Religious Liberty Laws Violate The Bible

03 Friday Apr 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Branding, Business, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, Management Practices, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Religion, Respect

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Arkansas, Bible, Do Not Judge, Indiana, New Testament, Paul, Religious Liberty laws, Romans 14

Dave Granlund Cartoon: Liberty for who?

The irony of conservatives effort to allegedly ‘preserve’ religious liberty is that they are actually inflicting one person’s religion on others through their business activities. The concept that other people should be forced to accept one person’s bias is discussed in the Bible, and conservatives are taking a position opposite of what is taught in the New Testament.

Romans 14 nails Christians to the cross of behavior. Nowhere in the New Testament is the definition of what it means to be a Christian better explained than in this single chapter. Paul, in his letter to the Romans explains to Christians:

You, then, why do you judge your brother or sister? Or why do you treat them with contempt? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat. It is written: “ ‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord, ‘every knee will bow before me; every tongue will acknowledge God.’ ” So then, each of us will give an account of ourselves to God. Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in the way of a brother or sister.

Romans 14: 10-13
New International Version¹

Both before and after this passage Paul offers examples of what he means by ‘passing judgement.’ The examples make it clear that the issue is not about what issues a Christian can condemn or protest regarding someone else’s choices, but that no Christian has the authority to judge another person.

The Religious Liberty laws passed in Indiana and other states emphasize the ‘right’ of a person to impose his or her religious beliefs on others who do not share those beliefs. The assumption is that a person can judge someone else’s personal choices, judge them as sinners, then refuse that person access to their products or services. This is in violation of the teachings of how a Christian is obligated to behave.

Applying the full meaning of Romans 14 to the situation, a Christian business person should not only accept another person’s lifestyle choices, and not judge them, but they should do everything possible to accommodate that person and their choices. Paul emphasizes to the Romans that a Christians obligation is to make peace, not conflict:

Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification.

Romans 14: 19
New International Version

The Religious Liberty laws are actually anti-Christian laws.

¹(KING JAMES VERSION – Romans 14:10-13)
But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God. Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling block or an occasion to fall in his brother’s way.

Common Core: Are You A Good Switch Or A Bad Switch? Part III

25 Wednesday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, College, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Higher Education, History, Internet, parenting, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Science, Taxes, Technology, Universities, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Common Core, Conservatives, conspiracy, funding, math, parent protests, reading, Republicans, school districts, school funding, teachers, Teaching, writing

PART III: An Answer to the Question: Good? or Bad?

Implementation of Common Core

THE VERDICT
In the past year significant political forces have targeted Common Core. The protests have been at near hysterical levels in many communities around the country. The complaints about Common Core are as follows:

Standards create a factory-like environment that attempt to put all students in one ‘box.’
Teachers focusing on test scores, not educational achievement
Parents don’t understand math methods
United States history under Common Core is un-American because it includes both positive and negative aspects of the history of our country
A belief that parents should define school curriculum, not the school, district, state, or federal government
A belief that President Obama is behind the implementation of Common Core and other conservative conspiracy theories

Many of the issues have been generated by conservative voices after a push by Republicans during the past election cycle to ignite anger and votes against public education. Almost all of the complaints would have occurred from any attempt to improve and refine American educational techniques, especially when those improvements involve standardization for all American schools.

If you believe that setting minimum standards in reading, writing, and math is bad, then Common Core is bad. If you believe that children in your community should graduate with similar skills to other students around the country, then Common Core is good. If you believe that a high school degree should be the end of a person’s education, then Common Core is bad. If you believe that every student should receive an education that would prepare them for college, then Common Core is good.

THE REAL PROBLEM
Despite the politicizing of Common Core, there is a real issue in implementing any change in education. Funding.

Any business that seeks to upgrade or improve their methods knows that there is a real cost to any change. Yet, even smart business people seem to forget that to improve our educational system requires a major funding commitment. It takes money to research and establish new programs. It takes money to train school districts, principals, and teachers. It takes money to create new teaching materials, and it takes money to educate parents.

What Common Core is missing is the funding needed to make it a success. Until we can accept the fact that a commitment to education requires a commitment to funding, then we will continue using 20th educational techniques in a 21st century world. America’s efforts to update our educational system will cost money and Common Core is a victim of a society that has abandon quality education because it costs too much.

