Females liberated western style
First the obvious. Half of humanity is female. Whether in whatever country they have the political vote or not, they do have the human vote. Whatever the society and culture, running the human world is more important than being left to the other half of humanity, the males. And women run the world, one way or the other, many think.
The western unleashing of the female vote in the last century, and the recent Islamic fascist objectives that include women returning to second class citizenship bring up the discussion of what is important to American society. Perhaps I think too much. And I am influenced by the relaxed media standards of what is important, and half of TV media seems to be handsome young women with questionable education and experience (albeit hardworking). And what they report as news readers is embarrassing to many. A little subject matter expertise will go a long way (boys and girls).
Perhaps, like males, younger females can over extend themselves as some kind of collective movement, world wise speaking. Most of humanity has little to do with politics and collective movements, and is mostly about families and reproduction. Can the west catch up with east, in this case? Can the younger females catch up, too? Most of us older males and females are way ahead!
Translate
Saturday, September 01, 2007
Political agendas are a human thing
Why in America today do politicians focus of finding or inventing new problems to solve? Why can’t politicians run on maintaining the status quo, or even improving it?
The status quo is a full plate because of all the past successes, many in the public policies started by governments, local, state, and federal. Most Americans have electricity, clean tap water, sitting flush toilets, heat without having to stay up all night, and an expectation that their children will outlive them thanks to public health policies. This is way beyond what even European royalty had a century ago, and 2/3 of the world still does not have. That we can make taking care of what we have is a legitimate expectation that voters should demand. We’ve been accepting less. Recent stories of falling bridges, embarrassing public education examples, poisoned pet food and toothpaste and medicine, contaminated human food, and lead in children’s toys are just the reported examples. Seldom reported are the citizens stolen from and the undermanned and under funded local police too often saying sorry. Seldom reported is the changing standard of poverty, USA style. Never reported is our government switching from draining wetlands to restoring wetlands in a noble environmental cause. It will take the come back of mosquitoes and malaria to change all this. And don’t blame the government; it just does what the politicians’ laws dictate.
Of course politicians focus on finding or inventing new problems to solve in order to enhance their chances of getting elected, or reelected. In the end, leadership on this most important issue has to come from the voters. Do we need a continuing succession of new problems to solve, or a need to socially engineer or reengineer our American culture, albeit with even more taxpayer money? The follow on question is: is there a law of diminishing returns going on? Are we voting for politicians who spend more and more taxpayer money to get less and less on new problems? And the second follow on question is one of results. What is most important to voters who pay taxes. Is it results, or good intentions?
In America, the concept of career politicians has gained traction. Probably we voters contributed to this. In the same vein, we American voters can dictate new priorities for the politicians we elect. Call it a soft revolution.
Why in America today do politicians focus of finding or inventing new problems to solve? Why can’t politicians run on maintaining the status quo, or even improving it?
The status quo is a full plate because of all the past successes, many in the public policies started by governments, local, state, and federal. Most Americans have electricity, clean tap water, sitting flush toilets, heat without having to stay up all night, and an expectation that their children will outlive them thanks to public health policies. This is way beyond what even European royalty had a century ago, and 2/3 of the world still does not have. That we can make taking care of what we have is a legitimate expectation that voters should demand. We’ve been accepting less. Recent stories of falling bridges, embarrassing public education examples, poisoned pet food and toothpaste and medicine, contaminated human food, and lead in children’s toys are just the reported examples. Seldom reported are the citizens stolen from and the undermanned and under funded local police too often saying sorry. Seldom reported is the changing standard of poverty, USA style. Never reported is our government switching from draining wetlands to restoring wetlands in a noble environmental cause. It will take the come back of mosquitoes and malaria to change all this. And don’t blame the government; it just does what the politicians’ laws dictate.
Of course politicians focus on finding or inventing new problems to solve in order to enhance their chances of getting elected, or reelected. In the end, leadership on this most important issue has to come from the voters. Do we need a continuing succession of new problems to solve, or a need to socially engineer or reengineer our American culture, albeit with even more taxpayer money? The follow on question is: is there a law of diminishing returns going on? Are we voting for politicians who spend more and more taxpayer money to get less and less on new problems? And the second follow on question is one of results. What is most important to voters who pay taxes. Is it results, or good intentions?
In America, the concept of career politicians has gained traction. Probably we voters contributed to this. In the same vein, we American voters can dictate new priorities for the politicians we elect. Call it a soft revolution.
Friday, August 31, 2007
The value of self-censorship in American society
Censorship has a bad connotation. Self-censorship should not.
Self-censorship is as simple as displaying self-control and good manners in all aspects of life. Self-censorship suggests leadership, as in parents to children. Self-censorship suggests the values of showing respect in a respectful and cheerful manner. Self-censorship suggests self-control and respect is valued.
Political debate and blogging prompts this post as so many bloggers use bad language because they can. Most readers think bad language, and insults, subtle or not, hurts the cause of the poster, yet it is the style today. Bad language insults do not win hearts and minds anywhere, anytime. A little respect goes a long way.
On the bad language theme, and self-censorship theme, why do so many movies have bad language written in to the scripts? The decades old argument that the movies are just reflecting real life have long be superceded by influencing our American culture in a bad way. I say this as a foul mouthed Marine who has been counseled on his bad language in an earlier time. Of course I blame it on my Navy time.
Most think that behavior is learned, not biological. Behavior includes training in manners and self-control. Attending a dining-in at a Royal Marine Commando base in Scotland and using American cotillion training saved me a lot of embarrassment. So did going to a cocktail party in Hong Kong. As much as I was chagrined to being made to attend cotillion training at an earlier time, and the dancing steps never took, the social etiquette training did take. And much like one just has to memorize the multiplication tables, one also just has to memorize etiquette rules, assuming one believes in the value of all this in American society.
Displaying self-control and good manners is not a born trait, I believe. This is definitely a learned behavior. And it is time to teach it again. Leadership by example by trained adults is the best way, but more effort is needed. This is not an advertisement for bringing back cotillion, lord knows, I would have broken my leg to get out of it. But by leadership, example, and private programs (this is not a government responsibility) we can begin to teach and require our young men and women that have missed out on all this the opportunity to get back in to respect for civility; and even recognizing the value of this respect, some might say standard. Then they can teach it in their own way.
Much like too many of our young men and women have never been taught to do basic things like cook, sew, and do basic home maintenance, we are now suffering a lack of teachers of the same. These most basic skills are not biological, they are taught. The same applies to the idea of self-censorship, or displaying self-control and good manners. This must be taught for the benefit of American culture. The alternative looks like anarchy.
Censorship has a bad connotation. Self-censorship should not.
Self-censorship is as simple as displaying self-control and good manners in all aspects of life. Self-censorship suggests leadership, as in parents to children. Self-censorship suggests the values of showing respect in a respectful and cheerful manner. Self-censorship suggests self-control and respect is valued.
Political debate and blogging prompts this post as so many bloggers use bad language because they can. Most readers think bad language, and insults, subtle or not, hurts the cause of the poster, yet it is the style today. Bad language insults do not win hearts and minds anywhere, anytime. A little respect goes a long way.
On the bad language theme, and self-censorship theme, why do so many movies have bad language written in to the scripts? The decades old argument that the movies are just reflecting real life have long be superceded by influencing our American culture in a bad way. I say this as a foul mouthed Marine who has been counseled on his bad language in an earlier time. Of course I blame it on my Navy time.
Most think that behavior is learned, not biological. Behavior includes training in manners and self-control. Attending a dining-in at a Royal Marine Commando base in Scotland and using American cotillion training saved me a lot of embarrassment. So did going to a cocktail party in Hong Kong. As much as I was chagrined to being made to attend cotillion training at an earlier time, and the dancing steps never took, the social etiquette training did take. And much like one just has to memorize the multiplication tables, one also just has to memorize etiquette rules, assuming one believes in the value of all this in American society.
Displaying self-control and good manners is not a born trait, I believe. This is definitely a learned behavior. And it is time to teach it again. Leadership by example by trained adults is the best way, but more effort is needed. This is not an advertisement for bringing back cotillion, lord knows, I would have broken my leg to get out of it. But by leadership, example, and private programs (this is not a government responsibility) we can begin to teach and require our young men and women that have missed out on all this the opportunity to get back in to respect for civility; and even recognizing the value of this respect, some might say standard. Then they can teach it in their own way.
Much like too many of our young men and women have never been taught to do basic things like cook, sew, and do basic home maintenance, we are now suffering a lack of teachers of the same. These most basic skills are not biological, they are taught. The same applies to the idea of self-censorship, or displaying self-control and good manners. This must be taught for the benefit of American culture. The alternative looks like anarchy.
