, let’s say that a bunch of manly men in Rochester wanted to invade Jordan. They could get bids from different airlines and find the best price for transporting them to Amman, and I’ll bet that they’d even throw in, at no extra charge, dropping a few bombs along the way. Competition and privatization always work. Or my buds over at Halliburton will always give you a good deal.

 

In 2008, the U.S. spent over $661 billion on defense. My share of that was at least $2000. I could definitely spend that money better than the government does. For example, for $2000, I could buy a professional-grade assault rifle to take with me to town hall meetings, and enough ammo to last me several weeks. Clearly, the Founding Fathers wanted us to form our own militias. I say to Big Government: take your sticky mitts off my military. Let me be free!

 

Back to health care: if people get sick, why should the government bale them out? Survival of the fittest–that’s God’s way! I don’t rely on government handouts; I go to the VA hospital. If people starve themselves and get sick, they should take responsibility and eat. That’s what I do. If children are born sick and their parents can’t afford insurance, obviously that’s God’s will, and the government shouldn’t interfere.

 

In the old days, governments just provided necessary services, like removing corpses from the streets. I’m willing to pay for that. But we’ve got to stop socialism before it’s too late and everyone has health care with death panels, like those snooty Brits who think they’re better than us but who are actually worse than the French were in 2003 when they opposed the liberation of Iraq. As a proud American, I’m happy to stand guard against the Russians from my front porch, but those Brits have invaded us twice before, and I wouldn’t put it past them to try it again. Don’t count on Big Government  to stop them–Obama’s in bed with Gordon Brown and the Queen–and I can’t do this all myself. We have to work together to stand up to the march of socialism. Gentlemen, warm up your Hummers and load your assault rifles! They’ll give me universal health care over my dead body.

 

Sincerely,

Todd P., Wasilla, Alaska

No Comments »

SAL PAL:

Isn’t Shepherd, allegedly, a 7th old king?

SHEPHERD:

No, I’m a sage. You can tell 7th-old kings because they speak in the royal “we,” such as “We are NOT amuuuussssssssed.” or “We shall take our tea now.” whereas 7th-old sages tell jokes like, “I’m so old, they discontinued my overleaves! They write my age in Roman numerals (Ye Olde Sauge VII). I can’t remember what plane I’m on but still remember when the Dolphins played for Lemuria. They can’t get parts for my self-karma anymore.”….

No Comments »

I have a concept I call “multi-causality,” which means that many human situations are likely to be caused by several converging factors, rather than just one thing, and two identical-seeming situations can have different causes. There is sometimes one factor that is dominant in particular situations, but it’s limiting to be satisfied with one explanation for any phenomenon. Life is complex.

A good example of this is disease: What causes cancer, for instance? Emotions? Diet?  Toxins? All of the above? None of the above? Some people tend to offer pat answers. In holistic health circles, some people blame every problem on an impacted colon, parasites, or a lack of raw food, for instance. Some spiritual folks blame everything on a negative attitude, unresolved childhood issues, or energetic invaders. However, every experience is unique and needs to be seen with fresh eyes, without preconceptions, if one hopes to get to the bottom of it.

Did you ever wonder what causes Presbyterianism? At one point, most Christians were Catholic, and now there are all these unnatural permutations!

If one is going to ask about what causes, say, homosexuality, it is equally fair to ask what causes heterosexuality–it can’t be assumed that heterosexuality is causeless. Everything has causality, even if it’s more usual or the biological default–there are many biological defaults that don’t apply across the board (for example, not every human is territorial, so why do people go with the default when they do?). Then there is bisexuality, and the question of how fixed sexuality and gender are in the first place.

That said, here is some channeling I did about transsexuality:

—

Sometimes there is a last-minute change of plans in which the soul had set up the lifetime to be one sex, and then abruptly decided to accept a body of the other sex. However, what was set up may have been harder to shift than had been anticipated, and there is a pull toward the original set of plans in terms of gender.

