Armed Teacher Games

13 Thursday Feb 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in Crime, Crisis Management, Education, Ethics, Government Regulation, Health, Higher Education, Lessons of Life, Opinion, parenting, Politics, Universities, Violence in the Workplace

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

2nd Amendment, active shooter, Active shooter scenarios, Arming Teachers, elementary school, gun laws, gun rights, K-12, law enforcement, National Rifle Association, NRA, school, school violence, War Games

SHALL WE PLAY A GAME?

ARMED TEACHER SCENARIOS

STUDENT DISCOVERY
First grader finds hiding place of gun when teacher isn’t looking and pretends to shoot friend not realizing he’s released the safety. Kills the student. WINNER: NONE

STUDENT WITH INTENT
Student learns where teacher keeps gun. One day student is despondent and decides to commit suicide and take others with him. Kills teacher, kills two students, kills self. WINNER: NONE

DESPONDENT TEACHER
Teacher despondent after a series of life-changing events. Takes out gun and shoots self in front of classroom. Teacher dead. WINNER: NONE

LOUD NOISE
Teacher responds to loud noise in hallway. See a person with a gun and shoots them. Other person is another teacher with a gun also investigating the loud noise. Teacher dead. WINNER: NONE

STUDENT WITH GUN
Teacher sees a student with a gun. Accesses gun and yells at student to drop weapon, student turns, teacher shoots the student. Student was taking prop fake gun for school play back to office to be secured. Student dead. WINNER: NONE

ACTIVE SHOOTER CONFRONTATION
Teacher hears popping in hallway. Accesses gun and opens door. Active shooter with assault weapon shoots teacher, enters open classroom door, shoots students who have no time to hide or escape. Teacher dead, 25 students dead. WINNER: NONE.

OK CORRAL SHOOTOUT
Teacher hears popping noise in hallway. Accesses gun as shooter enters classroom. Gun battle ensues resulting in Teacher, shooter, and several students killed. WINNER: NONE.

ACCIDENTAL DISCHARGE
Teacher hears popping noise in hallway. Accesses gun. Begins to quietly evacuate students to safety, but accidentally discharges gun and shoots one of the students. WINNER: NONE

ACCIDENTAL POLICE SHOOTING
Teacher hears popping noise in hallway. Evacuates students to safe area and returns classroom. Accesses gun. Identifies shooter. Kills shooter. Police enter, see a person with gun and orders the person to drop their gun. Person turns, police shoot and kill teacher. WINNER: NONE.

STRANGE GAME. IT SEEMS THE ONLY WAY TO WIN IS NOT TO PLAY.

Early 2014 PR Fails: Target and Christie

13 Monday Jan 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Government, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Respect, Social Media Relations

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

bridgegate, George Washington Bridge, Governor Chris Christie, GW bridge scandal, New Jersey, Nixon, retail, store, Target

Self-inflicted Wounds?

Only 13 days in 2014 and Target and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie share the spotlight for worst public image of the new year.

Target credit information theft just keeps getting worse. We learned last week that data was stolen for 70 million Target customers, not 40 million as belatedly reported earlier this month. Target is averaging over one sales-killing announcement a week so far this year and each new announcement makes the crisis worse. There are people who say Target will survive, but if someone were going to attempt to kill a leading corporate retail organization, this would be the way to do it.

It’s not like Target has no competition. Making customers worry of whether their credit data is safe when they shop is not a unique experience desired by any retail store. Add the but-wait-it-gets-worse element and sales are bound to sink.

Target will likely continue to minimize the crisis, which will only increase the distrust of the brand. The PR strategy they are following is going to dig them into a deeper grave.

Not to be outdone, Governor Chris Christie is dropping his own PR boob bombs. After claiming that a traffic tie up at the George Washington Bridge was part of a legitimate traffic study, he then was forced to confront emails that clearly indicated his top aides were involved in Nixon-era tactics aimed at some type of petty revenge act.

Governor Christie’s apology missed the mark

The issue is not whether or not Governor Christie knew that his senior staff were behaving like chimpanzees throwing their poop at people in the zoo, the issue is Christie is either 1) incompetent for surrounding himself with idiots, and/or, 2) incompetent for not knowing what was going on, or, 3) aware of everything and is lying about it.

The big PR factors in both crises are the lack of humility and accepting responsibility. Instead of minimizing the crisis, Target should have been ahead of the crisis. Not only should they be providing the most accurate and honest information, they should have been apologizing to their customers, assisting them, and offering to make things right for any customer who is affected by the loss of their credit data. This is an issue of long-term survivability, not revenue projections for the current quarter.

As for Governor Christie, that ship has sailed. He had a chance to accept responsibility and resign. His, the-buck-stops-here-but-I’m-blaming-everyone-else strategy only proved that he has dignity of Lance Armstrong. He could have admitted his mistakes, stepped back, and then worked to rebuild his reputation, but he instead he revealed how low he can go.

Public image is everything, and it does not suffer fools gladly.

Hey Stupid, Privacy is Dead and Your Face is the Reason

31 Tuesday Dec 2013

Posted by Paul Kiser in Communication, Crime, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Ethics, Generational, Government, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Lessons of Life, parenting, Photography, Public Relations, Relationships, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Technology

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Anthony Weiner, Biometrics, face, Facebook, facial recognition software, Facial recognition system, Ohio, on line, Privacy, Twitter

Facial recognition software is the final nail in Internet privacy

Go ahead, just try to protect your privacy. Give up Facebook. Scoff at Twitter. Swear you’re going to never sign on the computer again. It is all useless.

Stick a fork in privacy on the Internet. There no such thing as privacy on the Internet, nor is there privacy off the Internet.

A girl decides to check up on her boyfriend. She happens to be an attorney in Ohio and has access to the State’s facial recognition software. She uses it to snoop on her boyfriend and other people her friends were dating. This was in 2008. Five years ago and she was using (well, misusing) facial recognition software that was meant for finding criminals.

It doesn’t matter whether you take the picture or post it. It doesn’t even matter if you knew you were in the picture. New Years Eve? Good luck in keeping your face out of every picture that people around you take. If your face shows up in a posted picture, it can be found and matched.

Not only law enforcement is using facial recognition software. Casinos are using it. Some suggest that Disney is using it in their parks. Retailers are using it. Your significant other can buy it and download it today. If you want to see how deep the rabbit hole goes, watch this TED Talk on facial recognition software.

Anthony Weiner: Too bad it wasn’t his face that got him in trouble

There is no such thing as privacy. One more time. There is no such thing as privacy.

THE ANSWER
Behave. That’s it. Or at least know that if you don’t behave everyone will find out and it will be at the worst possible moment for you. People learn how to behave when they go out in public. The Internet is public. There is no difference.

10 Things To Decline From An Employer

09 Monday Dec 2013

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Employee Retention, Ethics, Health, Honor, Human Resources, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Pride, Privacy, Public Relations, Re-Imagine!, Relationships, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Technology, Tom Peters

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Affordable Care Act, benefits, company car, company cell phone, company email, Email, employment agreement, employment contract, free speech, Heath Benefits, Intellectual property, NDA, Non-compete, Pay for Performance, retirement benefits

No longer can anyone expect to build a lifelong career with one organization, nor is that considered healthy for the individual or the company. A person is now his or her own commodity. He or she must expect to build their own skills and reputation as an individual on the open market rather than as corporate employee number 8675309.

In this Brave New Working World a person should be prepared to say ‘no’ to antiquated elements of 20th Century employment, not only because they are inappropriate, but because they indicate that employer is unaware of their failure to be competitive in the 21st Century. Benefits and perks that were meant to tie a person to one organization no longer make sense in a world where ‘permanent employee’ has been replaced by ‘contract labor.’

Here are ten employment offers and requests that should be declined from an employer and cause you to re-evaluate your working relationship with a company:

No. 10 – Retirement Benefits
It should be obvious that any company offering retirement benefits either does not understand today’s working world or is trying to offer something that they know you will never receive. Better to have the money now and invest than pretend you’ll still be with the company when you retire.

The Company Email is always the company's to give or take away

The company giveth and taketh away access to your email

No. 9 – The Company Email Account
You many have to use the company email when corresponding with others in the company, but always ask yourself, “If the company decided to lay me off today and they ended my access to my email account, what information would I lose?” What about that email from the senior executive that ordered you to overcharge your customer? Every email sent to your company email account should be forwarded to a private account and blind copy any company emails you send to your private account. This protects you and the company from the unethical corporate manager.

No. 8 – The Company Car
When I was growing up my uncle worked for an oil tool business and he had a company car. I thought that was the coolest perk in the world. While it is a rare perk in today’s world, it should be declined in most situations. The problem with the full-time company car is that it becomes a liability if a better employment opportunity arises. Suddenly you’re faced with buying a new car in order to accept a better job.

The company cell phone comes with chains attached

No. 7 – The Company Cell Phone
Many people fail to realize what a company cell phone represents. It is a chain that ties the employee to the employer 24/7/365. A boss may hesitate to call a private cell phone, but have no problem calling the phone they are paying for at 3 AM. Many jobs require an employee to be accessible, but you are better off with your own phone than be indentured by a company cell phone.

No. 6 – Giving Your Employer Your Social Media Passwords
There are questions as to whether it is legal for an employer to demand an employee’s passwords to his or her Facebook, Twitter, and other Social Media passwords. The bottom line is that you do not want to work for a company that wants this level of control on your life. It will only go downhill from there.

No 5 – Restricting Free Speech (The NDA)
In an exercise with students in a graduate program, I purchased the fictional company they worked for and I was interviewing them to determine who to keep and who to let go. As part of this exercise I gave each of them an outrageous NDA contract (see Kco NDA) to sign. In almost every case, the Master’s program students signed it, most without question.

A company’s has a right to protect its reputation, but employers should be under the burden to gain the loyalty, trust, and respect of their employees so that they would not dream of talking smack about their workplace. If an employee is ready to bad mouth the source of their income then either the employer hired the wrong person, or the employer has failed to treat their employee as an important asset. In either case, it is the employer, not the employee who shoulders the burden of the failure.