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Russian aviation is not ten feet tall, either
The Russian military equipment is not ten feet tall. In fact, it is less tall than our American equipment, in my humble opinion. And I worked with a Russian engineer who said much the same thing. And I grew up aviation style until I flunked the depth perception test. And so when I read alarming news reports about Russian aviation sales to Venezuela, Syria, and Iran I took it with a grain of salt. In another day, I did not. But time and experience changes many things. Perhaps the Russians are taking in a lot of money, paying a lot of engineers, and then seeing their exported gear parked due to lack of maintenance and maintenance funding. I only wish we could get them to do this more!
My Russian friend always dreaded the flight back to Russia since there was a good chance the Aeroflot plane would be build by Ilyushin. He always wished to fly a Boeing plane if he could get a choice, which he could not.
Right now there are reports than the President of Venezuela is spending 3 billion dollars of his nations wealth, oil income mostly, for Russian planes. Fine and dandy if he is also spending the required 15 to 20 billion dollars to do the infrastructure support to include education, parts and supplies, and even weapons that fit the planes. There is little evidence of this, and the planes may be parked for a long time.
The same principle applies to Russian exports of jet airplanes to the Middle East. Alarming reports of top of the line Russian jets to Syria, paid by Iran, and shared by both, come to mind. This is of concern, until one looks at the 25 or so Russian planes Syria paid for around 1975, and they are still parked because they do not run.
Just watch the History Channel to be impressed with the Russian jet dog and pony shows, mostly in the west. They make good machines. It’s the buying the fleet with its support to influence foreign policy of Syria, for example, where things come up lacking. On the face, the Russian jet planes are pretty good. Especially of worry is when they are electronically retrofitted with European avionics stuff. What is not of worry is the Russian made label. And the recent resurgence of Russian strategic aviation is a political move, given that all the airframes and most of the avionics are still 50 years old. Go figure what Putin is trying to show, but these people and their airplanes are not ten feet tall.
The Russian military equipment is not ten feet tall. In fact, it is less tall than our American equipment, in my humble opinion. And I worked with a Russian engineer who said much the same thing. And I grew up aviation style until I flunked the depth perception test. And so when I read alarming news reports about Russian aviation sales to Venezuela, Syria, and Iran I took it with a grain of salt. In another day, I did not. But time and experience changes many things. Perhaps the Russians are taking in a lot of money, paying a lot of engineers, and then seeing their exported gear parked due to lack of maintenance and maintenance funding. I only wish we could get them to do this more!
My Russian friend always dreaded the flight back to Russia since there was a good chance the Aeroflot plane would be build by Ilyushin. He always wished to fly a Boeing plane if he could get a choice, which he could not.
Right now there are reports than the President of Venezuela is spending 3 billion dollars of his nations wealth, oil income mostly, for Russian planes. Fine and dandy if he is also spending the required 15 to 20 billion dollars to do the infrastructure support to include education, parts and supplies, and even weapons that fit the planes. There is little evidence of this, and the planes may be parked for a long time.
The same principle applies to Russian exports of jet airplanes to the Middle East. Alarming reports of top of the line Russian jets to Syria, paid by Iran, and shared by both, come to mind. This is of concern, until one looks at the 25 or so Russian planes Syria paid for around 1975, and they are still parked because they do not run.
Just watch the History Channel to be impressed with the Russian jet dog and pony shows, mostly in the west. They make good machines. It’s the buying the fleet with its support to influence foreign policy of Syria, for example, where things come up lacking. On the face, the Russian jet planes are pretty good. Especially of worry is when they are electronically retrofitted with European avionics stuff. What is not of worry is the Russian made label. And the recent resurgence of Russian strategic aviation is a political move, given that all the airframes and most of the avionics are still 50 years old. Go figure what Putin is trying to show, but these people and their airplanes are not ten feet tall.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Just who is in charge of American culture?
Is it kids or adults? Is it individuals or groups? The questions assume the sellers of individual rights are just meeting demand, and getting paid for it. And the questions assume we adults can vote with our feet and our pocket books.
The question of the day is droopy pants worn by boys and girls to the chagrin of many communities. But it could be many more things, like home security verses criminal rights to roam in public. It could be school dress codes. It could be homeland security while in a war. It could be school chaperones breaking apart 7th graders grinding at a school dance. But it is the droopy pants issue that should define who is in charge of communities, and America. It is the adults, and not the children.
In this most litigious society, too many are intimidated by lawyers. The stories coming out of Iraq combat and the CIA about the influence of lawyers is intimidating compared to World War Two stories, for example. But here in our communities, let our common sense and leadership run our communities. This often will cost money, but let our lawyers fight their lawyers, with a strategy of bleed them out. In this strategy, insure it is our tax payer money working for us, and not the children-in-charge lawyers being paid out of our pocket. Let the children-in-charge lawyers get paid by their sponsors and not the public. If that doesn’t work, then let’s fight again. If there is an easier way to get back community control to the adult standards, please say so. After all Rome was not built in a day, and it takes a big effort to turn an aircraft carrier around, but one has to start the effort.
Is it kids or adults? Is it individuals or groups? The questions assume the sellers of individual rights are just meeting demand, and getting paid for it. And the questions assume we adults can vote with our feet and our pocket books.
The question of the day is droopy pants worn by boys and girls to the chagrin of many communities. But it could be many more things, like home security verses criminal rights to roam in public. It could be school dress codes. It could be homeland security while in a war. It could be school chaperones breaking apart 7th graders grinding at a school dance. But it is the droopy pants issue that should define who is in charge of communities, and America. It is the adults, and not the children.
In this most litigious society, too many are intimidated by lawyers. The stories coming out of Iraq combat and the CIA about the influence of lawyers is intimidating compared to World War Two stories, for example. But here in our communities, let our common sense and leadership run our communities. This often will cost money, but let our lawyers fight their lawyers, with a strategy of bleed them out. In this strategy, insure it is our tax payer money working for us, and not the children-in-charge lawyers being paid out of our pocket. Let the children-in-charge lawyers get paid by their sponsors and not the public. If that doesn’t work, then let’s fight again. If there is an easier way to get back community control to the adult standards, please say so. After all Rome was not built in a day, and it takes a big effort to turn an aircraft carrier around, but one has to start the effort.
Just who is paying for all the protests?
Between the eco stuff, and the minority but fervent controllers of the Democratic party, just who is paying? Even if many of the protests in all forms seem weak, one still wonders? Organization, and the constant media-friendly reports, makes one especially wonder.
The cynical will suggest big time underwriters are paying to gain some kind of future business and political advantage, to include continued funding of what works to enhance these advantages. Some think George Soros wants his son to President. After all, it worked for the Kennedy family. In this case, both sides know they are dancing with the devil, including the slathering politicians being funded for elections. The slightly less cynical will suggest this small percentage of Americans, and more importantly, a small percentage of the Democratic party, are just bleeding themselves dry, human energy wise and financially. Time will tell. In the latter case, it comes across like the Shaker religious group which bred themselves out of existence. Much the same will probably happen to the netroots kind of Americans, and their funding.
There is a third way to answer who is paying … it may be the American taxpayer. The cottage industry of non-profits as well as Arab charities is full of abuse stories that seem to suggest toleration for protesters or whatever, be they terrorists or freedom fighters. Just ask various opinions of now deceased Menachem Begin when the shoe was on the other foot. The point is this is a repeat problem in the U.S., and now it is the Arab Muslims taking advantage.
A rural southern land owner might make a comparison to the fire ant infestation. There are two obvious courses of action. One is to fight them continuously with all fire ant weapons. The other course of action in fighting them is to allow them to build up big nests, and then go in and eradicate them, again with fire ant weapons. Both ideas assume humans might win battles, but may lose the war.
Of course fire ants reproduce themselves at prodigious rates. But then we humans have the funding. Now if fighting fire ants is not a bipartisanship national interest objective, what is?
Funding national political objectives should be about the same. It is not happening now. What a sad state of affairs. And a back to basic question continues, just who is funding all the protests? And why? Voters answers to these questions should have much to do with their vote in 2008.
Between the eco stuff, and the minority but fervent controllers of the Democratic party, just who is paying? Even if many of the protests in all forms seem weak, one still wonders? Organization, and the constant media-friendly reports, makes one especially wonder.