Personalities are created before incarnation; overleaves, etc., are set up along with the life plan. Usually, gender is part of the plan. The vast majority of those who accept a body of the other sex at the last minute adjust to it fine; there may be more opposite sex behavior in childhood than is the norm, but it usually mostly fades in time. Those who don’t adjust well often are more comfortable/used to the opposite sex body to begin with, and it often fits with their male/female energy ratio more to be the other sex.

There can also be an issue of imprinting while in the womb, although past-life history helps determine how the soul interacts with the imprinting. A soul who has mostly been female who decides to be male may choose to be born to a parent or parents who are seeking a female or feminine child. This allows the soul to make a transition.

Transexuals are far more fully identified with the opposite sex than most transvestites, crossdressers, and effeminate males and masculine females. With the latter, there are some aspects of identification with their body, and some aspects of identification with that of the opposite sex. With transsexuals, there is little identification with the birth body, yet, from the soul’s viewpoint, this is a good way to “dip its toe” into the experience of the less-comfortable sex. In the following lifetime, there may be more comfort with it, and by the lifetime after that, the soul might be fully at ease as that sex. Transvestites, crossdressers, and effeminate males and masculine females are often in the stage of adjustment that transsexuals will be in their next lifetime. Most souls are comfortable with both sexes. Those who have a strong preference for one have the most trouble adjusting to the other.

END

—

As I say, a particular person’s story may be different from the possible scenarios outlined above, so it’s a good idea not to jump to conclusions.

***

Re: photos for channeling. Some channels get information *from* the photo, whereas others just use to to make sure they’re tuning in to the right fragment. Often a name and a clear signal in the question-asker is enough to identify the subject, but the full name, birth information, *and* a photo makes for certainty, in my experience. I know that my channeling is not being influenced by my impressions, because what I get surprises me occasionally but is later validated. However, if a channel doesn’t want a photo, that’s fine, too.

A student trying to guess the role, etc., without anchoring perceptions in what’s right in front of him–eyes, facial expressions, energy, etc.–can go wildly off-base, using circumstantial evidence. The roles look and feel different from one another. If you jump to the conclusion that someone is a sage, for example, based just on behaviors, then you might assume that a theatrical scholar with sage imprinting is a sage, because you have nothing else to go on. If you’re expecting all artisans to be arty and unpractical, you’ll miss the earthy ones working in construction and other trades. If you immediately assume warrior or king when someone is authoritative or bossy, you could miss the other roles with a goal of dominance, or power or aggression mode. Behavior results from many factors, including overleaves, body type, astrology, imprinting, and past lives, but your essence is what you *are*, not what you do. Behavior often but doesn’t always reflect your essence, so you have to look deeper to see essence.

No Comments »

CHERYL:

And, as much as I disliked SH’s characterization of warriors, when my children where younger and they were misbehaving, I would arch my eyebrow and give them a certain focused look…they knew instantly that I was not pleased and they should stop whatever they were doing or suffer the consequences.  Cold and bluntly focused is an apt description…lol…my daughter still teases me about that look…

SHEPHERD

AKA “Don’t mess with me!” It’s making a clear, wide boundary, which is what warriors do.

Referring to the flavor of the eyes as “cold” or “hot” isn’t saying that warriors are *emotionally* cold or priests are emotionally hot–that’s more an individual matter, although the solid roles (warrior, king, and scholar) tend to be no-nonsense, having one input. I’ve met emotionally warm and cold people within every role. Coldness results from repression or emotional damage, whereas simply being unemotional might be a result of not having an emotional center or part of center, or having been taught not to show your emotions in public.