No. 4 – Intellectual Property
If you have been consigned to produce something tangible for someone, then you have agreed to surrender it once it has been created and delivered; however, many companies are claiming ownership of any work done by an employee as their own intellectual property. Nothing could be more disrespectful to a human than to treat them as a machine that is only useful as a tree from which they pick and enjoy the fruit. A business that values their team would never have to be concerned about the issue of intellectual property because each team member’s work would be a source of pride and celebration. The important element in any organization is the person who creates the work, not the work itself.

Before you sign away your right to maintain ownership of your work you should ask if you want your give away your legacy of achievement to those who didn’t do the work?

The Affordable Care Act is emancipation for the worker

No. 3 – Health Benefits
America has millions of people who continue to work for an employer primarily because they need or want the health insurance offered by the company. As an employer do you want people to only be working for you because of the health benefit perk?

The biggest impact that the Affordable Care Act will have on America is to free people to work for people they want to work for, not those who have the critical health care benefit he or she needs.

No. 2 – Pay For Performance
When someone attempts to quantify a job or project they sacrifice common sense for greed. The need to meet the measured goals forces an employee to ignore important aspects of work that can’t be measured or quantified. Pay For Performance assumes the Ends always justifies the Means, which is rarely true in the business world, despite what greedy executives and investors think. Almost always customer satisfaction is at risk under Pay For Performance standards because a customers true satisfaction cannot be measured by questionnaires, surveys, nor sales. In every case the wise employee will figure out how to exploit the system and defeat the true purpose of the evaluation tool.

Pay For Performance systems are lose-lose scenarios for everyone and a company that relies on them does not understand how to truly motivate and reward its team; therefore, you should avoid the trap they are setting for you, your customers, and themselves.

No. 1 – The NCA
The non-compete agreement or NCA is the one indicator that proves only fools work for the employer, and there are plenty of fools out there. You shouldn’t be one of them.

An NCA basically eviscerates your career by not allowing you to continue working if you leave the current company. In today’s world that can be a death sentence. Your skills and experience are laid to waste by an NCA and you should never agree to it, nor should you consider working for someone who asks you to sign one.

Nevada Middle School Shooting Made Worse By Absent and Inept Public Relations Management

04 Wednesday Dec 2013

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Communication, Crime, Crisis Management, Ethics, Government, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Opinion, Print Media, Public Relations, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Traditional Media, Violence in the Workplace

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

crisis, Crisis Management, guns, Nevada, Reno, School shooting, Sparks, Sparks Middle School, Washoe County School District, WCSD

On October 21st a 12 year-old Nevada boy brought a gun to his school, killed a teacher, shot two other students, then killed himself. The shooting left families devastated in a continuing saga of gun-related school incidents. Sadly, the crisis was intensified and prolonged by the failure of the local authorities to use standard and best practices in managing public relations. At times it seemed that there was a vacuum in media management. At other times it seemed that government officials from China had been employed to handle community relations.

Sparks Middle School – A tragedy made worse

In any crisis situation there is panic followed by confusion, rumors, and fear. The first goal is to resolve the immediate crisis. In most situations this will involve turning over control of the facilities and situation to law enforcement and other first responders.

However, the second goal of an organization in a crisis is to reduce the confusion, rumors, and fears. This process must start as quickly as possible, and sometimes it must be done before the crisis is under control by first responders.

In the Nevada incident, parents throughout the Reno community¹ were aware of an active shooter on a local school campus within minutes of the 7:15 AM shooting incident. There were 20 to 30 eyewitnesses when the teenager shot a teacher, who then reportedly went into the school and killed himself . It was all over within a few minutes.

(¹The shooting occurred in Sparks, Nevada, a suburb of Reno.)

In the first hours following the shooting some rumors persisted that police were looking for the suspect; however, it is likely that law enforcement on the scene knew within ten to fifteen minutes that shooter was dead. With the suspect dead, the priorities of the first responders were to render assistance to the wounded, secure the students and school, secure the crime scene, and gather information.

Children became the official source of the shooting

Children became the official information source of the shooting

At least eight different sources were quoted in the first few hours after the shooting. This would indicate that the Washoe County School District and the various law enforcement agencies responding did not select a skilled spokesperson to manage the post-shooting situation. At 7:42 AM, less than 30 minutes after the shooting, the Reno Gazette Journal reported the following:

A shooting had occurred at Sparks Middle School
A police spokesperson had confirmed that the shooter was ‘neutralized’
Police were looking for the suspect
The school was on lockdown
The students had been evacuated

It shouldn’t be a surprise that the information coming from the crime scene in the first hour of the incident will be in conflict; however, the role of the primary spokesperson is to rapidly identify rumors and incorrect facts and address them. Two hours after the shooting a press conference was held. This was the opportunity for local authorities to reduce anxiety, confusion, and fear by detailing critical information. By answering as many of the basic questions (who, what, where, when, why, how) as possible the public could be reassured that despite the tragedy, authorities knew what happened and had the situation under control. After the press conference the Reno Gazette Journal reported:

“Authorities released few details about a shooting at about 7:15 a.m. at Sparks Middle School during a 9:15 a.m. press conference.”

If the families of the dead and wounded had not been notified then it would not have been appropriate to release the names; however, authorities wouldn’t even confirm whether teachers or students had been shot. Students began reporting what happened to the media and with no cooperation from local authorities, the families were contacted. That is the symptom of absent or inept media management.

Forcing Children To Be Spokespeople
Within minutes after the shooting word spread, not just within the local community, but around the world. Instantly parents, grandparents, relatives, and friends of school-age children began asking questions. What school? Was anyone killed? How many were shot? Who was killed or injured? Was it over? Why did it happen? Is my child/grandchild safe?

By withholding the details the local authorities did not withhold the story they just lost management of it. Without an official source for information the witnesses, in this case, mostly children, became the official spokesperson. To make the blunders of the first day worse, suburban police and city officials refused to release the name of the shooter for three days, citing that his name did not appear on any ‘report.’

The Public’s Right To Know Not the Correct Issue
Local media was incensed by the stonewalling of the authorities to release the name; however, this was more than an issue of the public’s Right to Know. The stated reason by authorities to withhold the shooter’s name was to protect the family, the failure to release this information put more focus on the shooter’s family to confirm or deny the rumors that were rampant within the community.

A skilled spokesperson would have understood this and worked to ensure that the information was appropriately released while also urging the media to respect the family’s need to grieve.

Who Owns Information?
In the 20th century mass communication came with a catch. Access to information could be controlled. The public knew what the government, public relations staff, editors, and news directors wanted us to know. That changed with the Internet and Social Media. Information is fluid and it will flow through any conduit it can find. Information desired by the public will find the quickest path and anyone who believes they can stop the flow of it is only diverting it through another source. A spokesperson can and should be the quickest path for facts and information because it will reduce the fear, confusion and rumors.

The mishandling of the crisis in Nevada should serve as a lesson as to why a skilled, experienced crisis manager and spokesperson should be a part of every organization. No tragedy should be made worse by inept local authorities.

Is It Time For A Two-Tiered School System?

12 Tuesday Mar 2013

Posted by Paul Kiser in Education, Ethics, Government, Management Practices, Opinion, parenting, Politics, Relationships, Respect, Taxes

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

elementary education, Parent Development, parent involvement in school, parents, Pay for Performance, schools, secondary education, teachers

There is a major problem in America’s educational system and that problem is obvious to anyone who spends time in the classroom. Consider this scenario:

Student X is one of the youngest in the class and started the year slightly behind (academically) her older classmates. Student X lives in a moderate, stable family environment with a modest income. The parents of Student X volunteer at the school and her Mom helps in the classroom once a week. Student X is expected to do her homework soon after coming home from school. One of the parents of Student X is available while she does her homework to answer her questions and assist her as needed, but the parent does not give her the answers. Her parents are in regular contact with her teachers and stay aware of her strengths and weakness. Student X receives constant encouragement to focus on learning.

Student Y lives in a two parent environment; however, one of the parents works 60 to 80 hours a week. Student Y is involved in a variety of non-school activities that take up several hours of after school time. One parent tends to be the mode of transportation from activity to activity, but doesn’t always wait for Student Y. Homework for Student Y is a ‘if we have time” priority, and Student Y’s parents have little contact with the school. Student Y’s parents are never sure what to expect on his report card and are often caught be surprise when there is an issue with a grade.

The absent parent in a child’s education cannot be replaced by all the computers in the world.

Which student do you think will do well on a Standardized Test? Which will student has a better chance to succeed?

The fact that is often overlooked when discussing America’s public schools is the role that parents play, or fail to play in their child’s education. This is not a ‘blame’ issue, but it is a reality that must be included when politicians discuss how they want to ‘fix’ our schools. Parent investment in their child’s education is vital for her or his success in learning. Parents who, for whatever reason, fail to be committed to support and promote learning at home risk destroying the commitment their child will have in the classroom.

So the question is whether or not we need a two-tiered school system based on the parent’s commitment(†) to their child’s education. I believe that most good teachers can tell which students have committed parents, and which do not, so dividing students into two groups should be easy to accomplish.

Several studies have identified the advantages a student with involved parents has over a student who does not.(¹)(²)(³) In addition, a lack of parent involvement may require additional resources from the school to take up the slack of the parent who is not invested. If a teacher has to spend extra time to help that student who didn’t do their homework and master the needed skill, then the rest of the students pay the price because they can’t move forward until Student Y catches up. Even a child who is academically behind is less of a burden on the school when their parent is actively invested in the school.

Dividing our schools based on parental involvement makes sense…on paper, but like all quick fixes there are problems created by the fix that negate it. Identifying students with absent parents avoids the real problem, which is making parents aware that their investment in education is vital for their child’s success.

A Parent’s Place in Education
Despite the need for parental involvement, there is a limit to a parent’s engagement in their child’s education. Unless a parent also has a degree in education, the teacher is the most qualified to take the lead in the classroom. Parents should see themselves as interns in the school.

