We are controlled by the media.  A lot of people would like to think that our democracy is a "two-party stranglehold," yet it doesn't have to be the case.  Truthfully if you look at the ballot, you'll see at least SIX Presidential candidates running.  How much have the media mention to you about the other three pairs of candidates running for president?  Do you know who they are?  Do you know the party they representing?  Do you know their platforms? 

I'm still going to vote for whom I think exudes the most leadership qualities.  People close to me know who I'm voting for.  Yet still, I bring this up because I'm very disturbed at how the media controls the actual election.  But the media has the amount of control that we the voters allow them to have, so we're also at fault here.  If Sarah Palin becomes a media darling because she's a female Vice Presidential candidate, then shouldn't a female Presidential Candidate receive the same media attention?  Likewise, if Barak Obama is also soaking up media publicity as being the "First Black Presidential Candidate," then how about the OTHER TWO BLACK PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES RUNNING IN THIS ELECTION???

Lets take a look at the Presidential and Vice Presidential Candidates:

Libertarian Party: Presidential Candidate Bob Barr and VP Wayne A Root.  Did you know that the Libertarian Party wants the U.S. to withdraw out of Iraq?  Did you know they opposed the recent tax paid bailout? 

American Independent: Presidential Candidate Alan Keyes and VP Wiley S Drake.  This party is probably a party with a more theocratic base.  In other words, they feel government is best controlled by their conservative Christian theology.  It's support is from the Republican Party members opposed to McCain's "liberalism."  Yep, they're THAT conservative.  (P.S. Alan Keyes is the 2nd of the 3 BLACK Presidential candidates) 

Green Party: Presidential Candidate Cynthia McKinney and VP Rosa Clemente.  Yes, people blamed the Green Party for Bush's first Presidential victory 8 years ago, and I feel that that was unwarranted.  For all the Hilary and Sarah hype, heres a presidential ticket where the president and VP candidates are BOTH FEMALE.  (BTW, Ms McKinney is the 3rd of the 3 Black Presidential candidates) 

Peace and Freedom: Presidential Candidate Ralph Nader and VP Matt Gonzalez.  Yes Nader and Gonzalez were both running for the Green Party in the past.  They resurfaced with an even more socialist agenda and platform then the Green Party.  In fact, the Peace and Freedom Party has a socialist stance when it comes to the issue of labor relations. 

Democrat: Obama and Biden; Republican: McCain and Palin.  Nuff said.  None of the 4 could sneeze without some sort of publicity.  Yet between the two parties it's sad to say that the losing party has a better shot of the candidacy than the OTHER 4 Parties' Candidates combined. 

That's where the flaw of our democracy lies.  How come the majority of us who works from day to day, picks up the newspaper, watches the news, has never heard of the other four candidates?  How come they're not taken as seriously as our Democratic and Republican nominees?  Now before you say, "they don't have a legitimate shot," ask yourself, how and why not?  Who's responsible for that?   Who's responsible for the fact that in the 2000 election only 51% of those eligible to vote voted?  How about the 55% in 2004?  This is BARELY half the voting population.  Who's responsible? 

Let's look at the last Presidential Election in 04.  221,256,930 eligible voters.  122,294,980 people voted (hence the 55%)  According to wiki, Bush received 62,040,610.  Now look at the amount of percentage of how much votes Bush received from ELIGIBLE VOTERS.  According to my math, if every eligible voter voted and  Bush only received the numbers he received, he would've only landed 28% of the vote!  That's not even a third!  That means of the total amount of eligible voters, more than 70% DID NOT vote for Bush.  Now once again I ask, WHO'S RESPONSIBLE? 

So before you blame the media, before you blame Diebold, before you blame corporations and campaign finance mumbo jumbo, look in the mirror first and ask yourself...

WHO'S RESPONSIBLE???

When I was training for the PSI 7 Life Success Course, we used a term a lot throughout the course.  "Own it."  We were mainly talking about identity and a positive description about ourselves.  "Owning it" means to embrace that description ("awesome, achieving, beautiful, wonderful, ect") and allow it to enter our core being.  "Owning it" also means to relentlessly pursue our goals with reckless abandonment, not allowing obstacles to overcome us, and to accept full responsibility with what comes along with obtaining that goal.  Throughout my time at the High Valley Ranch, "OwnIt" was the buzzword. 

When I took the Leadership Seminar, we weren't verbally reminded of the term, it was expected to be a given by then.  It took awhile for me to realize that.  I was waiting to be reminded, but when I was called out for "not showing up," I started to get it.  By then, "owning it" meant stepping up and taking charge and initiative...something that I considered to be a weak area for me.  I was always the type to let someone else take the initiative.  Nevermind that for the past year I began to learn how much it cost me, I just did not want to take initiative for anything. 

Upon graduating from MLS, we were then eligible to attend Principia.  Initially upon completing MLS, I thought I was not going to be able to attend Principia because I had a prior engagement that I was already committed to attend.  But I was able to attend about 80-90% of Principia thankfully though I know I missed some fun and challenging events and will have to wait to the next Principia for it. 

So what was my prior "commitment?"

When I escorted the contestants for the Miss Chinatown U.S.A. Pageant, I was approached by the group of "housemothers" shortly afterwards to volunteer and model for the On Lok Annual Fashion Show.  I was initially reluctant to help them out in that capacity.  I downplayed the entire everything.  I gave them a disclaimer that I was an actor, not a model, and therefore would not know how to conduct myself on the runway.  When people inquired about my initial absence from Principia, I explained to them that I had a prior commitment which I did.  When I was at Principia, my LS Brothers and PSI 7 Teammates would ask me about my upcoming premature exit from the event, and I'd explain that I was a "volunteer" for a charity fashion show.  I told very little people what exactly I was scheduled to do.  If I did tell them, I downplayed the responsibility entirely.  ("Oh, they wanted everyday people, NOT PROFESSIONAL models...""I don't know why they asked me, I already warned them I'm an actor, not a model...")

So after the conclusion of the fashion show, I had lunch with my liondance team and was planning to head home to sleep when it really hit me about my whole attitude and approach to my experience in helping out the On Lok Center. 

I wasn't "OWNING IT." 

Downplaying the whole experience meant that I was distancing myself from the event.  I didn't own the fact that out of 15 guys who helped escort this year's pageant, I was one of the two members chosen to help out.  I didn't own the fact that I was trusted by this particular committee for my level of professionalism.  I didn't own the fact that I rebuilding relationships that were lost for almost ten years.  And in turn, I wasn't owning the experience I created at the High Valley Ranch during Principia. 

So I drove three hours to return to the Ranch in order to own and claim what I got out of Principia.  Let me tell you that it was worth the drive all the way.  Owning and accepting.