Figures of the One Must Go

by Victor Living

  Was it possible for you to jump out from the muddy plots before getting in with both legs? It always was a chance you should have taken. You know because it’s natural to admit that if a man sneaked inside your house, he is not a sincere but a corrupt man. Yes, it’s a bitter truth, but for the literal intruder, you are as a man—zero. He doesn’t hate or disrespect you. He dislikes seeing in your eyes. Sorry, but for him, you are nobody and without a name. He only needs the things you own. As an alternative, you’re in high demand for another equivocal phony-made swindler, slicker, and bilker man. He appreciates your presence as a considered target. But if he gets noticed, you’re in vigilant watch of him, and he’d try another approach. Remember, he waits to endear you that only you have a zeal to sign such brilliant agreement. And he tries to help you. Make an answer to him, “Thanks for such a generous offer. But before the last word, I'll take a breath of fresh air.” Then, after your intention is pronounced, offer him a broad smile, but to yourself give an internal command, “Run, Forrest, Run!” Next, just disappear from a site. Do you know you can also take a cold shower? That is a clue that when he realized losing the situation, he thought about you for maybe half of minute and looked for another donkey. Would you like to conclude and seal in mind avowal:

  In time, learn to justify jeopardy as a jack-in-the-box?

  Self-assess real possibilities; do not lose by a split second.

  Assign for deals: over-optimism depraved is not failure because we are still hunting for our weakest attributes including

  WHIMSY AMBITIONS to grab.

  Doesn’t your position suggest that an escape from fraud is controled by your own character. But recall again how your caprices pulled you toward effortless things. It’s, as usual, later that your fancy drift allows a complicated man to complete his corrupt goals and print in your toxic memory: how did you get caught by such a smooth trick? The answer is learning how to stay alert. Maybe for self-training, recollect how the biggest mistake happened. I know it’s painful, but remind yourself in the last minute not to withdraw. It has great value. Gee whiz! Let me again involve you in word-painting meanings that describe a probable imposture when we become that “broken key” and answer:

  Why do you not spurn the sweetest offer?

  Why do you not cope with your best traits of character?

  How can you convert into the pitiless assessor of a situation? Because anyone who has enough skills can quickly become that rogue

  BROKEN KEY to cheat’s fritz.

  Let’s consider that you would be happy to create your materialized antifraud shield as a broken key? But to get closer to that idea, try to conduct yourself comfortably under any circumstances and probable picaroon will assess you as “a key to his weakness is not a doable task.” Yes, don’t give a person the chance to move closer to riddle you. Have you ever been in a situation while opening the door to your home and your broke? What’s sad is that a piece of fractured bit stays in the keyhole. And now it’s impossible to twitch loose by any tool because you will surely damage the lock. I hope, after such a moment you can build a potent metaphor. My point is you must think about how to become that broken part of the key to the man who planned to screw you up. Interesting, huh? But when you understand that, you won’t let the hook catch you, and the adventure ends before it has a chance to start. If you look into the eyes of the person who makes you “brilliant promises,” what should your reaction be? I think you should incline yourself to a complete stop. Remember these people have an impressive charisma.

  They always look just to capture your attention with your interests and hobbies. But first, whatever sounds intriguing, they will test you for knowledge of the laws. Isn’t it a signal to you about their specific approach to get you? For instance, many have already deceived people never introspected in the opening load of any agreements. Why we always believe a stranger? It’s a puzzle for all times. But how to decipher his intentions you can learn from review and approve the set of statements: guess that a condescending tone of a sham is not an enigma for you but just a start.

  When you afford to talk longer, conduct yourself as if you are interested in profit.

  While both of you touch a base of law in a deal, pretend like it does not matter, and you’ll see how he keeps coaxing you because any transgression of the law in an instant opens dirty ploys as not aligning with the

  SUITABILITY of the LAW as ending games.

  Could we chew over what regular people consider sensible? It’s that today without a hundred examples appearing clear: people are over frustrated with total theft. And it counts from the simplest pinching of your pockets to the hypothetical high-rank official’s robbery at the sizeable organizational scale. And in such an environment, you have to keep the prerogative choice: settle for cutting any circumstances that pull you to steal or overstep the bylaws. So when you are still hesitating, refuse hundreds of longing “advisors” about fast earning. But, even as such provisions appear, for the mainstream of us, obeying a criminal law must not abe fear of punishment but the supremacy of the moral law over any private offense. And when we condemn the fraudster, we do this for our families, houses, streets, and city. But what is most important is we have to teach ourselves how to become that broken key for any deceiver.

  Would you like to contrive as aspects, and together with their character, set up grounds of protection:

  As an essential rule: never let an unexpected friend come close.

  Catch a voice intonation of a person who persuades you.

  Even that which is small or grandiose, always keep a fig-barrel in your pocket when making a deal—an axiom for all occasions.

  While you show you're happy with the contract, recheck every single phrase as if you are an impenetrable wall. It will be a signal to your 'sweet friend' about their full

  MORAL FIASCO and your win and

  WHAT to do NEXT— not your confusion.

