…

I would guess that I’ve sensed this for some time now. It was years ago that I became disillusioned with cable network news and the polarizing shows that I run. True, I cannot stand the babble from Rush…but neither can I handle Olbermann or Maddox for that matter. They all clutter my thoughts, make me dull to innovative ideas and I regress to the refined arguments of a 3rd grader. Seriously, I found myself in situations of political discussions where my finest articulation of why I felt the way I did was reduced to “He’s an idiot.” It’s embarrassing because it’s true.

Luckily, the dissonance in me has found a resolution to not continue as the deficit-oriented monger. It’s simply not the person that I want to be.

I like David’s open-ended questions because they are rooted in more than our individualistic nature. Each one asks how _”we”_ can envision the future, can make changes towards that future and build upon those successes. Moreover, because the question pull at the strings of community, they also suggest that I have a responsibility to be more inclusive of others ideas (even if countervailing to my own) if any of us (myself included) are to move forward on an issue of substance.

This is not to say that my recognition of the communal tug-of-war at all washes away all senses of my ego. It doesn’t. To be sure this path is more difficult for the individual’s ego. It asks one to reach beyond his/her like minded cohort. It begs one to accept that his/her ideas may not prevail. It drives one to grow, not beyond his/her ego, but within his/her understand or the role of the individual inside a diverse community eager for real, substantive social change.