Even in fundraising, the parent’s role should be subservient to the school and its staff. Parents who decide for the school what projects and programs should be funded risk interfering with the objectives established by those who have an understanding of the larger view.

This should not cause a parent to wait to be asked to become involved. School administrators and teachers focus should be on the students, not on directing parents. This requires that parents and the school create an environment of trust and respect that is facilitated by timely and effective communication.

Professional Development for Parents?
One problem that faces parents is that most of us are not trained in the skills of helping a person learn. In addition, parents may not understand the objectives of the teacher; therefore, they may not know how they can support the in-class work when the student is working at home.

Schools are financially strapped for resources, but if politicians really want to help our educational system, maybe they should consider how schools can pay for parent development seminars (and/or webinars) that will support the objectives of the teachers and the school. By improving the at-home learning environment politicians might actually take a big step in ‘fixing’ our public schools.

We may not need a two-tiered school system, but we certainly need to accept that the failure of a student in school may indicate the failure of a parent, not the teacher or the school.

†(I was reminded this week about the difference between someone who is involved and someone who is committed. If you’re eating a bacon and egg breakfast, the chicken was involved, but the pig was committed.)

Standardized Testing is Not the Solution in American Education

09 Saturday Mar 2013

Posted by Paul Kiser in College, Education, Ethics, Government, Higher Education, Opinion, parenting, Politics, Universities

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

Nevada, Nevada Schools, No Child Left Behind, NSHE, Pay for Performance, Reno, schools, standardized tests, student performance, teachers, Washoe County School District, WCSD

Most of the political discussions about America’s failing education system do two things. First, they blame someone, usually the teachers, and second, they seek simple-minded solutions that assume all children are developmentally equal and live in the same socioeconomic environment.

If education were only about what can be scored on a test, then we don’t need teachers, we need mind programmers

No Child Left Behind was based on the belief that a standard test would be the ultimate measure of a student’s success or failure. The assumption was that if student’s scores on a standardized test failed to achieve established goals then we could all blame the teachers and administrative staff, then punish them. The concept assumed that a student’s base level abilities, and parental support was irrelevant. No Child Left Behind was an idea that applied a corporate-like measurement system, which often fails in a business environment, and forced public schools to leave education behind in pursuit of goals that reduced students to do or die numbers.

The failure of No Child Left Behind is so spectacular that after a decade the program began, over two-thirds of the States are ranked at a “D” or “F” in the quality of education by StudentsFirst.org Report Card.

Standardized tests assume that every child is an X, but in reality they are A to Z

Standardized tests assume that every child is an X, but in reality they can be A to Z

One of the major failures of the program was the institutionalizing of testing standards that encouraged teachers to focus on teaching their students how to successfully take the tests, but not to understand the material. The program ultimately forced out many excellent teachers that rejected the absurdity of No Child Left Behind, which is ironic because the goal was to force out less effective teachers. The result has been that school after school has failed to produce the results desired leaving America with a generation of students who are even less prepared for adult life.

Nevada’s Washoe County School District (WCSD) is typical of many school districts across the United States. For the 2010-11 school year the standardized tests indicated that an average of 85% of the high school students (9th-12th grades) met or exceeded the established standards for reading, writing, and math. Those scores would indicate that 85% of the students are prepared to move on from high school.

However, of the 1,600 Washoe County School District graduates that attended Nevada state-run universities, almost half (48%) of them required remedial classes to bring them up to college entrance-level work. The standardized tests are designed to measure competency; however, even though the scores indicate the students are prepared, almost 1 out of 2 need to take classes to address educational deficiencies.

Some might say this just confirms the inadequacy of public schools; however, if that were true the standardized tests should reflect those failures and they do not. It is the inadequacy of the standardized test to measure educational performance or lack of performance.

Standardized tests can be an effective tool in education, but they are just one tool. If we truly want to improve the educational performance of America’s students we must stop holding a knife to the throat of teachers and schools and stop using simple-minded measurements of academic performance to determine whether they live or die. A teacher can’t be held accountable for a parent that doesn’t believe in homework, therefore causing the student to be behind the rest of her/his class. It’s time we began supporting the teachers who have years of training and experience in education, rather than applying failed business models that destroy public education.

Raging Employee: A Case Study For Today’s Business

26 Tuesday Feb 2013

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Communication, Crime, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Employee Retention, Ethics, Government, Human Resources, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Opinion, Politics, Public Relations, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Technology, Violence in the Workplace, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

denver post, Frank Sain, Franklin Sain, gun, gun magazine, gun violence, NRA, Public Image, rifles, Softec Solutions

Frank Sain’s Mug Shot

Last Tuesday (February 19,) police detectives visited Frank Sain at his office at SofTec Solutions in Englewood, Colorado. Sain was hired as the Chief Operating Officer for the technology company in the Fall of 2011.

As reported by the Denver Post, they questioned him about six emails he sent between February 13 and 15, in addition to voicemails left to Colorado State Representative Rhonda Fields. Representative Fields has proposed legislation to limit gun magazine capacities in Colorado. The emails and voicemails were said to be sexually and racially offensive and indicated he was enraged by the proposed legislation.

“Hopefully somebody Gifords both of your asses with a gun….”

per The Denver Post – In an email from Frank Sain to Representative Rhonda Fields

Two days after the police interviewed him (February 21) an unsigned letter was received by Representative Fields that threatened harm to both her and her daughter.

The next day Frank Sain was arrested and this past Monday the arrest was reported in the Denver Post. According to the Denver Post, Sain admits to the emails.

The situation is an important case study for business because it is the type of crisis that every business must be prepared for in today’s social media, politically charged world.

Company Public Image Issues

Frank Sain’s headshot before he was erased from the company’s website

The obvious issue is public relations. A rank-and-file employee who acts out in a public forum out can damage a company’s reputation, but to have a manager, and in this case, a company executive, who acts out creates an impression that the organization might have been involved, or at least, enabled the behavior of the person.

In addition, an organization’s website typically boasts about its executives and when one of them misbehaves it makes the company look incompetent. It is important for a company to not prejudge an accused employee; however, when the basic allegations are admitted to by the employee the organization must take quick action to divorce itself from the actions of the employee. In this situation, with the allegations reportedly admitted to by the employee, SofTec Solutions quickly responded by removing Frank Sain from their website within 24 hours of the Denver Post story.

One issue is whether or not the organization should speak out publicly regarding the employee. Many companies might choose to not create any more public exposure regarding the situation, but I feel that would be the wrong choice. Both the public and customers/clients of the company will have a negative impression of the company that will be left in everyone’s mind if not addressed. It is important that the company make it clear that the acts and opinions of their executive were not enabled, endorsed, nor condoned by the organization and some type of heartfelt statement should be made with apologies to the appropriate people.¹

SofTec Management Team webpages – Monday versus Tuesday

Human Resources Issues
Separating an employee is never easy. Separating an employee who has demonstrated rage and flaunts his gun ownership is even harder.

An organization cannot have an executive who makes derogatory sexual and racial statements and threatens to do violent harm to others. Of special concern is that in this situation the person seemed to escalate in his bad behavior after being questioned by law enforcement, signaling the potential of underlying, uncontrolled rage.

If the person can be reasoned with, it would be best to sit down with the employee and discuss the situation. Allowing the person to resign might be appropriate; however, in some cases an organization may have a duty to inform other potential employers of the circumstances of the separation. Making the employee someone else’s problem is not a smart move, especially if the company failed to warn the new employer of potential violent behavior.

The best practice in this situation might be to put the employee on paid leave for a period of time and require he seek counseling to address his behavior issues. There should be an understanding that separation with some type of severance package would occur upon compliance with the counseling requirement.

The organization should discuss the situation with legal counsel that is experienced in employee law as local, state and/or federal laws may dictate what an organization can, must, and can’t do in these types of circumstances. Engaging an expert in crisis management and/or violent employee situations should be part of separation planning.

In House Investigation
Under these types of circumstances an organization should conduct a thorough investigation of the employee’s co-workers, clients, etc. The purpose is to identify the scope of the issue. Did he confide in people who should have informed the company? Are there others who are sympathetic to him and might have behavior issues of their own? Does the company foster extreme political anger and if so, how should it be addressed? Did he act out among customers/clients and, if so, what is the impression they have of the company? Did he have an abusive email style with employees and/or customers.

There are many questions that must be answered if an organization hopes to move out of the crisis. Burying the incident may make everyone feel better, but it may turn out that the problem was just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. Training, counseling and other remedial efforts for all employees may be required to heal the damage caused by the executive who put the company into the crisis.

¹(UPDATE: Just before publishing this article, the Denver Post announced that SofTec Solutions had suspended Frank Sain and issued a strongly worded statement condemning his behavior.)

Pope Paul VII?

15 Friday Feb 2013

Posted by Paul Kiser in Ethics, Generational, Lessons of Life, Opinion, Pride, Relationships, Religion, Respect, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Catholic, Christian, Church Christianity, Pope, Roman Church

A Pope without white hair? Why not?

As I understand it there is a vacancy coming up in the papacy and I think I might be just the person they need right now. I realize I may not meet all (or any) of the applicant requirements, but you don’t win the lottery if you don’t buy a ticket, right?

Some may feel that I’m not qualified because I don’t believe in God; however, I could make an argument that based upon their actions, it would seem that some Popes didn’t believe in a God either. I’m not an atheist¹ nor do I have a problem with anyone who chooses to believe in a God. I just think that the accountability for good and evil should reside in the acts of a person, not attributed, nor blamed on a God or devil.

I used to be a Catholic and that should qualify me for the position. If not, perhaps the fact that I’ve also been a Protestant and a Seventh Day Adventist should show that I have a wide variety of experience as a Christian. As an Adventist I even studied the entire Bible, so I know what it actually says about Christianity.

But enough about my qualifications, let’s talk about what I can do for the Catholic Church.

