The Big Picture
by Glynn Wilson

Do weird things ever happen to you when you first wake up in the morning that make your day start to spin off in strange directions before you know it?

Surely this happens to everyone from time to time. The question is, how do you handle it? What do you do about it? Take Ritalin?

That might not be the best approach, as recently reported. Sometimes I write about these things. Often there are larger insights to be had if you stop and think before you react and don’t let a quick emotional response govern your actions.

Of course even writing about these things will inevitably result in some folks overreacting or misinterpreting their meaning, but that’s human nature I suppose. I’m interested in what can be learned from these incidences. I trust you are too. Here’s an example of what I’m talking about.

Today’s Dream

As my mind first came awake this morning, even before my eyes opened, I started thinking about the dream I was just having. (Before I say anything else about dreams, I should reveal that I did a research paper on dreams for a psychology class many years ago but I now have some disagreements with the findings of both Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung).

Anyway, in this dream I was in Tuscaloosa having a drink in a bar with Ed Mullins, my old mentor in journalism from the University of Alabama. He’s retired now, but we still talk from time to time. We talked on the phone just the other day. (One of the things that is obviously correct from dream research is that what we dream about is drawn from resent experiences. Although the events in the dreams will diverge widely from the actual experience, and they may in fact hold a lesson about life for you, if you pay attention).

In my dream, Dean Mullins and I were talking about something else, something purely fictional, although there is a point about reality I want to share with you. I dreamed Mullins had been responsible for obtaining a grant for me. The grant had actually been awarded in the form of one of those red and white University of Alabama credit cards the alumni associations are always promoting on the Web.

But in the dream I did not know what the grant was for, so I asked him in person. He started talking about one of my Facebook acquaintances (who shall remain nameless lest I unnecessarily embarrass him and cause an entirely new argument I don’t want to have with someone I barely know). Dean Mullins started talking to me about something called “Naive Journalism.”

Before I go any further, I must point out that there is no such field, as least not by that name in any academic study I know.

But after I woke up and started thinking about it, it makes perfect sense. Perhaps someone should do a study about it, because it is the perfect name for the type of so-called “objective” journalism that is still practiced in American newsrooms every day, and it is the exact opposite of the type of scientifically objective journalism I am working to pioneer and promote on this Web site.

Of course it makes perfect sense that in this dream I was getting paid big bucks to practice that kind of journalism, because that is what all the “big time” national broadcast journalists get paid big bucks to practice every day on TeeVee.

Case in point.

This led to the second contradictory event that almost led me to do something that would have started another argument, but I’m going to write about it instead. (It might result in an argument anyway, but at least I will have a chance to explain my position in writing in advance).

As I was headed for the coffee pot to pour my first cup of joe, I overheard the talking heads on the “Today Show” making light of a new controversy involving the use of the drug Ritalin to treat children for Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD). It seems a flurry of stories about a shortage of the drug in recent months finally prompted one researcher in the field to write an opinion piece for the New York Times that ran under the headline: Ritalin Gone Wrong.

The drug scientist raised some interesting questions that have been on my mind for a long time, and probably a question on the minds of a lot of other folks too. You?

“Are these drugs really helping children? Should we really keep expanding the number of prescriptions filled?”

The conclusions?

“To date, no study has found any long-term benefit of attention-deficit medication on academic performance, peer relationships or behavior problems, the very things we would most want to improve.”

“The illusion that children’s behavior problems can be cured with drugs prevents us as a society from seeking the more complex solutions that will be necessary. Drugs get everyone — politicians, scientists, teachers and parents — off the hook. Everyone except the children, that is.”

Now, back to the dream and my point.

I have been seeing people do some pretty strange things lately, contradictory things that make me wonder if the people doing these things are on Ritalin.

For the record, I have never taken Ritalin or any other drug prescribed for any psychological or allegedly genetic condition for problems learning or interacting with others. Although if these drugs had been around when I was a kid, there is a chance I would have been put on them. I was a bit impatient, hyperactive at times and did not take well to authority, but we now know that is often the case with some of the smartest people, often those who are the most creative. Artists, writers, etc.

If that had happened, chances are you would not be reading this today, because I may have turned out to be an entirely different person. It is my contention that while the drugs may help kids get along early on in life, it changes their brains and their experiences and potentially stifles their natural creative abilities.

As poets have pointed out before, conformity is the antithesis of creativity.

I believe Emerson once said, “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.”

Now for the third and final point of the day.

After I poured my cup of joe, cranked up the Mac, got online and opened Facebook, I noticed several comments from friends who I believe must have taken Ritalin at some point in their lives (if not today). I won’t go into the details here, but let’s just say there are some things being said that make no sense, at least not to me. If you want to quiz me more about this in the blog comments, I might share more.

But for now let’s just say these things fall into a similar category of all those anonymous comments on blog posts all over the Web from people who seem to take some strange pleasure in trying to get famous under a fake Internet handle. Now I know our modern media society has created a desire on peoples’ part to obtain fame, for that seems like one of the few pathways to success.

But I must ask again: How do you expect to get famous by acting anonymously? Or in the case of one friend, how do you expect to get famous by NOT taking actions that lead to actual publicity outside your isolated little community? Is it the Ritalin? Or did Facebook already remap your brain and make you think you are already famous, just because your picture is published on the Web for your 113 friends to see?

This makes no sense to me. Perhaps I need Ritalin? What do you think? Or maybe I just need another couple of cubs of coffee. Now forgive me for stopping here, but I have some scientifically objective journalism to practice. See you soon Scott Beason.

