Danger, Carlos Danger!

Aww, I couldn't resist that headline! #sorrynotsorry I almost considered renaming our foster kitten, 'Carlos Danger,' but the kitten has better judgment. Also, he's too smart to be a politician. But since I'm speaking about  not being able to resist one's baser intentions, how about Anthony Weiner, that super classy guy running for NYC Mayor? Weiner, who said when asked about how many inappropriate "relationships," he's had, responded:"Six to ten, I suppose-but I can't tell you absolutely what someone else is going to consider inappropriate or not." http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/anthony-weiner-details-how-many-women-hes-had-online-relationships-with/2013/07/25/c185ad5a-f572-11e2-9434-60440856fadf_story.html

I cannot make this sh*t up.That comment made me chortle bitterly... and then depressed the hell out of me. Um, I'm going to go ahead and suggest that Mr. Weiner can exactly tell us what someone else is going to consider inappropriate, because, let's be frank, he knows exactly what he's doing when he gets involved in one of these "relationships." (Not to mention:the idea that anyone would use the term "relationship" to describe these tawdry online encounters speaks volumes about how lonely we are as a society, and, more significantly, how lonely Mr. Weiner must be with himself. Sexting is not a relationship!) When Anthony Weiner is flirting with yet another woman online, shortly after starting his public mea culpa campaign in People magazine,knowing that he's going to make a run for public office...come on, people! That punk knows exactly how inappropriate and shady he's being. And he relishes it.

Listen, I dislike Weiner because he's a liar, and incompetent, and never did anything for this city even before he first got caught. He was known for press conferences and self-aggrandizing behavior and being a bully...all of these being other sides, obviously, of his tremendous self-loathing. The only person Weiner ever served--and is still serving, I'd argue--is himself. And, I suggest, he's serving himself by deliberately sabotaging himself. Does that sound like gibberish to you? Listen, if you hate yourself, you'll do whatever it takes to destroy yourself.

So when Weiner says he has "no idea" what other people might consider inappropriate, I'd argue that not only does he know--in excruciating detail, by the way--but he must enjoy, in one aspect or another, seeing his private life, his family, his image humiliated so publicly. Inappropriate is as inappropriate does. What a shame. NYC deserves more. (Except for New Yorkers who perform live music on the subway. They deserve the death penalty. Don't even get me started.)

The real inappropriate behavior here, of course, is that Weiner apparently can't give the same commitment to
 figuring himself out, to getting the real, long-term help he so obviously needs, as he is to destroying himself. He's really committed to his pain. Unfortunately, I'm sure they'll continue to be very unhappy together.

If you're interested in figuring out how to stop sabotaging yourself, and instead allow yourself to achieve the  professional success you've always craved, email me @carlotazee@gmail.com, and like my Facebook page, "Carlotaworldwide Creativity Yenta," for a free consultation!

Besos,
C.

It's Friday, and while the marketers would suggest I write something about the weekend (Weekend=good. Happy?), I'm going to just bring to your attention this wonderful tidbit I discovered while reading Timothy Crouse's ground-breaking book about the press corp who covered the 1972 presidential campaign, The Boys on The Bus (1972, Ballantine Books).

At one point, Crouse interviews Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein--just Google "Watergate," for all my non-history-obsessed readers...oy--and they say, very matter-of-factly, that when they got assigned to cover the Watergate break-in, it was perceived as a small, local story. Almost a non-story, if you will. If anyone at the Washington Post, had understood the implications of the story, there's no way Woodward and Bernstein would have gotten it. Their respective careers at the Post, at the point, were going nowhere fast; they both felt like they were stuck, covering meaningless stories, and neither of them saw much possibility for advancement.
Also, Woodward was divorced, and Bernstein was separated from his wife, so they were both lonely and able to work 15, 16, 17 hour days.They were both hungry. In fact: they were both desperate.

And because of that desperation, they were able to develop those articles into, you know, history-making journalism that won the Pulitzer, got made into this great movie (http://youtu.be/vLt6djxhNe8) and re-created themselves as the journalists, the men, that they had dreamed they could be. Their desperation changed history, for good or for ill.
Oh, and for a bonus, we got to see Tricky Dick cry and talk about his "sainted mother." (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfNjpHAMy2E&feature=colike) Yeah well, my mom is also a saint, as moms go, but if I had done half of the stuff Tricky and his Plumbers did, she'd give me something to cry about! But I digest.

Here's why I bring this up: Woodward and Bernstein succeeded because they could not fail. Their desperation gave them the energy, the courage and the resources to do what many would have thought impossible. So maybe this weekend, maybe you at home will think for 5 minutes...what am I desperate for? What am I hungry for? What is that important to me?

If you know, I'd love for you to share it with me, either in the comments section or email me @ carlotazee@gmail.com!