The cynical will suggest big time underwriters are paying to gain some kind of future business and political advantage, to include continued funding of what works to enhance these advantages. Some think George Soros wants his son to President. After all, it worked for the Kennedy family. In this case, both sides know they are dancing with the devil, including the slathering politicians being funded for elections. The slightly less cynical will suggest this small percentage of Americans, and more importantly, a small percentage of the Democratic party, are just bleeding themselves dry, human energy wise and financially. Time will tell. In the latter case, it comes across like the Shaker religious group which bred themselves out of existence. Much the same will probably happen to the netroots kind of Americans, and their funding.
There is a third way to answer who is paying … it may be the American taxpayer. The cottage industry of non-profits as well as Arab charities is full of abuse stories that seem to suggest toleration for protesters or whatever, be they terrorists or freedom fighters. Just ask various opinions of now deceased Menachem Begin when the shoe was on the other foot. The point is this is a repeat problem in the U.S., and now it is the Arab Muslims taking advantage.
A rural southern land owner might make a comparison to the fire ant infestation. There are two obvious courses of action. One is to fight them continuously with all fire ant weapons. The other course of action in fighting them is to allow them to build up big nests, and then go in and eradicate them, again with fire ant weapons. Both ideas assume humans might win battles, but may lose the war.
Of course fire ants reproduce themselves at prodigious rates. But then we humans have the funding. Now if fighting fire ants is not a bipartisanship national interest objective, what is?
Funding national political objectives should be about the same. It is not happening now. What a sad state of affairs. And a back to basic question continues, just who is funding all the protests? And why? Voters answers to these questions should have much to do with their vote in 2008.
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Can elected politicians even do the basics anymore?
It’s a fair question as one who worries about the basics, like home security (not the D.C. term) but our home. Or public education about geography given the recent example from the Carolina follow-up which declares she’s a really good student. How could public education produce such a poor student? How could Dora the Explorer kids get Chinese lead in their American bodies? How could my dumb dog die from food purchased at any grocery store. How could I be executed by an illegal immigrant murderer still free in New Jersey?
Doing the basics takes money. It’s how to spend the money that will get most citizens attention…since we are in charge. And the basics are so important to American culture.
It’s a fair question as one who worries about the basics, like home security (not the D.C. term) but our home. Or public education about geography given the recent example from the Carolina follow-up which declares she’s a really good student. How could public education produce such a poor student? How could Dora the Explorer kids get Chinese lead in their American bodies? How could my dumb dog die from food purchased at any grocery store. How could I be executed by an illegal immigrant murderer still free in New Jersey?
Doing the basics takes money. It’s how to spend the money that will get most citizens attention…since we are in charge. And the basics are so important to American culture.
Monday, August 27, 2007
American people are awesome
And so is most of the New World, and our combined cultures. The emigration trends support this as others vote with their feet to come here.
Perhaps it is part our Judeo-Christian background, respect and support for the rule of law, or just plain economic opportunity. Maybe it is about our Constitution. One can also believe opportunity for their kids plays a big factor. Just having their kids being able to break out of the Old World patterns of being stuck where you are born in life is profound.
To give due to the blame America crowd, they have a point, also. As much as I hate to agree, many of their points appeal to many. American culture as exported by Hollywood is abhorrent to many. As one who has lived overseas, the appeal of this to many young people is even more abhorrent to their parents in much of the world. Disrespect for traditions, disrespect for parents, and disrespect for women almost always come up, as they should. All this is too often amplified in cultures where change comes slow, as it does in much of the third world. But also do not ignore societies and cultures that thrive on change, often quickly (USA, Japan, and Korea come to mind). Amplify all this “change” with global communications and many will listen to the blame America crowd.
Those who do not recognize how awesome American people may be perhaps are just lacking being through the school of hard knocks. Having been prejudiced against will change a lot of experience and worldly opinion. Those assuming most prejudice is white against black or brown just have not been “experienced”. Where is Jimi Hendrix when we need him, and he did serve in the 101st. Try seeing hippy girls making lewd suggestive sexual displays against midshipmen required to wear Navy uniforms back during the 1967 Newport Folk Festival will get one’s attention. This was not Joan Baez or Bob Dylan or Peter, Paul and Mary. It was raw prejudice. Just see the looks in the Georgia Tech faculty lunch lounge in the 1980’s by the academics against we ROTC types and it hurts (and I graduated from GaTech). Just live in Japan and see the difference in how many Japanese look at we “foreign devils” is an attention gainer. They especially are prejudiced against Negro foreign devils. Go through a Katrina “like” Philippines village after a typhoon, and see the hungry look on the family’s faces as they know the government will not be in to help them. As a Marine, I locked and loaded after this eyeball experience. And keep perspective, which usually comes with some experience. My Japanese experience often taught that local Okinawans disliked the Japanese Self Defense Force types as much as we American military types. It was not as much cultural, as being anti-military. If you live there and read their history, it will make sense to an American, as it does to the local Okinawans. And then there is my Saudi experience, but that is another story. I’m just glad I am not a woman born in Saudi Arabia.
So on to today’s politics, foreign and domestic. It’s a full plate, but the menu seems simple. Foreign wise, we are on the defensive which frustrates so many. Being on the defensive means too many foreigner thinkers are in charge of most everything, to include our American lives and budget. Domestic wise, it seems American frustration about Iraq is alive and well, as in dominating our domestic issues. But there are so many more domestic problems that solutions in the past worked, and have made us so awesome when our ancestors solved them for their time. But now it is time for domestic change, as in upgrade. This is a simple enough menu item for we awesome Americans, and fellow types.
And so is most of the New World, and our combined cultures. The emigration trends support this as others vote with their feet to come here.
Perhaps it is part our Judeo-Christian background, respect and support for the rule of law, or just plain economic opportunity. Maybe it is about our Constitution. One can also believe opportunity for their kids plays a big factor. Just having their kids being able to break out of the Old World patterns of being stuck where you are born in life is profound.
To give due to the blame America crowd, they have a point, also. As much as I hate to agree, many of their points appeal to many. American culture as exported by Hollywood is abhorrent to many. As one who has lived overseas, the appeal of this to many young people is even more abhorrent to their parents in much of the world. Disrespect for traditions, disrespect for parents, and disrespect for women almost always come up, as they should. All this is too often amplified in cultures where change comes slow, as it does in much of the third world. But also do not ignore societies and cultures that thrive on change, often quickly (USA, Japan, and Korea come to mind). Amplify all this “change” with global communications and many will listen to the blame America crowd.
Those who do not recognize how awesome American people may be perhaps are just lacking being through the school of hard knocks. Having been prejudiced against will change a lot of experience and worldly opinion. Those assuming most prejudice is white against black or brown just have not been “experienced”. Where is Jimi Hendrix when we need him, and he did serve in the 101st. Try seeing hippy girls making lewd suggestive sexual displays against midshipmen required to wear Navy uniforms back during the 1967 Newport Folk Festival will get one’s attention. This was not Joan Baez or Bob Dylan or Peter, Paul and Mary. It was raw prejudice. Just see the looks in the Georgia Tech faculty lunch lounge in the 1980’s by the academics against we ROTC types and it hurts (and I graduated from GaTech). Just live in Japan and see the difference in how many Japanese look at we “foreign devils” is an attention gainer. They especially are prejudiced against Negro foreign devils. Go through a Katrina “like” Philippines village after a typhoon, and see the hungry look on the family’s faces as they know the government will not be in to help them. As a Marine, I locked and loaded after this eyeball experience. And keep perspective, which usually comes with some experience. My Japanese experience often taught that local Okinawans disliked the Japanese Self Defense Force types as much as we American military types. It was not as much cultural, as being anti-military. If you live there and read their history, it will make sense to an American, as it does to the local Okinawans. And then there is my Saudi experience, but that is another story. I’m just glad I am not a woman born in Saudi Arabia.
So on to today’s politics, foreign and domestic. It’s a full plate, but the menu seems simple. Foreign wise, we are on the defensive which frustrates so many. Being on the defensive means too many foreigner thinkers are in charge of most everything, to include our American lives and budget. Domestic wise, it seems American frustration about Iraq is alive and well, as in dominating our domestic issues. But there are so many more domestic problems that solutions in the past worked, and have made us so awesome when our ancestors solved them for their time. But now it is time for domestic change, as in upgrade. This is a simple enough menu item for we awesome Americans, and fellow types.
Sunday, August 26, 2007
An element of truth can make any argument plausible
The Vietnam analogies for Iraq are just coming out of the woodwork since the President’s speech to the VFW last week. Most just cherry pick history to make a point, but many also are educated fools it seems. And for lack of knowing what to say, many just say what they know. The old story about asking three PhD’s the same question and always getting at least four answers comes to mind. So does the story about the blind wise men describing an elephant to a village of all blind people where each blind wise man is correct in what he says, but misses the point of the entire elephant.