Some might think that as Pope I would stray from the teachings of the Bible, but, in fact, I would place more emphasis on the Bible, especially the New Testament, since that is the part that is written by Christians, for Christians. Under my service as Pope, Catholics would be expected to abide by Romans 14: 10-13:

But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. For it is written:

“As I live, says the Lord,
Every knee shall bow to Me,
And every tongue shall confess to God.”

So then each of us shall give account of himself to God. Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother’s way.

Bible, New King James Version

That passage defines how a Christian is to behave and it needs no interpretation of a holy man. Bottom line, mind your own business. That God you allegedly believe in will decide what is a sin or not.

Another passage, Matthew 22: 21, further defines the limitations of a Christian:

Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s

Bible, King James Version

Both passages tell Christians that engaging in politics to declare the sins of another person is forbidden, and so shall it will be if I’m made Pope. Further, any Catholic who promotes the use civil laws and government policy to restrict, prohibit, restrict, or regulate the alleged ‘sin’ of another shall be excommunicated. If you believe in a God, then don’t try to be the God.

Another change will be to abolish marriage restrictions on priests. Not only will they be allowed to marry, it will be encouraged, and they will be encouraged to have families. There is no better way to understand the meaning of life than to be a parent of a child and a priest with a family can relate to his or her flock better than a priest without one.

If you caught that last reference to priests as “his or her” then you know I will allow women to be priests. Not only will women be allowed to be priests, but gay and lesbians will be allowed. Anyone who has the capacity to love another person is too valuable to not consider for Church leadership. Also, it’s time Catholics put some distance between us and the Baptists.

Finally, one of the other major changes I will make if selected as Pope will be to eliminate some of the rituals of the Church. If there is a God, why should we try to bore Him or Her with the same old, tired policies and procedures week after week?

I know these changes will cause many current Catholics to denounce their faith, but I’m confident we’ll be fine without them. The new Catholics we gain will be true Christians, and that seems more important to me.

So, who will be contacting me and what’s the next step in the application process?

NOTE: This article was originally titled “Pope Paul I.” After I published it I researched the names of the Popes and discovered there have been six Popes using the Pope Paul name, thus the change to Pope Paul VII.

¹Regarding the term ‘atheist,’ we don’t attach a name to everyone who doesn’t believe in something mythological. If you don’t believe in invisible gorillas does that mean I can call you an aprimatist?

The Dark Side of PR: Distraction and Deception or ‘Armstronging’ the Public

11 Monday Feb 2013

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Ethics, Management Practices, Opinion, Politics, Public Relations, Religion, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM)

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Armstronging, BP, deception, distraction, Lance Armstrong, National Rifle Association, NRA, PR, Public Image, Social Media, Tony Hayward

In this series regarding public relations (PR) tactics of ‘Managing the Message’ I’ve talked about how some organizations focus is centered on Reaction Avoidance (SEE: Why ‘Managing the Message’ Doesn’t) rather than public interaction. In a Social Media dominated world, this results in the organization always looking manipulative and weak.

In Part II (SEE: Public Relations Techniques That Kill Organizations) I discussed the use of Anti-listening techniques to avoid and limit public discussion of issues that an organization may not want to address. In this article we will discuss more sinister techniques used to by organizations to ‘manage the message.’

Managing the Message is the alpha and omega of the NRA

Managing the message inherently requires the belief that PR people have God-like powers over the public. Add an organizational executive team that already believes they are Gods and we have the perfect storm of ego and a lack of ethics that lead to the worst PR tactics in business. Under these circumstances we move from passive techniques to manage the message into an aggressive intent to distract and deceive.

There are many examples of aggressive attempts to manage the message and in almost every case there are people in key positions who see themselves as the maker of information and disinformation. These people believed that they have justification to take any step necessary to protect the public image of the organization and/or promote organizational goals, ethical or not. Distraction, withholding information, and deception are the rungs of the ladder that sink an organization into deeper and deeper into the dark side of PR.

Withholding Information
Withholding Information and/or blocking information is a tactic of an organization using aggressive and unethical PR tactics. One of the best examples of this is the National Rifle Association (NRA.) The NRA seems to only care about public opinion when the polls tend to support its position, but that doesn’t stop them from trying to manipulating public opinion.

In 1996, the NRA worked with Arkansas Representative Jay Dickey (R) to cut $2.6 million from the budget of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and added the wording the appropriations bill that restricted the CDC from any research that would “advocate or promote gun control.” $2.6 million is what the CDC had spent in the prior year on gun-related research. The 104th Republican-controlled Congress passed it into law and it has restricted the CDC from gun-related research since 1996. (¹)

The NRA worked with Kansas Representative Todd Tiahrt (R) in 2003, to forbid the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) from collecting statistics on gun injuries and deaths. In 2011, the NRA worked with Representative Denny Rehberg (R) of Montana to prevent the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from funding any research that contradicted or challenged pro-NRA positions. (²)(³)

BP: What Leak?
Another example of withholding information occurred in the summer of 2010 when the BP leased oil rig, Deepwater Horizon caught fire and exploded in the Gulf of Mexico.

BP public image destroyed once video revealed the PR deception

In the days after the complete loss of the rig, BP PR tactics included denial of an oil leak at the wellhead, acknowledging a small amount of oil leakage, and finally admitting larger and larger amounts of leaking oil that still underestimated the amount of actual oil spilled. At one point BP withhold live video of the oil spill at the wellhead.

BP’s public position was that until anyone could prove otherwise, they could deny any significant oil spill. BP’s ‘prove it’ stance forced public media to accept BP’s estimates until overwhelming evidence piled up against the company. Once it did, BP’s public image was in tatters. No one believed anything CEO Tony Hayward or BP said.

‘Armstronging’ the Public
Technically the act of withholding information falls into the category of deception and distraction, although an organization that is consciously attempting to deceive or distract the public is flirting with possible criminal and/or civil charges. While some organizations (or even some people) might be under the belief that their unethical acts will never be discovered, some organizations may simply be trying to delay or soften a negative issue by forcing the public to learn the details over a period of days, weeks, months, or years. Yet, many times the PR tactics used by an organization is simply a lack of executive ethics rather than a conscious choice.

I cannot tell a lie…well, yes I can,…piece-o-cake actually

The most recent high-profile example this is the Lance Armstrong fiasco. The world now knows that Lance Armstrong used illegal performance enhancing drugs and techniques during his reign as Bicycling King, but through denial and aggressive legal means he managed to make most people believe he was innocent. Now he admits he lied, but it is far enough past his glory days that it may not have the impact it would have at the time he was active in the sport. Still, who wants to be Lance Armstrong now? No one.

The problem with managing the message is that Social Media has stolen power away from the PR people. An organization’s public image consists of the support and enthusiasm of an elusive mass of connected people, who can smell manipulation and love to expose unethical acts of people with more money than sense. On the other hand, Social Media readily responds to respect and honesty, which is not familiar territory to some older business men. As we move deeper into the Social Media Age, the business world will see a new PR model that listens more, talks less, is more humble and less arrogant, loves interaction and rejects domination.

Public Relations Techniques That Kill Organizations

06 Wednesday Feb 2013

Posted by Paul Kiser in Branding, Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Generational, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Public Relations, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Technology, Traditional Media

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

anti-listening, Conservatives, Managing the message, Nancy Brinker, Planned Parenthood, PR, Race for the Cure, sim, sm, Susan G. Komen

In Part I, “Why ‘Managing the Message’ Doesn’t,” we discussed the dangers of trying to ‘manage the message’ in a Social Media world. Part II looks at the techniques used by organizations to manage the message and why they fail.

Organizations that adopt a manage the message policy for Public Relations (PR) assume that they are the controllers and manipulators of the public image of their organization, which demotes the public to the role of a mindless zombie. If that doesn’t sound stupid enough, let’s look at the methods that organizations use to manage the message.¹

[¹ I realize that I’ve used the words Manage the Message five times in the first two paragraphs; however, “insulting PR techniques” isn’t quite specific enough as there are so many of them. 😉 ]

Corporate PR: We manage the message by not listening

Anti-listening Techniques
The subtle use of anti-listening techniques is one strategy used by organizations who seek to manage the message. The concept is simple: an organization can’t be held accountable for issues that don’t exist. By not listening an organization can effectively deny existence of an issue because they can claim ignorance, therefore can deny accountability.

One example is the use of formalized procedures for communication from the stakeholders, including the public. An organization might ignore or restrict communication on their Facebook page, requiring complaints and comments to be made through a process that is more complex or requires greater risk to complainer.

EXAMPLE: From the Facebook page for a Parent/Teacher group of an Elementary School after parents discussed concerns about major changes in the school calendar:

“Please remember that this page is used for the PTC to share PTC sponsored fundraising events and activities. If anyone has comments/complaints about the school they need to be addressed with the administration.”

(From the School’s Marketing Director)

The strategy of denying open discussion of issues allows an organization to divide and conquer people who may object or have a strong reaction to negative events or significant changes. By restricting public comment on their website or Social Media formats such as Facebook, an organization can prevent all but the most committed people from voicing their opinion or concern. For those that do comment, the organization can hide dissent and concerns behind a veil that only they have access to, so the true scope of the issue is hidden from public.

The problem with this technique is that issues or concerns do not go away by ignoring or hiding them. Whether expressed or not the reaction exists and it impacts the public image of the organization. A divide and conquer strategy increases the reaction once people discover that others share their concerns. In the Social Media world, the truth will eventually come out through a disgruntled customer, employee, or other source. Once the full scope of the deception is exposed the organization will lose all credibility and once the organization loses credibility the public image is also lost.

In January of 2012, the Susan G. Komen Foundation was receiving massive condemnation for a politically charged decision to defund Planned Parenthood. Rather than accepting that the public voice was valid, CEO Nancy Brinker attempted to double down on their position by claiming a bogus conservative-initiated Congressional investigation was reason to deny the grant requests by Planned Parenthood. Her efforts to paint an obvious conservative-motivated action as justified left her and the organization looking like right-wing wackos who had no clue that the organization depended on the perceived goodwill of the public.