THE HYSTERIA OF THE LOUDEST VOICES
Unfortunately, Common Core lost a lot of support in the past twelve months. Much of that was due to the political rhetoric during last year’s campaigns, but some teachers are also pulling back support. This is not surprising. As parents become more vocal in opposition, few teachers are willing to oppose parent sentiment even if they are wrong.

Common Core is not a perfect educational system, but it does attempt to better prepare America’s children for a higher level of achievement. Most of the real issues can be resolved with better funding. Just as a school built in the 1950’s is no longer relevant for 2015, education methods of the pre-information era are not relevant today. Our population is continuing to increase and the skills our children must have to thrive as adults are going to advance. Education is going to be expensive, but if we don’t pay now, we will pay more later.

PREVIOUSLY: Part I: A Primer in American Education
Part II: What is Common Core?

Common Core: Are You A Good Switch Or A Bad Switch? Part II

25 Wednesday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, College, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Higher Education, History, parenting, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Taxes, Technology, Universities, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Asian learning methods, Common Core, K-12, learning, math, mathematics, New Math, No Child Left Behind, parent involvement in school, parent reactions, students

PART TWO: What is Common Core?

Cartoon in Chicago Tribune about parent reaction to Common Core

The Third Generation of Standardized Education
The basic premise of the George W. Bush (43rd President) administration’s No Child Left Behind (NCLB) mandate was that reading, writing, and math are fundamental to all learning. This is a sound concept; however, these basic skills cannot supplant other subjects traditionally taught in K-12 schools, nor can they be isolated from those subjects. Our society, both business and personal interactions, require an adequate understanding of a wide variety skills and knowledge that exceed the basic skills of reading, writing, and math.

Common Core is an attempt to refine the concept of NCLB by creating standards for all schools that focus on reading, writing, and math, but it also folds these skills into other subjects that impact personal success in the 21st century. Common Core emphasizes teaching methods and outcomes, but leaves it to the State, school district, and school on how to incorporate the program into the curriculum.

Why Some Parents Dislike Common Core Math
Some of the methods adopted by Common Core have angered parents and politicians. In particular, the approach to teaching math. The math issue centers on bewildered parents who don’t understand the revised math teaching methods and why equations seem to be more complicated than when they attended school. The assumption by parents is that whatever they were taught is good enough for their children; however, that is not necessarily true.

Almost every adult in this country was taught that the symbol for a number (e.g.; ‘7’) was everything we needed to know about the number that it represents. We were taught to memorize how the symbol ‘7’ multiplied by the symbol ‘9’ equals the symbol ’63.’ That teaching method does not mean that the student understands that ‘7,’ ‘9,’ and ’63’ are symbols representing a group of objects.

This is a subtle, but important understanding in math functions. The equation ‘7 x 9 = 63,’ means that we are taking a group of seven objects, adding eight more groups of seven, and determining the total of objects. That is much more complicated than just memorizing that 7 x 9 = 63, but it helps us realize that multiplication is a shortcut to manually counting out 63 objects individual, rather than grouping them.

The weakness of memorization of relationships between symbols also creates confusion as a student moves into higher mathematical equations. In algebra, geometry, and calculus the numeral symbols become less relevant. For example, X = (X+1) and Y = (X-3) can be confusing because ‘X’ stands for EVERY number.

The Credit Card Example
A man is given ten credit cards, but he is NOT told that each credit card represents an amount of money in the bank and, that if used, the money is replenished the next day. He is told how to use each credit card. One card is to buy gas, one to use at the grocery store, etc. Today, he’s at the gas station and it so happened that two of his friends are already there. He decides to pay for his friend’s fuel, which they appreciate. They go on their way, but when he tries to pay for his fuel, the credit card is declined. He didn’t understand that the card represented a limited amount of money, he just assumed it could be used for any amount of fuel. That is similar to how math has been taught in the past. We may have known what to do with the numbers (symbols,) but we may not have fully understood that numbers are just symbols.

Good News, Bad News
Parents objections to the new math teaching methods are a good sign that our children are gaining a deeper understanding of mathematics than their parents did in school; however, parents need to be able to assist their children with homework.¹ This means parents need to be taught the new methods, but few if any schools have developed programs to teach parents because there is no funding available to accomplish the task.

Who Came Up With the Common Core Math Techniques?
Despite the belief that Common Core math techniques were invented in the past few years, the techniques were modeled off educational programs in certain Asian countries where they have been more successful at preparing students for college. In 2009, a coalition of State Governors and Educators worked together to build an educational program that would serve as a ‘best practices’ guide for American schools, which was the birth of Common Core.