The other trend is the emphasis on looking back, vice forward. The expression that those who do not read history are doomed to repeat it comes to mind. But so does the expression about the military always preparing to fight the last war. Except in today’s case, the military analogy also applies to politicians and their hired advisors, and the media and its pundits. After all, having a job in the news or political business does not confer any extra experience or common sense.
Looking forward means leadership and business experience. (In the old days it was called the school of hard knocks.) Looking forward means mission statements, and accountability for results, be it local, state, or national. Leaders have tools such as yesterday’s six sigma by Motorola, or TQM by many, but these are tools only. Looking forward means taking the initiative and learning from mistakes, if the Board or voters will be so tolerant. America has become too committee and CYA and process oriented, as if doing the process or having good intentions is what counts, rather than accomplishing the mission. The recent shutdown of the King/Drew hospital in Los Angeles can be seen as place which looked back while today’s people died as a result. This is the place where the lady died on the floor in the emergency area after having been ignored for hours. The CIA’s IG critiques of process over results provides another example. The point is that the ideas of good intentions and process are still alive and well in American government.
Of course leaders come from us, we Americans. Why any citizen politician leader and his or her family would come to the caustic environment of Washington, D.C. is a good question. Many think the politics of personal destruction and criminalizing politics as political tools have in fact run off many of the leaders we need today at the federal level, be it executive, congress, or judiciary. They don’t even bother to apply these days, or run for office.
America needs leaders, not historians and other such ilk. Leaders are in short supply in D.C., while paid critics are over supplied.
The Vietnam analogies for Iraq are just coming out of the woodwork since the President’s speech to the VFW last week. Most just cherry pick history to make a point, but many also are educated fools it seems. And for lack of knowing what to say, many just say what they know. The old story about asking three PhD’s the same question and always getting at least four answers comes to mind. So does the story about the blind wise men describing an elephant to a village of all blind people where each blind wise man is correct in what he says, but misses the point of the entire elephant.
The other trend is the emphasis on looking back, vice forward. The expression that those who do not read history are doomed to repeat it comes to mind. But so does the expression about the military always preparing to fight the last war. Except in today’s case, the military analogy also applies to politicians and their hired advisors, and the media and its pundits. After all, having a job in the news or political business does not confer any extra experience or common sense.
Looking forward means leadership and business experience. (In the old days it was called the school of hard knocks.) Looking forward means mission statements, and accountability for results, be it local, state, or national. Leaders have tools such as yesterday’s six sigma by Motorola, or TQM by many, but these are tools only. Looking forward means taking the initiative and learning from mistakes, if the Board or voters will be so tolerant. America has become too committee and CYA and process oriented, as if doing the process or having good intentions is what counts, rather than accomplishing the mission. The recent shutdown of the King/Drew hospital in Los Angeles can be seen as place which looked back while today’s people died as a result. This is the place where the lady died on the floor in the emergency area after having been ignored for hours. The CIA’s IG critiques of process over results provides another example. The point is that the ideas of good intentions and process are still alive and well in American government.
Of course leaders come from us, we Americans. Why any citizen politician leader and his or her family would come to the caustic environment of Washington, D.C. is a good question. Many think the politics of personal destruction and criminalizing politics as political tools have in fact run off many of the leaders we need today at the federal level, be it executive, congress, or judiciary. They don’t even bother to apply these days, or run for office.
America needs leaders, not historians and other such ilk. Leaders are in short supply in D.C., while paid critics are over supplied.
Saturday, August 25, 2007
Fathers for daughters
What’s love got to do with it?
Not too long ago there was a religious sect that had an annual pick your spouse out of the hat ceremony. If one did not like the luck of the draw, one simply threw their name back in the hat, and waited another year. As bad as this sounds today, the alternative 50% divorce rate sounds worse. This sect’s % was better than 50 %.
That boys and girls are different is not the subject of this post. Most know this.
What is the subject of this post is girls, fatherly speaking. The idea of group dating and girl friends “with privileges” is appalling as a father. Fathers understand hormones, thank goodness, as it helps girls put out, as when growing up. Ah, the mental pictures. But also fatherhood conveys certain perspectives, mostly about American society.
As a father, I would just love to cross their legs and tie them shut. This would work for birth control in the back of the car, but my objective is more sinister. Thanks to education, much of this is better understood. The amount of thrown out used condoms in rural parking places on my rural place is a good reason to think the kids are practicing safe sex.
This post is about girls, though. And it is posted as a father. All that has gone in the last 5 decades or so vis-a-vis the pill has been about birth control. How about humanity, and the girls part in all this. If this sounds like a heavy load, it is. Just who does run the world?
What’s love got to do with it?
Not too long ago there was a religious sect that had an annual pick your spouse out of the hat ceremony. If one did not like the luck of the draw, one simply threw their name back in the hat, and waited another year. As bad as this sounds today, the alternative 50% divorce rate sounds worse. This sect’s % was better than 50 %.
That boys and girls are different is not the subject of this post. Most know this.
What is the subject of this post is girls, fatherly speaking. The idea of group dating and girl friends “with privileges” is appalling as a father. Fathers understand hormones, thank goodness, as it helps girls put out, as when growing up. Ah, the mental pictures. But also fatherhood conveys certain perspectives, mostly about American society.
As a father, I would just love to cross their legs and tie them shut. This would work for birth control in the back of the car, but my objective is more sinister. Thanks to education, much of this is better understood. The amount of thrown out used condoms in rural parking places on my rural place is a good reason to think the kids are practicing safe sex.
This post is about girls, though. And it is posted as a father. All that has gone in the last 5 decades or so vis-a-vis the pill has been about birth control. How about humanity, and the girls part in all this. If this sounds like a heavy load, it is. Just who does run the world?
The American way of war got us here
Can it get us out?
Will you buy the line that every country has a distinct way to wage war? There might a best way, but most countries wage war their way, often not the best way. Of course who decides what the “best” way is too often turns out to be some academic subject written decades later.
America’s historical trends about war so far in just over 200 years is one of isolationism, and pacifistic instincts. Many attribute this to being self confidently surrounded by vast oceans, and being too busy to take the time out to be bogged down by the old world’s problems.
We have gone to war. Congress and the President have declared war many times, and war with less than war declarations are also many. Sometimes we just have to fight. This is where the subject of the American way of war comes up.
We Americans have crummy war leaders, historically speaking. Mostly our Presidents and Congressmen, and importantly these days, their hired staffs, have little experience about war fighting. In the past this has been much the same. These days the American way of war includes vast bureaucracies that don’t respond very well to our President or Congress as they try to prosecute a war. That’s pretty bad, but the badness is amplified by the inexperience of our political leaders and their staffs. Most appalling is the inability of these same people to admit this, and do something about it, publicly.
So what we get is what we get. The old line of the blind leading the blind comes to mind. Maybe the academics have a point, though most doubt it. Does anyone doubt that had we not been attacked on September 11, 2001, with all the vast damage to our centers of gravity, that we would have attacked Iraq? This is the American way of war, before, during, and after. Our political leaders lead us there, a decision many agree with. It’s the during and talk of after that comes up these days. After all, you dance with the one you came with.
The attack of Iraq was a stunning military victory is its brevity and confirmation of all taught at the political and military schools about maneuver warfare and the entire military education system down to the NCO level, with Clausewitz confirmed. What was not taught, and later not practiced and imposed, was how to win the peace as in the nasty details of small wars occupations with un-American experiences like constabularies or gendarmes. Most professional schools did not teach this mostly because it is not how America works, though much of the rest of the world does work this way. All this process of losing the peace was amplified by bureaucratic infighting at the D.C. level. Nobody could impose unity of effort. This has been the American way of waging war.
Now citizens are being asked by our President to have patience in the Iraq war. The request assumes finally he and his hired minions have learned how to wage a small war, such as winning the peace in Iraq. It’s been a long four or more years for America in his and his staff’s learning curve. Now citizens are also hearing other loyal comments from some such as Senator Warner suggesting he and his staff also have some knowledge about winning the peace in Iraq, using their learning curve and political knowledge about the American way to wage war. There are other loyal comments suggesting some knowledge about winning the peace for U.S. interests.
It is important to our national interest to win the war against Al-Qaeda. We did defeat a similar idea against the Barbary Pirates around 1800. Whether Iraq makes it as an Arab democracy or three states or whatever is secondary to many of our thoughts. This is the American way of waging a war. The learning curve about waging war applies also to citizens, as we impose ourselves. Politicians got us into Iraq, and the cause was good and noble, and they will get us out of Iraq…with a good bit of citizen influence. This is the traditional American way of waging war.