If you’ve validated your own role, you can sometimes make an educated guess about someone else’s based on how you react to him or her. As a sage, artisans (the opposite role) tend to wag my tail–I often find them adorable (Dave, you big teddy bear, you!); if you’re a king, you might find artisans exasperating. If you’re a scholar, you might find warriors to be refreshingly straightforward; if you’re an artisan, warriors might make you want to hide under your bed. If you’re a warrior, kings might galvanize you to bow on one knee; if you’re a sage, you might want to cut kings down to size (”You’re not going to shut me up. The emperor has no clothes!”). Servers and priests tend to inspire one another; a server who looks drab to some people might give a priest a warm sense of hearth and home, a foundation for larger-scale inspiration. Etc.

A caveat: I might have a similar reaction to someone with a strong secondary artisan influence as to someone who *is* an artisan. Sorting out role, ET role bleedthrough (if discarnate), and the various casting influences can be a challenge.

Our essence shows up in everything we do, so, yes, we could read body language and facial expressions as well as eyes, but the eyes are probably more reliable.

 

NEWBIE DOOBIE DO:

Do warriors have natural musical ability? I was surprised to see warrior composers on the celebrity list. I thought this was talent for expressive roles.

SHEPHERD:

There are members of every role in every profession, although there are proclivities; the role tells you more *how* an individual approaches something than *what* s/he will do. One warrior Michael channel is also a violinist, for example. Warriors have a particular feel for percussion, hard rock music, and other earthy sounds, although there are no rules or limitations.

No Comments »

JEN:

The other night I was watching a BBC production of Pride and Prejudice and was wondering about Jane Austen’s overleaves. With all her emphasis on relationships, I guess she had to be a mature soul.

So how are a priest’s eyes supposed to look?

SHEPHERD:

Chelsea Quinn Yarbro says Austen was a mature scholar.

Priest eyes are hot and focused. Server eyes are warm and doe-like. Warrior eyes are cold and bluntly focused. King eyes are cold and pointedly focused. Sage eyes are expressive, and mischievously mirthful when smiling. Artisan eyes are childlike and radiant (their faces can be rubbery). Scholar eyes are neutral.

Scholars with a strong secondary influence from either essence twin bleedthrough and/or casting may look like a watered-down version of the secondary role; if you just can’t decide the role after you’ve gotten pretty good at spotting them, the person may be a scholar. With anyone, casting may jump out at you first, but if you persevere and study the eyes, the role should become clear unless the person has strong opposite influences. Some people are hard to figure out, and some are easy.

Sometimes, what stands out in someone’s eyes (”the windows of the soul”) is not essence but negative poles or trauma; for example, a depressed sage or a beaten-down king can be harder to spot.

Dave “Role Photos Database” is the most useful tool I’ve ever seen for learning to discern roles:

http://www.michaelteachings.com/overleaves_database.html

If you’ve validated your overleaves and have not yet participated, please send them to Dave with a clear head shot so that he can expand it. When we try to guess overleaves from “circumstantial evidence” rather than a direct apprehension of essence, we make a lot of mistakes.

No Comments »

JEN:

Apropos of the question about whether older souls are more advanced–Michael did say, when asked to comment on the Apostle Matthew, that he was a “relatively perceptive young soul.”

That does seem to imply Michael sees younger souls as relatively less perceptive than older souls.

SHEPHERD:

Both Sarah Chambers, the first Michael channel, and the main Yarbro channel have/had heavy arrogance as their chief features; this may have colored some of their channeling.

Soul age is a lot like human age, so that would be like saying “relatively perceptive young person.” It’s true that, by definition, younger people have less experience, but younger people can actually be more perceptive than older ones. For example, there’s a saying, “out of the mouths of babes.”

Also, when you get older, you may have more *opportunity* for reflection, by reason of not needing to focus outwardly as much, but that doesn’t mean that you have taken good advantage of it. Positive and negative poles, and chief obstacles (features) are separate issues from soul age; true and false personality are always options.