While the board members of the University of Alabama system were meeting at UAB’s Alumni Hall on Thursday, Feb. 2, a coalition of environmental, civic and student organizations gathered across the street to demonstrate opposition to a proposed coal mine along the Shepherd’s Bend portion of the Black Warrior River.

This is for my friends in the Occupy movement who say they might support Mitt Romney for president. Are you nuts? This guy is in the 1% of the 1%.

So you don’t think President Barack Obama has done everything right, everything you want. At least he’s trying. This guy would take us back to more tax cuts for the rich and deregulation of the oil industry and the big Wall Street banks.

According to some analysts, Romney’s opponents have been able to weaken his support by touting the fact that he is part of the greedy 1%. Romney has faced multiple charges of being a lackey for corporations and the wealthy, who only seeks to help them gain even more wealth. Romney personified that image on TeeVee for everyone to see in the video above.

During an interview with Soledad O’Brien on CNN, Mitt Romney made some comments he’s probably going to kick himself for saying. In a completely out of touch and, frankly, a stupid and heartless statement, Mitt Romney told O’ Brien that he doesn’t care about the very poor.

ROMNEY: “I’m in this race because I care about America. I’m not concerned about the very poor, we have a safety net there, if we need to repair, I’ll fix it. I’m not concerned about the very rich, they’re doing just fine. I’m concerned about the very heart of America, the 90-95 percent of Americans who are struggling, and I’ll continue to take that message across the country.”

O’ BRIEN: “You just said, ‘I’m not concerned about the very poor because they have a safety net. But I think there are a lot of very poor Americans who are struggling who would say, ‘That sounds odd.’ Can you explain that?”

ROMNEY: “Finish the sentence Soledad. I said I’m not concerned about the very poor that have a safety net, but if it has holes in it, I will repair them. The challenge right now — we will hear from the Democrat party the plight of the poor. And there’s no question it’s not good being poor. And we have a safety net to help those that are very poor, but my campaign is focused is on middle-income Americans.”

Romney’s comments show a clear empathy deficit and proves what his opponents have been saying about him all along. That he’s a greedy, heartless member of the 1%. Romney claims that the poor are well taken care of by social safety net programs, which Romney has promised to slash if he were to become President. Romney has said that he wants to cut food stamps, cut Medicaid, and let the housing market hit the bottom. He has said that he supports the Ryan Plan to kill Medicare and Social Security, two programs that prevent poverty among senior citizens and the unemployed. Most Americans are just one financial problem away from crossing the poverty line. Romney’s tax plan, meanwhile, only favors the wealthy. If he’s “not concerned about the very rich” as he says, why does his tax plan give the wealthy all the breaks?

Romney’s comments come at a very unfortunate time for his campaign. He has been consistently slammed for having offshore bank accounts in Switzerland and the Caymans, and for his work at Bain Capital. Bain’s vulture capitalism philosophy is just one reason why many Americans have lost their jobs and have become poor. Romney was also slammed for making money on home foreclosures in Florida and for paying a lower tax rate than most middle class Americans. So he has just given his Republican opponents, and the Democrats, another gift to use against him in the coming months.

Following is a summary of key federal disaster aid programs that can be made available as needed and warranted under President Obama’s major disaster declaration issued for Alabama.

More coverage: Tornadoes Rip Through Alabama in January 2012

Assistance for Affected Individuals and Families Can Include as Required

Rental payments for temporary housing for those whose homes are unlivable. Initial assistance may be provided for up to three months for homeowners and at least one month for renters. Assistance may be extended if requested after the initial period based on a review of individual applicant requirements. (Source: FEMA funded and administered.)

Grants for home repairs and replacement of essential household items not covered by insurance to make damaged dwellings safe, sanitary and functional. (Source: FEMA funded and administered.)

Grants to replace personal property and help meet medical, dental, funeral, transportation and other serious disaster-related needs not covered by insurance or other federal, state and charitable aid programs. (Source: FEMA funded at 75 percent of total eligible costs; 25 percent funded by the state.)

Unemployment payments up to 26 weeks for workers who temporarily lost jobs because of the disaster and who do not qualify for state benefits, such as self-employed individuals. (Source: FEMA funded; state administered.)

Low-interest loans to cover residential losses not fully compensated by insurance. Loans available up to $200,000 for primary residence; $40,000 for personal property, including renter losses. Loans available up to $2 million for business property losses not fully compensated by insurance. (Source: U.S. Small Business Administration.)

Loans up to $2 million for small businesses, small agricultural cooperatives and most private, non-profit organizations of all sizes that have suffered disaster-related cash flow problems and need funds for working capital to recover from the disaster’s adverse economic impact. This loan in combination with a property loss loan cannot exceed a total of $2 million. (Source: U.S. Small Business Administration.)

Loans up to $500,000 for farmers, ranchers and aquaculture operators to cover production and property losses, excluding primary residence. (Source: Farm Service Agency, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture.)

Other relief programs: Crisis counseling for those traumatized by the disaster; income tax assistance for filing casualty losses; advisory assistance for legal, veterans benefits and social security matters.

Get more information on the Federal Aid Programs for the State of Alabama here.

More coverage: Tornadoes Rip Through Alabama in January 2012

Newt Gingrich won the South Carolina debates using patented dick fu against Mitt Romney, so Romney hits below the belt in Florida.