By the time they tried to back peddle and fix the problem it was too late. Race For the Cure events in 2012 lost as much as one-third of the participation from the previous year and many donors question the use of their money by the Foundation. The irony is that Nancy Brinker had founded the organization thirty years earlier in her sister’s memory and now the Susan G. Komen name is not so much a symbol of fighting breast cancer as it is a reminder of conservative attempts to use backdoor methods to inflict their religious beliefs on everyone else.

MONDAY: The Dark Side of PR: Distraction and Deception Or ‘Armstronging’ the Public. When ethics are not a consideration, an organization is headed into a downward spiral that will almost always end with a public image that can be fatal.

Why ‘Managing the Message’ Doesn’t

05 Tuesday Feb 2013

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Employee Retention, Ethics, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Opinion, Public Relations, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Technology, Traditional Media

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

BP, Cool Hand Luke, Managing the message, Mitt Romney, PR, Public Image, Race for the Cure, Susan G. Komen, Tony Hayward

“What we got here….is a failure…..to communicate” Captain, the Prison Warden in Cool Hand Luke

Captain (Strother Martin) in 1967 film, Cool Hand Luke knew how to manage the message

If you are a business professor teaching students the importance of ‘managing the message,’ or a Public Relations (PR) firm telling your client how to ‘manage the message,’ would you please stop. No, I mean stop right now. In fact, contact everyone you have taught or advised and tell them you were wrong then refund their money.

CEO Tony Hayward got his ‘life back,’ but BP is still in PR clean up mode in the United States

‘Managing the message’ cost Mitt Romney the Presidential election. It severely damaged Netflix in 2011. It cost a BP CEO his job. It took the Susan G. Komen Foundation from being a major player in non-profit foundations to one that has to hide its name in shame.

Why?

First, ‘managing the message’ doesn’t work. Second, it’s a cowardly way to approach public relations. Third, it’s stupid advice. Fourth, it will end up causing major problems up to and including the end of an organization.

‘Managing the message’ assumes a person has control over the message. That would be a stupid assumption in a world driven by Social Media. John F. Kennedy’s words should be amended:

You can fool all of the people some of the time….until Social Media picks it up and then you’re screwed.

PR is no longer about creating an image. That was true back in the day individuals had no voice and people were subjected to mass advertising in every thing they watched, heard, and read. That was yesterday. Today an organization’s image is created by everyone who comes into contact with the organization. Customers, especially angry ones have as much of a voice in an organization’s public image as the Vice President of Marketing. Today PR is about listening and being honest and real in everything you say and do. That is something that can’t be faked or managed.

Reaction Avoidance
Managing the message is mostly about reaction avoidance. The idea is that if an organization handles it correctly, any negative situation will be minimized. The technique acts like a dam that has a short-term benefit, but a long-term disaster. When a PR crisis occurs the first instinct is to pretend there is no major problem. That is the start of a PR death spiral that only leads to bigger and bigger denials until the organization appears to be run by fools. By then executives turn and blame the PR staff for not ‘managing the message’ better.

TOMORROW: Public Relations Techniques That Kill Organizations. The two common techniques that characterize an organization who is trying to manage the message and why they fail.

Why You Hate Facebook and Can’t Stand Twitter

04 Monday Feb 2013

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, Ethics, Generational, Information Technology, Internet, Lessons of Life, Pride, Public Relations, Relationships, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Technology

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Facebook, personality, Privacy, Privacy on the Internet, Twitter, work behavior

Social Media Violates the Dual Work/Home Personality

You hate Facebook and can’t stand Twitter. You are mystified as to why anyone would want to share their personal information on the Internet and you probably make fun of people who do. The surprise is that it’s not because you’re male or because you’re over 40. But you are.

The reason Social Media is such an annoyance to you is because it goes against everything you were taught as you grew up. Social Media exposes your private persona and violates the boundary between your professional and personal identities.

Self Identity Devoured By The Corporation
Industrialization in the 19th and 20th centuries changed reshaped the life of the American male. As employment opportunities switched from being primarily farmers and small business owners to employees of the factories and corporations, workers found that their on-the-job behavior had to conform to company expectations. Job advancement within the company structure depended on a bosses perception of the perceived professionalism of the employee and not who they were in real life. That transformed the American worker into an actor who performed by the company script while he was under the watchful eye of his employer.

This division of a person’s life between home and work created a dual personality in men. At home a man was relaxed, caring, and spontaneous, or ‘unprofessional.’ At work a man was controlled, self-conscious, and unemotional, or ‘professional.’ As corporations became bigger, the division between the home and work personas became deeper to the point that a man might not be recognizable to his co-workers if their paths crossed outside of the work day.

Enter Social Media
Social Media tools like Facebook and Twitter have no work/home boundaries. The idea that a man should have a two personas is laughable in a Google searchable world that exposes the smallest of lies. That cold and tough business man doesn’t look so tough or cold when he posts pictures of his family activities on Facebook and that strips a man of his power base. The fake professionalism at work that empowers him can’t compete with the real person revealed on-line. The more a man’s power is dependent on his ‘professional’ persona, the more likely he is to abhor Social Media.

However, men who are angry about the lack of privacy in Social Media are trying to wage a hopeless battle to protect the nurtured idea that they must maintain two separate personas. The problem is that humans were never meant to divide their lives. Who we are at home is who we should be at work and vice versa.

It is understandable why you hate Facebook and can’t stand Twitter. They expose your greatest vulnerability…the real you. Perhaps someday that won’t seem like a vulnerability to you. And perhaps someday you’ll understand that the real you is not your weakness, but your strength.

Perhaps.

Coming This Week

03 Sunday Feb 2013

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Communication, Crime, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Generational, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Privacy, Public Relations, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Facebook, PR, Social Media, Twitter, Upcoming

My apologies for those of you who received an email alert regarding the article titled: Why ‘Managing the Message’ Doesn’t. It will be published this week; however, due to an error on my part it was briefly available late on Friday.

Currently I have three articles that will be published this week. They are as follows:

Monday: Why You Hate Facebook and Can’t Stand Twitter
Tuesday: Why ‘Managing the Message’ Doesn’t
Wednesday: Bad Public Relations Techniques That Kill Organizations

These articles should be available by 6:30 AM PST on the day it is published. I am also working on an article regarding ‘Grievance Collectors’ that I hope to publish be the end of the week.

Thanks for reading!

Paul

6 Actions Needed To Protect America From Bad Gun Owners

14 Monday Jan 2013

Posted by Paul Kiser in Crime, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, Opinion, Politics

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

501(c)3, assault rifles, assault weapons, background checks, conceal and carry permits, CT, guns, high capacity magazines, liability, National Rifle Association, Newton, NRA, rifles, school safety, school violence, Secret Service, tax exempt, Vice President Joe Biden

12 of 26 faces lost on December 14, 2012

One month ago 26 people, of which 20 were children, were taken from us by a man with an assault rifle. The man was given the opportunity to access weapons by a gun owner who failed to understand the potential threat of keeping guns in the home, even though she was so concerned about her son that she was allegedly attempting to have him committed.

Asking for common sense in the ownership, availability and use of a gun is NOT a political agenda. Our pledge is “and liberty for ALL.” Not “liberty for me because I own a gun.” Liberty requires a citizen to act responsibly and most importantly respect all the other citizens of this country. Somehow many gun owners seem to have forgotten that part of being an American.

Fifty years ago I saw a bumper sticker that said, “When guns are outlawed, only OUTLAWS will have guns.” The National Rifle Association (NRA) and some wacko gun owners keep shoving this in the face of America. The problem is that it is not the ‘outlaws’ who are threatening our lives, but irresponsible gun owners. Easy access to guns, especially in urban environments, coupled with weapons that are dangerous for citizens to own is not protecting our liberty, but rather is increasing the likelihood of death and serious injury for all Americans.

In addition, the strong-arm tactics of the NRA is crippling our government from taking common sense actions that are desperately needed.

There are six steps that are necessary to keep Americans safe:

Ban on ownership of assault-type weapons and high-capacity magazines

Assault weapons are effective when used by a trained professional, not by citizens fantasizing glory

The need for renewing the ban of assault-type weapons and high-capacity magazines has been demonstrated over and over, with each violent event costing innocent lives.

Assault-type (automatic and semi-automatic) weapons give the shooter the ability to spray multiple bullets on a target in seconds. A person must train extensively with an assault-type weapon in order to know when and when not to shoot. Citizens do not have the expertise to use such weapons without endangering innocent people.

In addition, these weapons are often used on law enforcement personnel which means we are encouraging ‘outlaws,’ (aka; our neighbor with a gun and a grudge) by giving them the means to attack the very people who are actually supposed to protect the rest of us.

Strict limitations on conceal and carry permits

Conceal and Carry: a self-inflicted wound to America

Carrying a gun in public is extremely dangerous and most training is inadequate. Gun training organizations acknowledge this:

…”because concealed carry courses required for issue of a CC permit fail to give students the proper skills to safely carry a concealed weapon…”

ALASTAR TDS-C, NC Gun Training Website

Conceal and Carry means that a gun is easily accessible which means that a person might be tempted to use it before understanding the situation. Even under the best circumstances, firing a gun with other people in the area is risking the safety of innocent people.

In 2012, police in New York wounded nine innocent people when confronted by another man with a gun. Certainly a citizen carrying a gun with little or training is not a solution to street crime and in most situations would add to the confusion of crime by pulling out a gun even if it were only in self-defense.

In addition, gun training should be standardized and only licensed trainers should be allowed to teach gun safety. In at least one all day gun training program in Reno, Nevada, one of the instructors spent much of his time ranting about his dislike for President Obama and shared his conspiracy theories about what the current administration was planning to do to gun ownership. The only people making gun ownership a political agenda are gun owners.