Can it get us out?
Will you buy the line that every country has a distinct way to wage war? There might a best way, but most countries wage war their way, often not the best way. Of course who decides what the “best” way is too often turns out to be some academic subject written decades later.
America’s historical trends about war so far in just over 200 years is one of isolationism, and pacifistic instincts. Many attribute this to being self confidently surrounded by vast oceans, and being too busy to take the time out to be bogged down by the old world’s problems.
We have gone to war. Congress and the President have declared war many times, and war with less than war declarations are also many. Sometimes we just have to fight. This is where the subject of the American way of war comes up.
We Americans have crummy war leaders, historically speaking. Mostly our Presidents and Congressmen, and importantly these days, their hired staffs, have little experience about war fighting. In the past this has been much the same. These days the American way of war includes vast bureaucracies that don’t respond very well to our President or Congress as they try to prosecute a war. That’s pretty bad, but the badness is amplified by the inexperience of our political leaders and their staffs. Most appalling is the inability of these same people to admit this, and do something about it, publicly.
So what we get is what we get. The old line of the blind leading the blind comes to mind. Maybe the academics have a point, though most doubt it. Does anyone doubt that had we not been attacked on September 11, 2001, with all the vast damage to our centers of gravity, that we would have attacked Iraq? This is the American way of war, before, during, and after. Our political leaders lead us there, a decision many agree with. It’s the during and talk of after that comes up these days. After all, you dance with the one you came with.
The attack of Iraq was a stunning military victory is its brevity and confirmation of all taught at the political and military schools about maneuver warfare and the entire military education system down to the NCO level, with Clausewitz confirmed. What was not taught, and later not practiced and imposed, was how to win the peace as in the nasty details of small wars occupations with un-American experiences like constabularies or gendarmes. Most professional schools did not teach this mostly because it is not how America works, though much of the rest of the world does work this way. All this process of losing the peace was amplified by bureaucratic infighting at the D.C. level. Nobody could impose unity of effort. This has been the American way of waging war.
Now citizens are being asked by our President to have patience in the Iraq war. The request assumes finally he and his hired minions have learned how to wage a small war, such as winning the peace in Iraq. It’s been a long four or more years for America in his and his staff’s learning curve. Now citizens are also hearing other loyal comments from some such as Senator Warner suggesting he and his staff also have some knowledge about winning the peace in Iraq, using their learning curve and political knowledge about the American way to wage war. There are other loyal comments suggesting some knowledge about winning the peace for U.S. interests.
It is important to our national interest to win the war against Al-Qaeda. We did defeat a similar idea against the Barbary Pirates around 1800. Whether Iraq makes it as an Arab democracy or three states or whatever is secondary to many of our thoughts. This is the American way of waging a war. The learning curve about waging war applies also to citizens, as we impose ourselves. Politicians got us into Iraq, and the cause was good and noble, and they will get us out of Iraq…with a good bit of citizen influence. This is the traditional American way of waging war.
Friday, August 24, 2007
Why many no longer read the New York Times, or TIME Magazine, or Newsweek
One could add in others like the Washington Post, or the Boston Globe, or the LA Times.
There was a time when a citizen seeking to be informed could expect news and information from these sources. Now, much like similar content from NPR, PBS, and BBC, many citizens don’t want to take the time to try filter out editorials and diatribe from our old faithful, now less faithful, news sources. In this citizen’s case it is not laziness, nor putting one’s head in the sand like the story of an ostrich. Rather it is a case of believing online reading, i.e., clicking on a story, equals income for these dinosaurs. And this citizen wants to do his part in advancing their demise sooner rather than later.
What is frustrating is that they (whoever they are) ran many off. We did not leave on our own.
The politics cannot be denied, or ignored. Where did today’s media gain or assume media and political power? And why do so many fellow citizens still get outraged by the repeated obvious bias of much of the reporting? Why are they clicking on these stories that then outrage them, the readers? Do they think that the reading of the online stories that outrage themselves may be inadvertently helping the life support for these outrages?
Of course the corollary is why do so many media types and pundits think what they say or write is so important, or even knowledgeable? If they are getting paid for it, plain and simple, this most can understand. But in turn, why are those who read online stories by dubious sources who gain income by clicks, doing the clicking?
Perhaps there is a Paradigm shift going on. Perhaps Sun Tzu’s advice about knowing your enemy is balanced by today’s knowing your enemy helps online finance them? America is better than this as we don’t have political enemies, only political opponents. But we citizens still control this Country, and voting with our pocket books has a big influence in the news media, and entertainment, mostly Hollywood. An aggressive manager might force the issues, but most of us just want the news, or just want to be entertained without being embarrassed or uncomfortable with our kids and peers.
An astute builder of future business models will note this paradigm shift, and exploit it like a good American businessman or businesswoman should. In the interim, one can guess the present situation will continue. What a sad state of affairs for such a wonderful country. But there is much value in ignoring the main stream media types and present leaders compared with other Americans also stepping up to the plate. And certainly do click on them!
A future national leader will take sad to satisfied. America has always required leaders. Sadly, today’s business and political leaders in the news media and Hollywood and the presidential election are generally lacking, mostly in showing National Interest. And so many citizens no longer read the New York Times, or TIME Magazine, or Newsweek. Even media managers and media consultants are having a numbing effect on we citizens. These same citizens have better ways and people to naturally lead this most important country, and human experiment in success.
One could add in others like the Washington Post, or the Boston Globe, or the LA Times.
There was a time when a citizen seeking to be informed could expect news and information from these sources. Now, much like similar content from NPR, PBS, and BBC, many citizens don’t want to take the time to try filter out editorials and diatribe from our old faithful, now less faithful, news sources. In this citizen’s case it is not laziness, nor putting one’s head in the sand like the story of an ostrich. Rather it is a case of believing online reading, i.e., clicking on a story, equals income for these dinosaurs. And this citizen wants to do his part in advancing their demise sooner rather than later.
What is frustrating is that they (whoever they are) ran many off. We did not leave on our own.
The politics cannot be denied, or ignored. Where did today’s media gain or assume media and political power? And why do so many fellow citizens still get outraged by the repeated obvious bias of much of the reporting? Why are they clicking on these stories that then outrage them, the readers? Do they think that the reading of the online stories that outrage themselves may be inadvertently helping the life support for these outrages?
Of course the corollary is why do so many media types and pundits think what they say or write is so important, or even knowledgeable? If they are getting paid for it, plain and simple, this most can understand. But in turn, why are those who read online stories by dubious sources who gain income by clicks, doing the clicking?
Perhaps there is a Paradigm shift going on. Perhaps Sun Tzu’s advice about knowing your enemy is balanced by today’s knowing your enemy helps online finance them? America is better than this as we don’t have political enemies, only political opponents. But we citizens still control this Country, and voting with our pocket books has a big influence in the news media, and entertainment, mostly Hollywood. An aggressive manager might force the issues, but most of us just want the news, or just want to be entertained without being embarrassed or uncomfortable with our kids and peers.
An astute builder of future business models will note this paradigm shift, and exploit it like a good American businessman or businesswoman should. In the interim, one can guess the present situation will continue. What a sad state of affairs for such a wonderful country. But there is much value in ignoring the main stream media types and present leaders compared with other Americans also stepping up to the plate. And certainly do click on them!
A future national leader will take sad to satisfied. America has always required leaders. Sadly, today’s business and political leaders in the news media and Hollywood and the presidential election are generally lacking, mostly in showing National Interest. And so many citizens no longer read the New York Times, or TIME Magazine, or Newsweek. Even media managers and media consultants are having a numbing effect on we citizens. These same citizens have better ways and people to naturally lead this most important country, and human experiment in success.
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Hand wringers are not leaders. Their education usually works against them. Most also suffer from little experience in what they wring their hands about.
The old catch 22 used to be “but”. Now it is “concerns”. No evidence or historical experience is required to make the statement. And it gets reported and reverberated around the main stream media till some even believe concerns are now facts. These people are both the reverberaters and the media who buy it, and even some of the public. Even more interesting is the hand wringer persona and confidence which suggests their lack of education and experience is acceptable to the public in making their public concerns, public. Some of we public think hand wringer concerns are a public admission of ignorance, albeit without shame of embarrassment to them, though what is happening is both publically embarrassing and shameful. But also it is hard to shame such local people, since most are not local, but from more distant lands and political causes.
Hand wringers abound in the main stream media, mostly in TV reporting and the newspapers.