TRANSCENDENTAL AND INFINITE SOUL AGES

According to Yarbro, our time on the astral plane after cycling off could be considered our transcendental soul age, and our time on the causal, infinite. Obviously, these are not normally experienced on the physical plane except with the special comings of transcendental and infinite souls. Apparently, the ages aren’t relevant to the high (abstract) planes: mental, messianic, and buddhaic.

LEARNING TO CHANNEL

Anyone who wants to can work on channeling any entity, just as anyone can work on learning an instrument, but it can require a lot of effort, and results vary. If you don’t have a reason on a soul level to channel, you probably won’t be very interested in investing what it takes to do it well (like anything else), although you might have skills left over from past lives. Causal (and higher) energy, especially, does affect your body, so you have to be prepared to deal with that.

I do Channeling Coaching, private sessions with people who are working on their ability to channel.

LINDA:

Shepherd says this is a stressful time to be physical and I am certainly finding

that to be true, especially this year…. He also says once we are over the hump

it will be easier…What Hump? and how soon? Do I have to wait till my next

life? any inside info gratefully received.

SHEPHERD:

I was just referring to the growing pains of so much change happening. Many systems have predicted this as a time of transformation. We have an opportunity to become more conscious, but that means dealing with all the stuff we’ve swept under the rug, so it’s not easy. Plus, our very survival is threatened by our prior lack of taking responsibility for the environment, weapons, etc., so there’s a lot of catching up to do. I assume that if we handle these things reasonably well, life will become less stressful. I don’t have inside information, but I’m thinking it will take several decades, so you and I may be out of luck. In the meantime, make sure you have plenty of good books and chocolate.

No Comments »

DANIEL:

I was thinking of the example of an artisan cast king (role). If I follow this logic right, this combination is more cardinal than a king cast king.

SHEPHERD:

I agree.

Everything on a Michael chart that has ordinality/cardinality contributes to the overall ordinality/cardinality of a person. I made a note to myself to illustrate that during the next online workshop (Sept. 13 for Part II–mark your calendar!).

Other than scholar/four, each position has a degree of ordinality/cardinality. For example, sages are cardinal but are the least cardinal of the three cardinal roles, while sage/five casting is ordinal but the least ordinal, since those positions “hug” the neutral scholar/four position.

KIM:

True soul age is hard to pin down without a channel for overleaves. But one clue I find rather dependable is how fearful the person is.

SHEPHERD:

I don’t find that. All negative poles are fear-based, all the way up to 7th old, and the degree of fear is individual.

I have a lot of physical fear because my eyesight isn’t good, I have slow reflexes, little coordination, etc., so if you throw a ball toward me, I’m likely to flinch. I won’t even get on a roller coaster or watch a horror movie. I know young souls who are competent athletes and thrive in taking risks, like sky-diving, because they trust their ability to deal with those kinds of challenges. On the other hand, I’m pretty fearless in my inner journeys and things like public speaking, which scare many people.

We all have fear and insecurities; courage is a matter of making a choice to “do the right thing” anyway.

On another matter, many sensitive spiritual people want to be assured that they’re almost done with their sojourn on the physical plane because they’re in a lot of pain or discomfort, and want it to be over. This is an especially stressful time to be physical for almost everyone; I do think it will get easier if we get over this hump. In the meantime, if essence wants a vacation between lifetimes, it can take as much time as it wants.

Death is likely to be a big relief for many of us, not unlike finishing our last exam for the school year; still, it’s probably not a good idea to drop out early.

SIGGI:

Aren’t the Grand Cycles more of an indication of overall soul levels? A soul has 13 Grand Cycles vs. a soul who has 4 Grand Cycles, would have much more experience, correct?

SHEPHERD:

Yes, but it’s experience at the deepest level that may not be directly accessed by the personality. Even past-life experience may be obscured by false personality. The number of grand cycles does suggest a person’s complexity.

VALERIE B:

I don’t understand grand cycles. It was always my understanding that when a fragment and its entity/cadre/greater cadre finally merged with the Infinite, that all divisions and fragments were merged with that whole, never to be separate again.