Conceal and carry permits should all expire by June 30, 2013, and renewed only if extraordinary circumstances indicated that the citizen needed, and was qualified to use a gun in a public place. In those circumstances the person should be required to be recertified every six month with at least four hours of training in the use of firearms in public situations.

Secret Service Consulting and Training for Schools

Secret Service agents are experts in identifying threats

We do not need another TSA-like division of the federal government; however, the federal government does have unique qualifications in the area of observing situations for possible threats. Secret Service agents are experts in assessing and taking action to neutralize violent threats.

Acting as consultants and trainers, the Secret Service could create a division with a five to ten-year mandate to work with school district and school staff across the United States in assessing and identifying potential threats. They also could offer classes similar to train law enforcement and school security threat assessment techniques, similar to what the FBI offers to private business leaders and security personnel at Quantico, VA.

Background checks on 100% of gun sales/exchanges

This is a no-brainer. The problem is that a background check doesn’t address future mental breaks, or temporary emotional triggers that could lead to violence.

Financial liability to gun owner and gun sellers for guns used in criminal acts.

Most gun owners are responsible. Most. The threat is not from ‘outlaw’ as the NRA suggests, but from the irresponsible gun owner. We can take steps to attempt to prevent an innocent citizen from being harmed by the direct or indirect act of an irresponsible gun owner, but their must be a consequence in order to discourage the idea that a gun owner can wash his or her hands of a situation that they could have prevented. To do this we need to link the gun owner to the crime committed by the use of his or her gun.

A person should be responsible for any crime committed with their gun both during their ownership, and within 18 months after they sell, trade, give, or lose their gun. The exceptions would be as follows:

The gun is stolen even though the owner took due diligence in securing their gun.
The gun is donated to a recognized government law enforcement agency.

Financial liability should be no less that $100,000 per incident and have criminal penalties for repeat offenders.

NRA Tax Exempt Status

The NRA has held America hostage for decades and has been able to harass our elected officials into complacency, while at the same time being exempt from paying taxes. They have enjoyed preventing government action to protect our citizens as they steal from the citizens by not paying their fair share to support our citizen-run government. This is unacceptable.

As of December 14, 2012, the NRA should be declared by the IRS to by a for profit organization and all contributions be declared as taxable. In addition, all organizations involved in lobbying and/or contributing to politicians, or politically associated organizations on behalf of gun manufacturers, owners, enthusiasts, or gun-related activities should not be considered for 501(c)3 status, or any other tax exempt status.

This should only apply to gun oriented organizations attempting to influence politicians and/or legislation.

These six actions would address the key issues that threaten American citizens, while still allowing for responsible citizens to maintain their rights to own guns. It’s time common sense returned and trumped blind stupidity.

Why David Brooks Isn’t Qualified to Decide Who Can Be A Gun-Control Spokesperson

30 Sunday Dec 2012

Posted by Paul Kiser in Crime, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, Opinion, Politics, Recreation, Respect, Traditional Media, US History, Violence in the Workplace

≈ 6 Comments

Tags

CT, David Brooks, gun laws, guns, Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Meet the Press, New York City, Newtown, NRA, rural, urban

David Brook, New York Times columnist

New York Times columnist, political analyst, and all-around smart guy David Brooks rarely says anything that lacks intelligent thought, so when he makes a verbal blunder, as he did on December 16th on NBC’s Meet The Press group think session, it should be considered a national holiday for backwater bloggers like myself who make verbal blunders on a daily basis.

Two days after the murder of 26 people in Newtown, CT, David Brooks was making a point about the need for rural people to be included on the debate regarding the use of guns in our society. He said:

Brooks, defender of the innocent rural gun owner

“…it’s perceived as an attack on the lifestyle of rural people by urban people…”

Mr. Brooks then suggested that it was inappropriate for the Mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg, to be leading the debate. Brooks stated:

“…it’s counterproductive to have him as the spokesperson for the gun law movement.”

As someone who was raised in northwestern Colorado, where blaze orange is always the Fall color, and a gun is put in your hand before a driver’s license, I would strongly disagree with Mr. Brooks and I would dispute that he is the person to choose who can be the spokesperson for laws to restrict gun ownership.

While guns are nearly idols to be worshiped in rural communities, this is not a debate about freedom of religion. Guns tend to have life ending consequences and that consequence is often borne by the person who doesn’t own the gun. Rural people don’t understand the pressures and conflicts (e.g.; road rage, etc.) that occur in more urban environments and therefore they don’t have a place in the debate of an issue that crosses the rural/urban boundaries.

Rural people usually can’t understand why anyone would live in a city and often have built their perception of city living based on news stories of mass killings, drive-by shooting, and murder-suicides. Many rural people see city life as a daily battle ground where the unarmed are targets for the armed bands of criminals who roam the city streets. The fact that millions of people live untouched by violent crime in cities everyday is beyond the belief of people who think Fox News is ‘Fair and Balanced.’

Mayor Michael Bloomberg is exactly the right person to be the spokesperson for the appropriate use and limitations of gun ownership in America. As Mayor of one of the U.S.’s biggest urban areas, Bloomberg’s view of the dynamics of cities and those who live in them is unmatched by few in America.

Brooks remark is akin to saying that only cigarette smokers should have a voice in the control and use of cigarettes, even though they can kill non-smokers. We don’t need to prove guns kill non-gun owners. Guns kill everyone, regardless of his or her gun-ownership status.

Brooks might be correct that this is a rural versus urban issue, but it is the rural citizen that already has the gun in hand and that is the wrong solution in an urban environment. It’s time urban communities were allowed to address the threat that rural values have on our cities.

Who can or cannot be part of this debate should be decided by those who face the threat, not by those who have the gun and David Brooks is not the person to make that decision for us…

….even if he is the smartest person in the room.

Conservative Credibility Account is Bankrupt

05 Wednesday Dec 2012

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Communication, Ethics, Government, Honor, Internet, Opinion, Politics, Public Relations, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Taxes

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

fiscal cliff, John Boehner, President George W. Bush, tax hike, wealthy

To be relevant you have to be credible and conservatives have spent all their credibility:

Bush Logic: Trust me. I know what I’m doing

George W. Bush was going to force government to be smaller by taking revenue away via massive tax cuts. Then he made government even bigger and spent our country into debt.
Mitt Romney changed his position on issues on a weekly basis resulting in a trust deficit that he couldn’t overcome.
Oil companies and wealthy business men paid millions of dollars to finance conservative candidate’s political campaigns filled with deception and lies that were exposed within hours through Social Media.
Republicans vowed to obstruct President Obama efforts at all costs and blocked any legislation or appointments for two years, then tried to blame Democrats for not being able to ‘reach across the aisle.’
Republicans concept of smaller government and less regulation resulted in higher unemployment and unethical business practices that destroyed our economy.
Conservative Investigation: Celibate males testify about women’s contraception
Elected conservatives males demonstrate the absurdity of their positions on abortion and contraceptives exposing an underlying misogynistic attitude.
Conservative white state legislators in the South pass laws targeted at Latinos and minorities to discourage them from voting revealing a racist attitude.
Conservatives ironically insult minorities and Liberals as lazy, ‘takers’ who only seek handouts from the federal government while they seek to live in the United States of America without paying taxes for the privilege of living and working in this country.
Boehner Math: 7.5% = 50%

Now conservative House Representative John Boehner is pushing the deception that a tax hike on the wealthiest 2% will impact fifty percent of small businesses. The fact is that a tax hike on those who have over $200,000 of personal income ($250,000 for married filing jointly) will affect only 7.5% of small business owners.

What is shocking is that the small percentage of wealthy small business owners pay themselves $200,000 or more out of their business account for fifty percent of all small business revenue. Note that the money is going into their pocket, not reinvested into the business, nor used for hiring more people, but into their personal account. Boehner is trying to protect the interests of the greediest of small business people.

92.5 percent of small business owners will not be impacted by this tax hike, but Boehner continues to try to deceive America into the belief that he is protecting small business owners.

The Republicans have exhausted their credibility and still they continue to try to deceive rather than serve America. It’s hard to understand conservatives pursuit of deception as a political tool. If the last election demonstrated anything it was that the majority of America could not be bought or deceived. Social media quickly exposes lies and deceptions and yet Republicans continue to behave as if they live in an Orwellian 1984, and people will believe whatever they want them to believe.

A Liberal Response to Conservative Secessionists

19 Monday Nov 2012

Posted by Paul Kiser in Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, Honor, Internet, Opinion, Politics, Respect, Taxes, US History, Violence in the Workplace

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Secede, Succession, Sucessionists

Stars and Stripe Temporary? Their new flag all white with a red banner saying, “It’s All About Me”?

I think it is important that Liberals keep an open mind about conservatives that are bitter about the results of this month’s election. There are some conservatives who are so angry that they want to secede from the United States of America and that might upset some Liberals because it’s an affront to the dignity of America. Our country is based on the premise that after we vote we all agree to accept the results of free and unbiased elections and work together under the elected leadership.

It is not a bad thing to allow people to express their disappointment by peacefully creating a petition that is born out of anger. Liberals place the highest regard for the rights of ALL Americans, and even though it is reminiscent of a three-year-old’s temper tantrum, we should not discourage anyone from expressing their opinion, no matter how childish or immature.

I stand by the right of anyone to reject the United States of America, that land the built and maintains the Interstate Highway System, created and maintains our national parks, built hydroelectric dams, educated millions of young Americans, protects our ethical civil and business environments, and created the Internet. It is the right of every citizen to declare that they no longer want to be a citizen.

For those so inclined, the White House has a webpage where anyone can create a petition, like the petition to Nationalize the Twinkie Industry, or add their name, email address and zip code to those who want to express their hate for this country and for what it stands.

I must admit that I do have some concerns about the people who are so angry that they are ready to give up all that the United States of America has to offer in order to ‘go it alone.’ That smacks of a survivalist attitude of it’s-all-about-me by people who are ready with their guns to kill anyone who my be a real or imagined threat. It is from this group of angry people who, with a touch of mental illness, would be most likely to hurt or kill innocent people.