There are concerns about the President’s Iraq policy for example. Is he too idealistic or naïve to expect democracy in the Middle East. Well hand wringers suggested much the same about Japan’s ability to become a democracy during the occupation after WWII, though one never hears a peep now. I suspect most hand wringers today are just ignorant on this subject.
Hand wringers worry about human’s contribution to global warming as if worse case based on their lack of information or their Google searching should drive public policy, for the world. The old expression of never assume conspiracy, when sheer incompetence comes to mind, still applies.
Hand wringers presently have to focus on we in the west who are both intimidated by them legally, and often have much in common anyway. Handwringers avoid the third world because they will be killed. Until they the business men and legal types fix their problems, they appear to be a drag, not a solution. A little science and financing will go a long way, if they the businessmen and legal types do the work. Yes, facts and details, not concerns, will dictate good public policy in the future for the harvesting of the rain forests, for example.
So who will lead America in our future? Many present surveys suggest many don’t care much as long as things go on. Not too shabby. Some of us even think things will sort out as long as the hand wringers and their fellows see the way of the vote, and accept it.
The old catch 22 used to be “but”. Now it is “concerns”. No evidence or historical experience is required to make the statement. And it gets reported and reverberated around the main stream media till some even believe concerns are now facts. These people are both the reverberaters and the media who buy it, and even some of the public. Even more interesting is the hand wringer persona and confidence which suggests their lack of education and experience is acceptable to the public in making their public concerns, public. Some of we public think hand wringer concerns are a public admission of ignorance, albeit without shame of embarrassment to them, though what is happening is both publically embarrassing and shameful. But also it is hard to shame such local people, since most are not local, but from more distant lands and political causes.
Hand wringers abound in the main stream media, mostly in TV reporting and the newspapers.
There are concerns about the President’s Iraq policy for example. Is he too idealistic or naïve to expect democracy in the Middle East. Well hand wringers suggested much the same about Japan’s ability to become a democracy during the occupation after WWII, though one never hears a peep now. I suspect most hand wringers today are just ignorant on this subject.
Hand wringers worry about human’s contribution to global warming as if worse case based on their lack of information or their Google searching should drive public policy, for the world. The old expression of never assume conspiracy, when sheer incompetence comes to mind, still applies.
Hand wringers presently have to focus on we in the west who are both intimidated by them legally, and often have much in common anyway. Handwringers avoid the third world because they will be killed. Until they the business men and legal types fix their problems, they appear to be a drag, not a solution. A little science and financing will go a long way, if they the businessmen and legal types do the work. Yes, facts and details, not concerns, will dictate good public policy in the future for the harvesting of the rain forests, for example.
So who will lead America in our future? Many present surveys suggest many don’t care much as long as things go on. Not too shabby. Some of us even think things will sort out as long as the hand wringers and their fellows see the way of the vote, and accept it.
Hand wringers are not leaders. Their education usually works against them. Most also suffer from little experience in what they wring their hands about.
The old catch 22 used to be “but”. Now it is “concerns”. No evidence or historical experience is required to make the statement. And it gets reported and reverberated around the main stream media till some even believe concerns are now facts. These people are both the reverberaters and the media who buy it, and even some of the public. Even more interesting is the hand wringer persona and confidence which suggests their lack of education and experience is acceptable to the public in making their public concerns, public. Some of we public think hand wringer concerns are a public admission of ignorance, albeit without shame of embarrassment to them, though what is happening is both publically embarrassing and shameful. But also it is hard to shame such local people, since most are not local, but from more distant lands and political causes.
Hand wringers abound in the main stream media, mostly in TV reporting and the newspapers.
There are concerns about the President’s Iraq policy for example. Is he too idealistic or naïve to expect democracy in the Middle East. Well hand wringers suggested much the same about Japan’s ability to become a democracy during the occupation after WWII, though one never hears a peep now. I suspect most hand wringers today are just ignorant on this subject.
Hand wringers worry about human’s contribution to global warming as if worse case based on their lack of information or their Google searching should drive public policy, for the world. The old expression of never assume conspiracy, when sheer incompetence comes to mind, still applies.
Hand wringers presently have to focus on we in the west who are both intimidated by them legally, and often have much in common anyway. Handwringers avoid the third world because they will be killed. Until they the business men and legal types fix their problems in the east, they appear to be a drag, not a solution. A little science and financing will go a long way, if they the businessmen and legal types do the work. Yes, facts and details, not concerns, will dictate good public policy in the future for the harvesting of the rain forests, for example. Overseas Chinese pay attention.
So who will lead America in our future? Many present surveys suggest many don’t care much as long as things go on. Not too shabby. Some of us even think things will sort out as long as the hand wringers and their fellows see the way of the vote, and accept it.
The old catch 22 used to be “but”. Now it is “concerns”. No evidence or historical experience is required to make the statement. And it gets reported and reverberated around the main stream media till some even believe concerns are now facts. These people are both the reverberaters and the media who buy it, and even some of the public. Even more interesting is the hand wringer persona and confidence which suggests their lack of education and experience is acceptable to the public in making their public concerns, public. Some of we public think hand wringer concerns are a public admission of ignorance, albeit without shame of embarrassment to them, though what is happening is both publically embarrassing and shameful. But also it is hard to shame such local people, since most are not local, but from more distant lands and political causes.
Hand wringers abound in the main stream media, mostly in TV reporting and the newspapers.
There are concerns about the President’s Iraq policy for example. Is he too idealistic or naïve to expect democracy in the Middle East. Well hand wringers suggested much the same about Japan’s ability to become a democracy during the occupation after WWII, though one never hears a peep now. I suspect most hand wringers today are just ignorant on this subject.
Hand wringers worry about human’s contribution to global warming as if worse case based on their lack of information or their Google searching should drive public policy, for the world. The old expression of never assume conspiracy, when sheer incompetence comes to mind, still applies.
Hand wringers presently have to focus on we in the west who are both intimidated by them legally, and often have much in common anyway. Handwringers avoid the third world because they will be killed. Until they the business men and legal types fix their problems in the east, they appear to be a drag, not a solution. A little science and financing will go a long way, if they the businessmen and legal types do the work. Yes, facts and details, not concerns, will dictate good public policy in the future for the harvesting of the rain forests, for example. Overseas Chinese pay attention.
So who will lead America in our future? Many present surveys suggest many don’t care much as long as things go on. Not too shabby. Some of us even think things will sort out as long as the hand wringers and their fellows see the way of the vote, and accept it.
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Leadership is not affirmative action or formula advertising
And what America needs now, more than ever, is real leadership.
An ideal leader of our country in any of the three branches of the federal government is intelligent, educated, experienced, and capable of tough love. We seem to have few people like this these days, and we should be very concerned.
For years now, really decades, we have used what people are vice who people are as a screening qualification for our future leaders. While the intentions might have been good, Martin Luther King was correct in asserting it should always be about qualifications and character. Promoting double standards has hurt the people affected and our country. Young people selected to compete with more qualified peers will invariably get frustrated and bitter. This frustration is often amplified by soldiers following leaders, sick people seeking medical care, or citizens seeking a lawyer wondering about one’s qualifications. And this author taught at Atlanta University for three years, so the author thoroughly understands and believes in the “diamond in the rough” idea. But when the then Ambassador to Iraq has an Arabic name and Muslim religion, and now he is the US Ambassador to the UN, one wonders if the old “what you are qualification” is still alive and well. This may not be fair, but that is just the way it is for both friends and enemies.
Now I have read the upcoming Democratic Presidential nomination convention has mandated racial quotas down to the tenth of a percent. Just who are these people who decide the numbers, and the definition of race? And more recently, I read there will be a “secret” as in “off the record” meeting very shortly about sanctioning certain states for moving up their primary votes. Maybe these 30 deciders have our best national interests in mind, and maybe they don’t. I would like to be a fly on the wall, or even make this an “on the record” meeting. And one may worse case this suspicion that the Republicans are just as bad in using the idea of what people are vice who people are.
As a citizen who only watches TV programs from the Discovery channels, the History channels, and Fox News (for now), I notice many advertisements these days include original music from the 50’s and 60’s. The trend is obvious, though the cause is beyond me. It is obvious we Americans are formula, at least to TV advertisers trying to make a living. And they are using the music in their cause. My oldest son, born in 1973, believes there are two formula trends at play. First is that people like original music. Second is that it works, as in making a lot of money.
But successful advertising formula is not leadership. Hired polls and focus groups is not leadership. What America needs now, more than ever, is leaders who are intelligent, educated, management experienced, chauvinistic as in appreciate their country, capable of tough love…and willing to say it on the record and accept the voters will.