SHEPHERD:

The survival of any individuality is controversial in the Michael community.

Personally, I’ve remembered some unresolved issues from previous cycles in regressions. I suspect that much science fiction writing comes from such memories.

No Comments »

VICTORIA:

 

You mentioned to Jayson an abrading dynamic between Growth and Caution - was this meant in conjunction with 6th level, in particular, or in general?

 

SHEPHERD:

 

I see that you have that, too. I’d say that just growth and caution could abrade since growth pushes ahead to gather new experiences, and caution puts on the brakes; but unified in the positive poles, you seek new experiences deliberately, with forethought and care.

No Comments »

Crop Circles–The Truth Revealed! (Was “Aliens and Sasquatch”)

By Shepherd Hoodwin

 

LONDON (July 3, 2009)–A British spiritualist, Henrietta Wigsby-Covington-Mayfair (known as the English Channel), announced on the telly this morning that, according to her spiritual guide Horse Feather, most crop circles are hoaxes perpetrated by Sasquatch. “We need to catch that hairy brute, and soon,” she said, “before all our farmers join cults and stop doing their chores. Then where would we be?”

 

The sweet little old lady continued, “I’m sympathetic that Mr. Sasquatch can’t go back to Maldek, seeing how it’s smashed up and all, but he should get his big sweaty feet out of our crops and find a different creative outlet, maybe needlepoint or woodworking. Farms are no place for self-expression. It’s just not proper.”

 

When Cedric Humpington, host of “Good Morning Worcestershire-Upon-Rutland-on-Thames,” asked her about the rumor that crop circles are created by extraterrestrials, she replied, “Most of us are extraterrestrials, lovey. I’m Pleiadian myself.” “However,” she remarked, “you’ve a good point there. Some of those space ships have been doodling in our fields, too. Those little gray people get so bored cooped up in their smelly ships; it’s a bit of amusement for them, like teens spraying graffiti on schoolyard walls saying ‘Vark was here.’ The blue aliens never make circles–they haven’t an artistic bone in their bodies; they’re worse than Microsoft and the British Accounting Association put together. And the green ones are deathly afraid of wheat. Most of it is Sasquatch, although he’d like you to think otherwise. He’s been stealing vegetables from my garden, too, bending my chard and scaring my poor kitty Emma half to death. It’s got to stop, I tell you.”

No Comments »

LIZ:

 

Does anyone have a method for distinguishing between ET and casting, and their influence on your personality (apart from channeling)? I notice on this list people seem to find ET influence stronger or more important whereas elsewhere it’s vv.

 

SHEPHERD:

 

If the ET is discarnate (giving the maximum bleedthrough), I regard its influence as being about equal with casting, although it shows up differently; otherwise, less so.

 

Bleedthrough is the actual energy of the role; casting is more a flavor and direction, *how* and in what domain the role manifests.

 

Re: Yung being a scholar with artisan casting and sage ET bleedthrough:

 

Secondary traits of all kinds show up more strongly with scholars, because of their neutrality.

 

Yung’s sage bleedthrough shows up in her smile and laugh, so it stands out.

 

However, Yung has triple artisan casting, so it’s a stronger influence: she’s second in her cadence (seven souls); her cadence is second-cast in her greater cadence (seven cadences); and her entity (spiritual family) is second in its cadre (seven entities).

 

Casting influences reverse ordinality/cardinality. So although artisans are an ordinal role, the number two is cardinal (because it’s in the first half of one through seven). So Yung’s essence tilts to cardinal because both bleedthrough and casting are cardinal, even though her essence (scholar) is neutral. As Gordon pointed out, both influences are expressive, so her career in dance and other creative activities make sense.

 

However, her stoic attitude pulls inward, and her chief obstacle of arrogance makes for shyness, which is not ordinality but does suppress expressiveness. So, as with most of us, there are conflicting influences.

No Comments »