I wish there was a way we could collect their names, email addresses, and zip codes so that law enforcement could keep an eye on them before they express their hate for their fellow citizens through an act of violence. Oh wait, they gave that information when they signed the petition. For a group of people who eat government conspiracy theories for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, they might have thought this one through a little better.

The Petraeus Lesson: Use Your REAL Name

16 Friday Nov 2012

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Branding, Business, Communication, Ethics, Generational, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Lessons of Life, Pride, Privacy, Public Relations, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

David Pertraeus, Email, private life, Public Image, public life

David Petraeus knows about public image, but he believed an alias online was not public

Men my age have been taught the we should have two personalities. There is the ‘professional’ persona that we wear in our public/business life, then there’s the ‘real’ personality that we only show when we are off the stage. That worked when there was a clear division between public and private life. For most of my life I knew that the person I knew at work was not the same as the person who was in the backyard with a beer in his hand.

A baseball cap and polo shirt don’t mask the person, why would an email alias?

The Internet changed all that, but somehow older men didn’t get the memo. When we found out we could create an email account like ‘secretagent007’, ‘mysteryman’, ‘mrinvisible’, etc., we really believed we could say anything we want, do anything we wanted without anyone knowing who we really were. I admit, it is a seductive concept that our professional/public persona could remain unknown online, but the fact is that anything we say or do online is recorded in history and will always be attached to us.

The Petraeus Lesson is simply this: USE YOUR REAL NAME EVERY TIME EVERYWHERE. Don’t allow yourself to be sucked in that YOU are smarter than every one of the 7,079,446,910 people on Earth. Never, ever, ever log on, create an email, or register for a social media site using a false name. If you have an email that doesn’t use your real name then get rid of it and get another one. This is 2012, and you need to know that what you say and do online is public. Period.

I know we older, white males were raised to believe in two personas, but it is a myth that we need to get over. It’s not a privacy issue, it’s a ‘am-I-smart-or-am-I-stupid’ issue.

America Held Hostage: DAY 716

15 Thursday Nov 2012

Posted by Paul Kiser in Ethics, Generational, Government, Opinion, Politics, Taxes

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Dean Heller, federal debt, federal deficit, fiscal cliff, GOP, John Boehner, John McCain, Mitch McConnell, Republicans

John McCain still bitter about 2008?

Sure we’ll cooperate with the President….when he becomes a Republican

Republican Senator John McCain promised that a Susan Rice’s nomination for Secretary of State will be blocked. Republican Senator Mitch McConnell says that he has a mandate for Republicans to push America over the fiscal cliff. Republican Representative John Boehner says compromise with Democrats is now possible if President Obama gives up the tax increases favored by most Americans. At least we know that the wealthy, old, white men in Congress haven’t changed.

After Republicans had major wins in the House and Senate in 2010, 42 Republican Senators signed a pledge to gridlock Congress and defeat any attempt by President Obama to move the country forward. That was 716 days ago.

Senator Mitch McConnell: “Election, what election?”

After shocking losses in the Senate, losses in the House that defied the gerrymandering of State Republican legislatures, and Mitt Romney’s loss of the century for President, the GOP is determined to pretend the 2012 election did not happen. That means America can expect the Republicans in Congress to offer more of what they gave us in the last two years.

Perhaps Senator John McCain will once again suggest another corporate tax holiday so wealthy white men can buy private planes and yachts. Perhaps Senator Dean Heller will again attempt to pass a law that will prohibit millionaires from receiving Food Stamps. Perhaps Representative John Boehner will again suggest that the Department of Justice pay Republicans to uphold the Defense of Marriage Act. Whatever they do, we can expect that they will hold America hostage to make sure nothing works in Washington D.C.

What America Must Do: Step 5 – Restart a Federally Run Space Program

05 Monday Nov 2012

Posted by Paul Kiser in College, Crisis Management, Ethics, Government, Health, Higher Education, History, Information Technology, Opinion, Passionate People, Politics, Pride, Re-Imagine!, Religion, Science, Space, Taxes, Technology, Universities, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

NASA, power, Prosperity, self sustaining, sewer, Space, Space Program, Space X, technologies, water

USSR scared America into the space race and it led to our prosperity

Fifty years ago America was scared. The USSR had sent a man into space and he had orbited the Earth. The Soviet Union was also threatening to plant their ballistic missile weaponry in Cuba. The United States entry into the space race was out of a fear that if we didn’t respond quickly, it might be too late.

This dire situation caused a crisis-type response that defined who we are as a people. Ignoring profit or ROI (return on investment) we established our space program and became proficient at churning out new technologies. Almost overnight we had a new breed of people who literally became rocket scientists.

And then it happened. We discovered that space technology had terrestrial applications. That wasn’t the justification for it, but our space program suddenly pushed the United States of America into the role as the go-to nation for space technology applied to terrestrial application. For decades Americans and the world reaped the benefits of the new materials, equipment and knowledge that came from our effort to go beyond the safety and protection of Earth’s womb.

Young people became excited about the space program and suddenly universities had applicants knocking down their doors to become a scientist, mathematician, or engineer that would go on to shape tomorrow’s world. Space ignited learning and research at colleges that shook up their dusty libraries and ivy covered walls. Philosophy, religion, arts, economics, and literature were blindsided in the 1960’s and 70’s by new questions that challenged our old beliefs and standards.

In 2008, USA space competitiveness was dominant, but today it wanes

Meanwhile, in Russia, scientists were put under extreme pressure to be successful on an accelerated space program. Behaving more like a mega-corporation that pushed for immediate results, Russia’s government forced scientists to try to take major risks in a dangerous environment where failure meant loss of life. When the scientist did have a new breakthrough they became state secrets and the larger population did not benefit. For the Soviets, the space race showcased the failure of running a government like a business.

Fifty years later America can look around at our computers, cell phones, medical devices and almost everything we touch, consume, or use and know that the space program had a direct or indirect impact on its development.

Yet, today America is stagnant. We are desperately trying to be competitive in a global market that spends most of its time figuring out how to make things cheaper, but not better. We say we want young people to pursue careers as engineers and scientists, but there is no burning reason for a high school graduate to pursue those careers. Instead we have university Psychology programs that are filled to overflowing with students who are more inspired to collect a salary by listening to other people’s problems than in designing the transportation and living habitats for a colony on Mars.

The United States is desperate for water in the South and West, but everyday we waste it

For decades the western United States has been battling with a growing population and a dwindling fresh water supply. We also face aging community water and sewer systems that are in need of major updating and repairs. We face global climate change because the we have been filling the air with energy absorbing carbon from burning coal, gasoline and natural gas.

The concept of transporting power, water, and waste is based on 19th and 20th century engineering. Power has to be generated hundreds of miles away and then delivered to homes via power lines that can fail in a major storm. Expensive and overburdened water treatment plants transport fresh, clean water through miles of pipeline and is only used once and then it becomes waste. Purified water that would be the envy of many people in Africa and the Middle East is mindlessly sprayed on our lawns and used to flush our toilets.

In space water has to be recycled, air must be purified, and power must be generated efficiently on a micro scale. That means focusing on self-sustaining habitats built that will face extreme conditions. On Earth, these technologies will pave the way to a shift from macro water, sewer and power systems (power plants and water and sewage treatment facilities) to cost-effective micro systems that free families from relying on expensive, polluting, and wasteful systems that are unsustainable. Everything we need to solve America’s terrestrial problems can be found by solving the problems of extended human living in space. In addition, a renewed public space program will inspire High School graduates to pursue careers in engineering and science.

Space X Falcon 9 Engine Array – Redefining space technology

America needs to be pushed into using new technologies that break down the paradigms of the past. In the 1960’s we were pushed by the Soviets and the result was prosperity. Today we need to push ourselves, not out of fear, but out of pride and courage. I have nothing against Space X or any other private or commercial space program, but prosperity doesn’t happen out of the pursuit of profit. Prosperity happens when everyone sacrifices from the board room to the break room for the good of the United States.

Space X has made new breakthroughs in the bureaucracies and waste built up over five decades by NASA and its private contractors and they should be the model of a new public space program, but investors and ROI are not the reason America needs to take back the leadership in space exploration.

If the last 50 years have taught us anything it is that raising ships to the stars, we will raise all ships on Earth. It’s time to reclaim our space program.

Links to:

What America Must Do: Step 1 – Silence the Wackos in Politics
What America Must Do: Step 2 – An Extreme Makeover of Government at All Levels
What America Must Do: Step 3 – Restore Government Revenue and Fair Taxation
What America Must Do: Step 4 – Balanced Budget By 2015, Debt under 50% of GDP by 2020
What America Must Do: Step 6 – Reinvent Higher Education

What America Must Do: Step 4 – Balanced Budget By 2015, Debt under 50% of GDP by 2020

03 Saturday Nov 2012

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Ethics, Generational, Government, Health, Honor, Opinion, Politics, Respect, Taxes

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Alan Simpson, Erskine Bowles, fair taxation, federal budget, federal debt, federal deficit, government revenue, government spending, What America Must Do

The family budget is NOT like the Federal budget

Anyone who compares the federal budget to a family budget simply doesn’t understand economics.

A family budget is ruled by how much revenue the family makes, and/or by credit worthiness of the wage earners. Families operate under a micro economic system that is finite. Still, if a family buys their house they may exceed their annual Gross Family Income (GFI) by over 500% when they sign for a loan that will eventually cost them $300,000 or more.

The federal budget is a dynamic machine that powers not only federal spending, but it also impacts unemployment and the general health of America’s economy. The federal budget usually doesn’t exceed the Gross Domestic Product (GDP;) however, in times of economic crisis the Federal Debt has exceeded GDP (see chart) for short periods.

The US Federal Debt compared to US GDP

The Federal Debt is determined by revenue (federal taxes, fees, and repayments) and by expenses or spending. When more people are employed they pay more taxes on the earned income therefore the federal revenue increases and the Federal Debt falls. When the unemployment increases federal revenue decreases and Federal Debt increases because fewer people are paying taxes on earned income.

