1. No regrets. We make the best choices we're capable of making at the time we make them. And even if we don't, we can't go back and unmake them. So I figure: just get over it. Learn, yes. But move on.

2. Direct answers to direct questions. Only fair. But that sometimes means revealing more than I was prepared to reveal. At least, then -- at that time.

Sometimes they run in conflict, those two. And I wish I could take the words back. But then again, I don't, because they're better where they are now: out of my head, out on the wind. No longer making noise, letting me focus on other things.

Like living with no regrets.

Emphasis on the "Limited."

I'll be the first to admit that my grammar's not always perfect. In the rush to get things written, sometimes my brain disconnects from my typing fingers and something other than what I meant ends up on the published page. (My brain and fingers have some serious debates about homophones.)

I stepped on an escalator this morning and felt a ghost. Not of someone else. Of me.

You want to make a change. Maybe you need to. You tell yourself that over and over again.

But, neither of those will make it happen. No, the answer to making change happen lies between the two: in what you're willing to do.

Think about it. Just needing to make a change rarely makes us act. We wait to be motivated. We wait to want to. But wanting to make a change isn't enough, either. We're hard-wired to want things to stay the same...and so we find ways to want the status quo more.

I think the magic word for change isn't "need" or "want," it's "willing." Am I willing to do what's needed to make change happen? 

"Am I willing to?" already assumes you want to make the change you need to make--it takes wanting out of the equation. What it inserts instead is a reality check on just how much change you're capable of taking on at the moment. If the answer is "yes," then it's hard not to act (you're willing to, after all...). If the answer is "no," it gives you a chance to figure out what you are willing to do instead. And that's the the first step to lasting change..

Because mere change isn't the goal. Sustainable change is.

What do you think? Are you willing to try?

Then, as now, it was seen that the pamphlet allowed one to do things that were not possible in any other form:

The pamphlet [George Orwell, a modern pamphleteer has written] is a one-man-show. One has complete freedom of expression, including, if one chooses, the freedom to be scurrilous, absuive and seditious; or, on the other hand, to be more detailed, serious and "high-brow" than is ever possible in a newspaper or in most kinds of periodicals. At the same time, since the pamphlet is always ashort and unbound, it can be produced much more quickly than a book, and in principle, at any rate, can reach a bigger public. Above all, the pamphlet does not have to follow any prescribed pattern. It can be in prose or in verse, it can consist largely of maps or statistics or quotations, it can take the form of a story, a fable, a letter, an essay, a dialogue or a piece of "reportage." All that is required of it is that it shall be topical, polemical, and short.