  I trust we all have experienced obnoxious incidents of out-of-order keys, but it has been possible to find immediate solutions. It would be the same if you had similar broken circumstances with any complicated man. Would like to share it in an answer with yourself:

  If from the first shot, you could understand that you don’t want to deal with such an odd person, what magnet attracted you toward close contact and engagement in a challenge with an

  ARTFUL MAN?

  Have you ever assessed how flexible you are and how self-satisfying narcissism has pulled your

  WHIMSY AMBITIONS?

  If you are talented enough to create a lock, with a no query you will open another security device. Even it sounds rhetorical, but why haven’t you tried to learn how a lock works and prevent the situation of becoming confusing by a

  BROKEN KEY?

  Is it difficult to seal in your mind the point that

  SUITABILITY of the LAW is ORDER?

  Is it a scalding truth that people achieve their dirtiest goals with no pangs of conscience

  as MORAL FIASCOS?

  Why when we are already fooled, do we feel it is critical of our weakness? Maybe it’s better to learn when a sweet speaker defines themselves as a fraudster and leave him without thinking

  WHAT is NEXT?

  Political Path

  16. Politicians

  While you’d examine the expressions:

  STATUS TO ANATOMIZE THAT

  POLITICIANS SPEAK

  PERSONAL CULMINATION

  MENTAL SHOT LOT

  it would help to amplify your views on politics.

  Reprehensibility.

  We all have internal accord about collapsed trust for politicians. And the only hope left for us does not renew old institutions but decomposes them as obsolete—looking for recourse to prevent your own societal self-destruction. In my twenties, I comprehended severe disparity: common men discuss political issues first and in more certain stances. Women get into polemics later, but only they are faultless predictors of the potential danger from any novel politici
an. Do you want to know why? They are wives and mothers and have a maternal premonition. Any mom in the world feels perils faster than anyone, as she has primary responsibility for the children. But about what do most moms worry? As women, they are quicker than men to estimate perils of political instability as unsafe situations for their kids. Hey, would you like to ask the world’s mothers if they would rather stay without basic food for their child or send them off to war? The answer is a sarcastic, nervous NO and sounds like pathetic mockery. The main reason is those mouthpieces who proclaim any war never haste to launch their kids to die even for the homeland. But when in the air smells of new-fangled conflict, only the mothers undergo it by dropping into anxiety. That’s why when annoying partial adjustments come, they feel it by their abdomens. But even history shows this state of affairs as constant; it does not last forever. I trust the next epoch could oppose it by collective gumption. And for supporting such light idea, let’s name causes by answering:

  What makes us pick up the polluted political populism?

  Does optimism on the authority allows its arrival? Will we before the digest ideas doubt in decrypted delusions? Because for ages we hold

  STATUS to ANATOMIZE THAT - our lot?

  I have a remarkable story of how one man tried to convey taking sides during a conversation about business and money. But even if you don’t like an approach to the opinionated establishment as a regular person, you will pick a side anyway. So, let’s see what happened:

  “My friend Justin is a supporter of the Republican Party. Steven, another cousin, is a follower of the Democratic Party. They have had many interesting clash-conversations. Justin, as usual, only appealed to one’s interests. He worked as an inspector for the Buildings Department of New York City. In his thirties, Justin was overactive and attended assemblies on the local Brooklyn branch for Republicans. He liked the information about social issues within the country. But it got more intense when Mr. Trump pushed ahead in the 2016 presidential campaign. Like a businessman, without political experience, he tackled problems that only seemed to get worse. As Mr. Trump showed what it means to be loose with one’s tongue, almost everyone jumped to rigorous dialogue. It became so easy to find opponents to any community’s problem. When Justin again met Steven, he had gotten a promotion to the leading manager of their big restoration company. Justin knew Steven was devoted to politics but as a member of the Democratic Party. So, after the duties of both parts were implemented, they began an exchange.

  “Hello, Justin! As I remember from your last run, now you should be on Trump’s side?” Steve started.

  “I shouldn’t. I accept that only as a TV show,” replied Justin. “And as a prospective voter, I believe not enough to hear stringent promises.”

  “Oh, I agree. Trump has picked the most painful issues always announced by the Democrats.”

  “It’s all on the cards, but I presume Trump says nothing about how he will present those tremendous changes. And please, just don’t tell me a joke about Democrats sending Trump as an emissary. It sounds farcical.”

  “No, I meant a different point.”

  “Listen, Steven, the Republicans first sounded alert about the situation with guns having this amuck. So what? If we do not count deterrent situations in the main cities—even Chicago, St. Louis, and Baltimore, we see only growth. You must also add shootings in schools and malls.”

  “Oh, yes. I see Democrats have just sent blame all over the country. Are they guilty of pulling up restrictions about how many bullets you may buy or which guns or rifles to sell? Maybe, but Democrats are not in the wrong when they demand to make harder legal restrictions in getting guns. Look, so far as I am informed between Republicans and Democrats is there is not a big gap in the percentage of positions about that. Our bipartisan opinions are almost like where gun ownership forces mass shootings first but crime next and in larger scales. And I believe every single person has heard stories connected with the absurd reason. But I can tell you one proposition from Democrats that you will not believe.”