George W. Bush cut income taxes and drastically reduced federal revenue. He then increased federal spending and suddenly our Federal Debt began to balloon. In addition, federal entitlement programs like Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are approaching a point that we have more people receiving benefits than they are funded.

There are many ways to solve the Federal Debt over a period of time, but increased federal revenue (see: What America Must Do: Step 3) is necessary if we have any hope of maintaining the quality of life that we expect in the United States. Smaller government is not the answer, but will actually deepen our economic problems. A bigger government comes with its own problems.

Smaller government means smaller economy and higher unemployment in both the public and private sectors. Bigger government means a bigger economy and lower unemployment, but it also can drive up inflation. A balance between the two is needed, but for years we have downsized the government and that has killed America’s recovery from the 2007-09 Recession.

Since everyday increases the Federal Debt, conservatives and liberals must come to a solid compromise to balance the federal budget soon. A target date for a balanced budget by 2015, should be possible through bipartisan cooperation; however, conservative extremists have no intention of bipartisanship, which is why they must be removed from the discussion (see: What America Must Do – Step 1.)

The other challenge is to bring the Federal Debt down under 50% of GDP. That can be accomplished by addressing some of the looming problems of the federal entitlement programs; however, a ‘dump and run’ strategy, where the federal government divides the current money up and dumps the programs on the individual states is a stupid solution. Federal government programs tend to be very efficiently administered. Dumping the federal administration of these programs in order to create 50 new State bureaucracies is a sure way to put most Americans in desperate poverty as State programs fail under the weight of the cost or States simply refuse to maintain the programs.

Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson. Two of the smartest people in the room when it comes to solving the Federal Debt issue

With relative minor adjustments federally managed entitlement programs can be maintained far into the future, and if conservatives and liberals build on work done by the Bowles-Simpson Commission the Federal Debt can be reduced below 50% by 2020.

If there is one issue that will safeguard the future of our children, it is the bipartisan work to resolve the Federal Debt.

Links to:

What America Must Do: Step 1 – Silence the Wackos in Politics
What America Must Do: Step 2 – An Extreme Makeover of Government at All Levels
What America Must Do: Step 3 – Restore Government Revenue and Fair Taxation
What America Must Do: Step 5 – Restart a Federally Run Space Program
What America Must Do: Step 6 – Reinvent Higher Education

What America Must Do: Step 3 – Restore Government Revenue and Fair Taxation

03 Saturday Nov 2012

Posted by Paul Kiser in Ethics, Government, Opinion, Politics, Taxes

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

David Koch, paying taxes, political ads, President George W. Bush, Sheldon Adelson, tax cuts

Image credit Jim Young / Reuters thanks to Salon.com

Bush: “Sure I screwed America, so sue me”

George W. Bush’s intentions are now clear. He intended to starve government by cutting taxes. He thought that by taking away government revenue, it would be forced to downsize. He then turned around and began spending money by increasing the size of the federal government (TSA, Homeland Security, etc.) and started two wars. The Federal Debt crisis was the only possible result of Bush’s actions.

We need to restore the revenue that Bush took away, which means higher taxes, but anyone who makes $60,000 per year or less knows that most of their income is needed for the basic necessities of life that allow them to contribute to society. Money for shelter, transportation, food, utilities, etc. are absolutely necessary. To increase the tax burden on the poorest 50% of American is not only unfair, it’s unproductive because it means cutting spending (which hurts the economy) of hundreds of millions of people in order to divert precious family income to pay higher taxes.

At the same time Bush made the wealthy, wealthier. Sheldon Adelson can spend $100 million dollars on funding negative attack ads. David Koch and Big Oil can contribute $500 million dollars to influence voters and millions more to deny the reality of global warming. Their spending is an insult to our political system. Rather than wasting on annoying political ads that tear apart our country it should be given to the local, state, and federal government to promote our society. If Sheldon Adelson and David Koch are taxed a few million more dollars, maybe they won’t be spending so much money on politics. They’ve demonstrated they have money to burn, so it should be taxed.

Higher taxes on those who are wasting money is not only fair, but it restores balance in a country where ALL are born EQUAL.

Links to:

What America Must Do: Step 1 – Silence the Wackos in Politics
What America Must Do: Step 2 – An Extreme Makeover of Government at All Levels
What America Must Do: Step 4 – Balanced Budget By 2015, Debt under 50% of GDP by 2020
What America Must Do: Step 5 – Restart a Federally Run Space Program
What America Must Do: Step 6 – Reinvent Higher Education

What America Must Do: Step 2 – An Extreme Makeover of Government at All Levels

02 Friday Nov 2012

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Communication, Customer Service, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, Higher Education, Honor, Human Resources, Management Practices, Opinion, Politics, Public Relations, Re-Imagine!, Respect, Taxes, Technology, Universities

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Extreme government makeover, government workers, job descriptions, Organizational Charts, policies and procedures

Over a period of years any organization tends to end up with outdated job descriptions, ineffective departments, and outmoded missions. Five percent of the people cause 95% of all policies and procedures to be written. As common sense is replaced by policies written to address the five percent, an organization fails to serve the 95%.

Sometimes organizational charts are meant to confuse, but governments should be clear and concise

Administrative assistants in most organizations tend to accumulate more and more power over time as they learn the tricks to cutting through the bureaucracy and working around the budget. Learning how to play the ‘game’ is the first step in becoming a corrupt organization.

Because business is established on a motive of basic greed, most businesses fall victim to corruption within a few decades and then fail. Governments established with the blessing of the citizens and motivated by creating a fair playing field for all tend to avoid massive corruption, but fall victim to small-scale corruption as individuals give in to their base human nature. Unlike business, good governments tend last for centuries; however, that doesn’t mean they don’t need to be restructured.

Government workers are the heart of America’s employment

In the United States, governments (federal, state, and local) have performed honorably, but it is time to do an extreme makeover. This means taking all policies and procedures, organizational charts, and job descriptions to the shredder. New ones will have to be written, but they must not be written just to address the five percent causing problems.

This may require the elimination of Human Resource (HR) departments. HR departments tend to be builders of bureaucratic systems and they are often locked into paradigms which dictate that nothing can exist outside of a written policy or job description.

This Extreme Makeover of government should not be done to ‘reduce’ government. The motive should be to create a government structure that answers the needs of ALL the citizens and maintains a fair and ethical environment for business. The idea that we can eliminate or privatize government is an unrealistic, unethical, and expensive mistake. A federal, state, or local government is absolutely necessary to protect all the rights of its citizens.

Links to:

What America Must Do: Step 1 – Silence the Wackos in Politics
What America Must Do: Step 3 – Restore Government Revenue and Fair Taxation
What America Must Do: Step 4 – Balanced Budget By 2015, Debt under 50% of GDP by 2020
What America Must Do: Step 5 – Restart a Federally Run Space Program
What America Must Do: Step 6 – Reinvent Higher Education

What America Must Do: Step 1 – Silence the Wackos in Politics

02 Friday Nov 2012

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Ethics, Government, Honor, Opinion, Politics, Relationships, Respect

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

America, GOP, Republican, Richard Mourdock, right-wing extremists, United States of America, Willard Mitt Romney

America is no place for rule by stupid people

Conservative ideals are meant to balance liberal ideals. It is the ying for the yang. When conservative and liberal positions are debated the correct course for the country is usually the result. Unfortunately, people like Karl Rove, Sheldon Adelson, Rupert Murdoch, and David Koch want to kill liberal contributions in politics so that only conservatives determine our country’s path. These people have used their massive financial and commercial resources and orchestrated an elaborate slander campaign of liberals by empowering the most extreme and gullible citizens with a lynch mob mentality. The right-wing wacko takeover of the Republican party has destroyed the rational conservatives in politics and crippled our country.

Richard Mourdock and extremist conservatives want 100% of America run by the stupidest 30%

Before Representative Richard Mourdock of Indiana demonstrated his stupidity about God and rape he made it clear that Republicans should rule America without listening to anyone else’s point of view. He said:

“…bipartisanship ought to consist of Democrats coming to the Republican point of view…”

That is what right-wing extremist call “reaching across the aisle.” Mourdock is representative of the radical conservatives that believe 47% or more of Americans should be silenced and slaves to conservative rule. America cannot move forward with these type of people in political office.

Rational conservatives must reassert themselves and take back the Republican party. As reasonable, thinking people reclaim mainstream conservatism, the wackos will fade back under the rocks where they belong. Already people are distancing themselves from Tea Party affiliation, a trend that will continue if honorable conservatives will step forward and kill off the weeds of extremism that has taken over their garden.

Liberals should also be wary of extremist in their garden. America fails when we allow the stupidest people to speak for us, regardless of ideology.

Links to:

What America Must Do: Step 2 – An Extreme Makeover of Government at All Levels
What America Must Do: Step 3 – Restore Government Revenue and Fair Taxation
What America Must Do: Step 4 – Balanced Budget By 2015, Debt under 50% of GDP by 2020
What America Must Do: Step 5 – Restart a Federally Run Space Program
What America Must Do: Step 6 – Reinvent Higher Education

3rd From Sol

~ Learn from before. Live now. Look ahead.

Category Archives: Ethics

Armed Teacher Games

Is It Time For A Two-Tiered School System?

Standardized Testing is Not the Solution in American Education

Pope Paul VII?

6 Actions Needed To Protect America From Bad Gun Owners

Why David Brooks Isn’t Qualified to Decide Who Can Be A Gun-Control Spokesperson

A Liberal Response to Conservative Secessionists

America Held Hostage: DAY 716

What America Must Do: Step 5 – Restart a Federally Run Space Program

What America Must Do: Step 4 – Balanced Budget By 2015, Debt under 50% of GDP by 2020

What America Must Do: Step 3 – Restore Government Revenue and Fair Taxation

What America Must Do: Step 2 – An Extreme Makeover of Government at All Levels

What America Must Do: Step 1 – Silence the Wackos in Politics