And what America needs now, more than ever, is real leadership.
An ideal leader of our country in any of the three branches of the federal government is intelligent, educated, experienced, and capable of tough love. We seem to have few people like this these days, and we should be very concerned.
For years now, really decades, we have used what people are vice who people are as a screening qualification for our future leaders. While the intentions might have been good, Martin Luther King was correct in asserting it should always be about qualifications and character. Promoting double standards has hurt the people affected and our country. Young people selected to compete with more qualified peers will invariably get frustrated and bitter. This frustration is often amplified by soldiers following leaders, sick people seeking medical care, or citizens seeking a lawyer wondering about one’s qualifications. And this author taught at Atlanta University for three years, so the author thoroughly understands and believes in the “diamond in the rough” idea. But when the then Ambassador to Iraq has an Arabic name and Muslim religion, and now he is the US Ambassador to the UN, one wonders if the old “what you are qualification” is still alive and well. This may not be fair, but that is just the way it is for both friends and enemies.
Now I have read the upcoming Democratic Presidential nomination convention has mandated racial quotas down to the tenth of a percent. Just who are these people who decide the numbers, and the definition of race? And more recently, I read there will be a “secret” as in “off the record” meeting very shortly about sanctioning certain states for moving up their primary votes. Maybe these 30 deciders have our best national interests in mind, and maybe they don’t. I would like to be a fly on the wall, or even make this an “on the record” meeting. And one may worse case this suspicion that the Republicans are just as bad in using the idea of what people are vice who people are.
As a citizen who only watches TV programs from the Discovery channels, the History channels, and Fox News (for now), I notice many advertisements these days include original music from the 50’s and 60’s. The trend is obvious, though the cause is beyond me. It is obvious we Americans are formula, at least to TV advertisers trying to make a living. And they are using the music in their cause. My oldest son, born in 1973, believes there are two formula trends at play. First is that people like original music. Second is that it works, as in making a lot of money.
But successful advertising formula is not leadership. Hired polls and focus groups is not leadership. What America needs now, more than ever, is leaders who are intelligent, educated, management experienced, chauvinistic as in appreciate their country, capable of tough love…and willing to say it on the record and accept the voters will.
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
Perverse thoughts on our American culture
Time provides some perspective on how so many standards have changed.
Americans cannot stand for pet suffering stories while we tolerate tens of thousands of humans being killed or maimed in auto accidents every year.
Prisons used to be to protect us from the criminals. Now millions die from murders and other crimes every year from criminals on the street. Why America defends criminal's individual rights over group rights is still amazing to this citizen.
Government at all levels used to be about providing services at a good price. Now they seem to be jobs programs with nice infrastructure and retirement benefits paid by the citizens.
Politicians used to focus on practical problem solving using compromise and civility. Now problems are ignored or avoided while the worse sort of discourteous behavior goes on. When was the last time you heard a question asked about social security solvency during a presidential debate?
Getting results used to matter. Now getting across one’s good intentions seems to matter more.
Budgets are for the real world. Borrowing is for governments, with future taxpayers having to pay the principal and interest.
The national sense used to be a lot about our future, and expectations for our children. Now it is about us, today.
Women used to run the world. Now since the birth control pill, the question about who runs the world is in doubt to this citizen.
Many fear unaccountable government child services and prosecutors when no one even heard of them in the not so distant past.
The idea about shame has been superceded by looser morals to the core of America. The out of wedlock birth rates have exploded, with the government helping pay for it. There are even TV ads promoting sexual relations with herpes, which can kill women from cervical cancer.
We used to understand when our nation was being attacked, physically or even culturally. Now so many citizens do not even understand all this, or care. The assumption that the life they were born to and grew up in will go on forever is culturally assumed. The idea of having to preserve all this is naïve to so many.
Television and home movie systems are morally corrosive to our culture. The old time alternatives of families having to play games or read to each other is lost to most of us. The value of this is beyond basic understanding to so many.
School curriculums always had shop and home economics as part of teaching the basics. Now many adults can’t cook, or even do basic home repair. And more than ever, parents don’t have these skills to teach their kids.
Governments outsource many services, often to very competent retired employees who know how to do their job. What happens when all these people die off?
The rule of law was always supreme. Our government, aka we the people, passed laws and enforced them for our benefit, and paid for it. Now we have sanctuary cities publicly refusing to enforce federal laws about illegal aliens, and yet the federal government still seems to be sending its federal funds to these revolters. Please let these leaders answer to their voters when the federal government cuts off their federal funds, or worse.
The citizen's pride in winning a ribbon in the local county fair has been often replaced by derision of the much of the community who think of such industrious persons as hopelessly naïve. Children pick up on this as the sponges they are.
Most Americans love their country. Most recognize a good deal when they see it. What the younger generations may not see is the change from a not so distant past. What the younger generations may lead is standards, and their willingness to work in their behalf. A lot of Americans are about to be superceded, politically speaking. Lord knows, one hopes what has happened to date does not take another revolution or civil war in America to correct.
Time provides some perspective on how so many standards have changed.
Americans cannot stand for pet suffering stories while we tolerate tens of thousands of humans being killed or maimed in auto accidents every year.
Prisons used to be to protect us from the criminals. Now millions die from murders and other crimes every year from criminals on the street. Why America defends criminal's individual rights over group rights is still amazing to this citizen.
Government at all levels used to be about providing services at a good price. Now they seem to be jobs programs with nice infrastructure and retirement benefits paid by the citizens.
Politicians used to focus on practical problem solving using compromise and civility. Now problems are ignored or avoided while the worse sort of discourteous behavior goes on. When was the last time you heard a question asked about social security solvency during a presidential debate?
Getting results used to matter. Now getting across one’s good intentions seems to matter more.
Budgets are for the real world. Borrowing is for governments, with future taxpayers having to pay the principal and interest.
The national sense used to be a lot about our future, and expectations for our children. Now it is about us, today.
Women used to run the world. Now since the birth control pill, the question about who runs the world is in doubt to this citizen.
Many fear unaccountable government child services and prosecutors when no one even heard of them in the not so distant past.
The idea about shame has been superceded by looser morals to the core of America. The out of wedlock birth rates have exploded, with the government helping pay for it. There are even TV ads promoting sexual relations with herpes, which can kill women from cervical cancer.
We used to understand when our nation was being attacked, physically or even culturally. Now so many citizens do not even understand all this, or care. The assumption that the life they were born to and grew up in will go on forever is culturally assumed. The idea of having to preserve all this is naïve to so many.
Television and home movie systems are morally corrosive to our culture. The old time alternatives of families having to play games or read to each other is lost to most of us. The value of this is beyond basic understanding to so many.
School curriculums always had shop and home economics as part of teaching the basics. Now many adults can’t cook, or even do basic home repair. And more than ever, parents don’t have these skills to teach their kids.
Governments outsource many services, often to very competent retired employees who know how to do their job. What happens when all these people die off?
The rule of law was always supreme. Our government, aka we the people, passed laws and enforced them for our benefit, and paid for it. Now we have sanctuary cities publicly refusing to enforce federal laws about illegal aliens, and yet the federal government still seems to be sending its federal funds to these revolters. Please let these leaders answer to their voters when the federal government cuts off their federal funds, or worse.
The citizen's pride in winning a ribbon in the local county fair has been often replaced by derision of the much of the community who think of such industrious persons as hopelessly naïve. Children pick up on this as the sponges they are.
Most Americans love their country. Most recognize a good deal when they see it. What the younger generations may not see is the change from a not so distant past. What the younger generations may lead is standards, and their willingness to work in their behalf. A lot of Americans are about to be superceded, politically speaking. Lord knows, one hopes what has happened to date does not take another revolution or civil war in America to correct.
Monday, August 20, 2007
Ignorance in education and experience is no excuse for a professional
Congress makes an officer and a gentleman or gentlewoman. Just who makes a hired human a media professional? … Or an educational professional?
It gets worse about education and experience. Most military and hunters try to recycle the brass casings to save money, and be environmentally responsible. Even trying to pull off a fake ambush in the Philippines during military training is often difficult because the locals are already giving away the ambush area in anticipation of recovering the brass from the blank rounds fired to make it seem real. Now that is experience. Lack of experience is some vice principal in a Catholic school (the last bastion of common sense one would think), kicking out a kid because he brought expended recycled brass casings to school in his backpack. Her logic was that if he had casings, he could have a gun. Now if that is not ignorance in education and experience, I am challenged to find a dumber example.