  “What is that?”

  “One engineer, a member of Democratic Party over fifteen years, worked for ammunition manufacturer in Dallas, Texas, for almost twenty-five years. Oh, yes, I see your surprised face because he is from a southern state. But listen, he projected one dubious idea: for the common people to buy ammunition only as rubber bullets, while the army could have real ammo.”

  “Again, what you mean?”

  “That idea is more unlooked for than we expect. That man affirms that you can create ammo with special bullets by which you can only injure the attacker but not kill.”

  “Do you support such an idea? That is a revolution. I can’t imagine approval for that. That implies tremendous changes in the arms industry.”

  “I agree and don’t see a contradiction here with the constitution. Do you want to defend yourself and family—you are welcome.”

  After such a suggestion, I grew in perplexity with thinking. “Look, in human history it has always been the same,” Steve broke the silence. “If somebody brings a fresh idea, the over-busy people price him as a lunatic.”

  “I agree, that is a trick-design. But let’s talk about Democrats’ policy. Those are fellows who practice the method of, after announcing progressive initiative, right away they hurry to do everything possible to stop it. But this solution is no longer ridiculous if the mass media openly talks about it. And as many issues are suspended, it seems unwise decisions come even for guns. Look how Trump flouts: all talk and no action. Is he disturbing an entire political establishment or only Democrats?”

  “That is difficult to assess. Not yet. As I know, the most radical proposals come from Democrats. But while it waits for a resolution, critics attack from all sides. Is it bad to use the proverb, 'wait and see?’’’ Steven replied with a sour face.

  “Are you sure about that? Trump tries to dish up it as a political movement. I assume the revise of Washington’s entire policy, especially the domestic one, taxes, production on American soil, medical insurance, should happen,” Justin refuted with the grimace of self-worth.

  “Okay. That is a substance of future. But you speak about like a revolution to push things. I hope that could apply not now,” Steven opposed him again.

  “What do you mean?”

  “I believe rather alterations are in our guts. I feel not just dissatisfaction, but the discontent of simple people. It’s flying in the air. Yes, yes. The unemployment percentage higher than five years ago, and it doesn’t matter which “political camp” sets the resolutions. As we witness the country divided as ever, we need opportunities. It looks as though the regular workers don’t want to wait longer. Finding jobs became hard. But with what should you apply?”

  “I emphasize, if we insist changes, we have to start from ourselves…”

  “Oh man, don’t assert such an adage. Do you know how old thatis?” interrupted Steve and gave Justin a wink.

  “It has a thousand years at least,” Justin answered with joy, and he continued, “Listen, what I noticed today is not fun anymore.”

  “Then, what are you expecting?” inquired Steven.

  “These moments occur on every corner. And I need not recall something special. For example, a few days ago, I had retreated from a root canal in this dentist’s endodontic office. Look, when all the tests totaled, it cost an extra $350 in unplanned spending. Plus, I had to pay for everything, because I have to renew my medical insurance. Anyway, a small woman with an impressive, robotic walk drew near me. In her eyes, covered by doc’s glasses, I captured the blink of dollar signs. So, I expected a trick from her with no mistake. When she took x-rays of my upper two teeth, it took five to eight minutes. Then, she stopped and made it seem as though she had come across something bad. I understood something was wrong. She told me she must consult with my primary doctor about what to do and walk out. About ten minutes later, she strode closer and told me she found old cement in the canal space. She insisted on ta
king it out, saying it was non-negotiable. So, she recommended surgery, and the assistant would tell me the price in a minute. As a result, I had to pay an extra $1,300, and only then could she treat the tooth. My feelings were like, ‘I’m not in a fancy dentist’s office, but a dirty auto shop.’ It’s the same as the master fix for the smallest problems. Anyway, I didn’t let her extract my tooth,” finished Justin.

  “Okay. It’s an unpleasant event,” Steven responded in sadness. “But what does it have to do with politics?”

  “Precisely everything,” concluded Justin. A big question mark appeared on Steven’s face as their talk took a pause. Justin spoke a minute later.

  “As you’ve known me for a long time, I pick queries from afar. That dentist also proved our propensity to lie. Let’s call it a legalized lie. And it runs by everyone and everywhere. Could I have made it a scandal? Yes, but I didn’t. I got only a ghastly impression. And that’s not about a finicky dentist or the medical field but moral bents. Do we have to alert the business as a predator? Yes. I thought society was sick with dementia about money. How can you attach this to the level of politicians? That is easy. If a dentist manages my teeth as the doctor of my health and lies, what does that imply about the care we receive from an accountable politician? I tell you. Even our social system is sick; we’re still delegating a person to defend our rights. It means that when a politician has access to the billions, he can’t make two million for himself. But let’s admit it sucked a lot of taxpayer money. And nobody agreed to it from the beginning. Isn’t that out of control?”