It seems to gets worse on having subject matter expertise. A recent cover of Time Magazine had a graphic with a Russian helicopter doing the pull out deed. The poor graphic artist using a symbol library of available icons, and the unprofessional reporter and producer, simply did not know how silly they looked to so many Americans that know better. And even today a Fox News TV article on Russian aviation reassertion of the old days of the bombers coming across the north pole used American video footage of the F-15 on and on and on (to make us think it was Russian planes). The ignorance and unprofessional display thereof was simply appalling to this person.
Just where is a common citizen to find the news? Not fake news, or news done in a hurry by those with no subject matter experience, just what is happening.
Those ambitious young people who want to sell a business plan that works in the media world might consider all this. They could make a lot of money when the reporter has experience. If fact, this idea also applies to educators of our young people. Teaching French in SC, or anywhere else, usually implies the teacher can speak French. In one case at least, the teacher has a teachers degree, but cannot speak a word of French, the job she was hired for.
Where’s the professionalism?
Congress makes an officer and a gentleman or gentlewoman. Just who makes a hired human a media professional? … Or an educational professional?
It gets worse about education and experience. Most military and hunters try to recycle the brass casings to save money, and be environmentally responsible. Even trying to pull off a fake ambush in the Philippines during military training is often difficult because the locals are already giving away the ambush area in anticipation of recovering the brass from the blank rounds fired to make it seem real. Now that is experience. Lack of experience is some vice principal in a Catholic school (the last bastion of common sense one would think), kicking out a kid because he brought expended recycled brass casings to school in his backpack. Her logic was that if he had casings, he could have a gun. Now if that is not ignorance in education and experience, I am challenged to find a dumber example.
It seems to gets worse on having subject matter expertise. A recent cover of Time Magazine had a graphic with a Russian helicopter doing the pull out deed. The poor graphic artist using a symbol library of available icons, and the unprofessional reporter and producer, simply did not know how silly they looked to so many Americans that know better. And even today a Fox News TV article on Russian aviation reassertion of the old days of the bombers coming across the north pole used American video footage of the F-15 on and on and on (to make us think it was Russian planes). The ignorance and unprofessional display thereof was simply appalling to this person.
Just where is a common citizen to find the news? Not fake news, or news done in a hurry by those with no subject matter experience, just what is happening.
Those ambitious young people who want to sell a business plan that works in the media world might consider all this. They could make a lot of money when the reporter has experience. If fact, this idea also applies to educators of our young people. Teaching French in SC, or anywhere else, usually implies the teacher can speak French. In one case at least, the teacher has a teachers degree, but cannot speak a word of French, the job she was hired for.
Where’s the professionalism?
The number of federal representatives to the House is not magic, nor Constitutionally dictated
It’s time for a numbers change, again.
The present number of representatives to the House is 435. That number was prescribed by a public law in 1911 passed by the Congress and signed by the President. In 1911 there were about 98 million of us Americans. Now this number is reportedly just over 300 million of us Americans. Back in 1911, there was still no federal income tax as the 16th Amendment beginning the income tax came a few years later. Even the women’s right to vote did not come until the 19th Amendment about 1920. And the size and responsibility of the federal government was less back in 1911, though Congressmen still had to provide constituent services. They still have to do this, but the numbers of constituents are many more.
A management consultant, or a common voter, might suggest we the voters need to spread the load on our poor congressmen and congresswomen. The Constitution requires the use of the census to apportion the number of representatives, but leaves the total number up to us. And it is a matter of public law as to what that number might be.
It’s time to change that number, again. And while we are at it, it is time for Congressional Term Limits for both the House and the Senate. We already have a Presidential Term Limits done by the 22nd Amendment ratified in 1951. The key point is to make the federal government more responsive to the voters in America. And the other key point is to make this federal government more manageable than the 1911 law allows.
The Electoral College is tied to all this idea, so the repercussions will get interesting.
Our Country has many problems. One of them is the present limit on the number of members to the House of Representatives. This voter cannot be the first to see this. This problem is hiding in plain sight.
It’s time for a numbers change, again.
The present number of representatives to the House is 435. That number was prescribed by a public law in 1911 passed by the Congress and signed by the President. In 1911 there were about 98 million of us Americans. Now this number is reportedly just over 300 million of us Americans. Back in 1911, there was still no federal income tax as the 16th Amendment beginning the income tax came a few years later. Even the women’s right to vote did not come until the 19th Amendment about 1920. And the size and responsibility of the federal government was less back in 1911, though Congressmen still had to provide constituent services. They still have to do this, but the numbers of constituents are many more.
A management consultant, or a common voter, might suggest we the voters need to spread the load on our poor congressmen and congresswomen. The Constitution requires the use of the census to apportion the number of representatives, but leaves the total number up to us. And it is a matter of public law as to what that number might be.
It’s time to change that number, again. And while we are at it, it is time for Congressional Term Limits for both the House and the Senate. We already have a Presidential Term Limits done by the 22nd Amendment ratified in 1951. The key point is to make the federal government more responsive to the voters in America. And the other key point is to make this federal government more manageable than the 1911 law allows.
The Electoral College is tied to all this idea, so the repercussions will get interesting.
Our Country has many problems. One of them is the present limit on the number of members to the House of Representatives. This voter cannot be the first to see this. This problem is hiding in plain sight.
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Is not it amazing about girls and boys
There are at least three divergent things (I would call them tangents) going on today, I think.
First is that the biological clock is ticking for girls who want to have babies.
Second is that most want to be married, and do the normal thing.
Third is the not normal thing, as in have a child out of wedlock and raise it on their own.
Is this the future of the world?
There are at least three divergent things (I would call them tangents) going on today, I think.
First is that the biological clock is ticking for girls who want to have babies.
Second is that most want to be married, and do the normal thing.
Third is the not normal thing, as in have a child out of wedlock and raise it on their own.
Is this the future of the world?
America’s future is leaders
A little homework on the facts, civility in discourse, and loyalty to the national interest will go a long way. Yet few seem willing to step up to the plate. After all it is much easier to be unruly and even use bad language to display one’s point of view, or frustration, or cynicism. Even worse, it appears much of our old time media names are attempting to influence our votes and our country to gain their (present owners and paymasters) political point of view. Most of these people will be in another job in ten years, and perhaps be bitter about their experience in being exploited by their educators and their hirers. They will get little sympathy when they went down another path than leadership.
The original idea of an investigative reporter is still alive and well. This type of person is in a hurry, but never in enough of a hurry to use internet searches like Google as their main source. They actually talk to people, and maybe even use the internet to help the process. These people are due respect as contributors to leaders who can listen, and learn.
There is at best about 16% of America, very well organized and funded by ways I wished I could learn, who try run our country through the Democratic Party. But they too are not leaders, but bitter complainers mostly. Politically, I could handle them, too, if only they would offer leadership. Then I might have a voting choice.
We Americans have choices, thank goodness. We should encourage candidates to step up to the plate. Those that are manipulators, not leaders, will be rejected at all levels, local, state, and federal. The key point is leaders who look out for our national interests will succeed. The whole industry of hired campaign mangers and their whole entourage will wash away with the vote. The country is the same, the voters sentiment is different, and in this the dinosaurs will die, and rot on the plains of America.
A little homework on the facts, civility in discourse, and loyalty to the national interest will go a long way. Yet few seem willing to step up to the plate. After all it is much easier to be unruly and even use bad language to display one’s point of view, or frustration, or cynicism. Even worse, it appears much of our old time media names are attempting to influence our votes and our country to gain their (present owners and paymasters) political point of view. Most of these people will be in another job in ten years, and perhaps be bitter about their experience in being exploited by their educators and their hirers. They will get little sympathy when they went down another path than leadership.
The original idea of an investigative reporter is still alive and well. This type of person is in a hurry, but never in enough of a hurry to use internet searches like Google as their main source. They actually talk to people, and maybe even use the internet to help the process. These people are due respect as contributors to leaders who can listen, and learn.
There is at best about 16% of America, very well organized and funded by ways I wished I could learn, who try run our country through the Democratic Party. But they too are not leaders, but bitter complainers mostly. Politically, I could handle them, too, if only they would offer leadership. Then I might have a voting choice.
We Americans have choices, thank goodness. We should encourage candidates to step up to the plate. Those that are manipulators, not leaders, will be rejected at all levels, local, state, and federal. The key point is leaders who look out for our national interests will succeed. The whole industry of hired campaign mangers and their whole entourage will wash away with the vote. The country is the same, the voters sentiment is different, and in this the dinosaurs will die, and rot on the plains of America.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)