NEXT: Part III: An Answer to the Question – Good? or Bad?
PREVIOUSLY: Part I: A Primer in American Education

¹Most studies indicate that students perform better when parents are involved in their children’s education. At the very least it indicates to the child that their parents place a high value on becoming educated.

Common Core: Are You A Good Switch Or A Bad Switch? Part I

24 Tuesday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, College, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Higher Education, History, Information Technology, Internet, parenting, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Taxes, Universities, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

classroom, college graduates, Common Core, Education methods, federal mandates, George W. Bush, graduation rates, high school graduates, job standards, K-12, NCLB, No Child Left Behind, President Barack Obama, Race to the Top, school districts, school vouchers, students, teachers, Teaching, Teaching methods, Teaching standards

School’s should welcome diversity of ideas but shouldn’t tolerate political agendas

PART I: A Primer in American Education

Who’s Afraid of Common Core?
Education in America is often the centerpiece of someone’s agenda, and the newest chapter of the how-to-fix-our-schools controversy is called Common Core. Conservatives have apparently decided that Common Core is the path to Satan. Liberals have reservations about Common Core because it smacks of a factory-like environment that assumes every student and school is the same.

The problem is that the most vocal critics of Common Core have no authority to speak on effective educational methods. Common Core is a significant paradigm shift in education, and opinions of untrained, uneducated, unhelpful ‘experts’ do nothing to move forward the debate on how best to prepare our children for Life 3.0.

The Cost of Achievement
In 1950, only one-third of the population in the United States had a high school degree or better, and only six percent had a college degree or better. In 2010, almost ninety percent of Americans had at least a high school degree, and thirty percent had at least a college degree. That increase is impressive, but what is astounding is that in the same sixty year time frame, America’s population doubled.

To accomplish that feat cost money. A lot of money. As the bandwagon to attack government spending gained steam, education loomed large in the sights of conservatives. The real cost of the success of American educational achievement has been to become a target of the post-Reagan agenda.

Public school in Panama: Seeking to achieve the American dream

A Historical Perspective
In the pre-Information age, schools were isolated in their own districts. How well the students of any given school performed was a local issue, not a state or national issue. In addition, a relatively small percentage of students sought out a college degree, and there were few school districts keeping track of college bound students.

The goal for most school districts in the 1960’s, 70’s, and 80’s was graduate as many students as possible, which sometimes opened the door to unethical practices, such as giving diplomas to students who clearly did not meet reasonable expectations (ability to read, write, etc.) to graduate.

However, by the 1990’s, the idea that all schools in the United States should be able to measure academic success through a unified set of academic standards began to take hold. As the Internet became the backbone of our society, the resulting information explosion forced us to accept that adequate math and reading skills were vital for success as an adult in a technologically advanced society.

First Generation of Educational Standards
By the beginning of this century, plans had been put into motion to establish a set of educational standards for all schools and testing of all students to determine a school’s success or failure. Under President George W. Bush, the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB,) was mandated and it required States to establish standardized testing, teacher qualifications, and annual academic progress reporting. This was one of the most sweeping federal intrusions into public education. The primary focus of NCLB was to improve reading, writing, and mathematics in schools nationwide, while allowing States to establish the educational standards that would have to be met.

The catch was that rather than investing in those schools that needed help, No Child Left Behind focused on punishing schools that didn’t meet the artificial standards. Almost ever reputable educational review of NCLB has given it a failing grade. Some of the reasons are as follows:

The emphasis on reading, writing, and math during a time when States were cutting funds for kindergarten through twelfth grade (K-12) created a shearing effect on other programs (language, history, music, arts, etc.) as money had to be reallocated to the studies under the NCLB Act.
Politicians had little understanding of education and the variables in a classroom environment and they attempted to apply factory-like operations to school systems that failed to address the real issues that impact the ability to learn.
NCLB assumed that teachers were mostly at fault for poor educational performance and politicians sought to intervene by imposing punishments for schools rather than actually acting in the best interest of the students.
The education of higher performing students was sacrificed in order to devote more resources for the poorer performing students.
Students with special needs were not excluded from the testing standards creating a population of students that automatically counted as failing against the school.

Educational Standards – Second Generation
Soon after taking office, the Obama administration began to move away from NCLB by introducing “Race to the Top.” This program flipped NCLB by seeking to reward States for adopting standardized programs rather than punishing them for not meeting federal standards. States competed for additional federal education funding; however, not every State rushed to play the game that offered no guarantee of financial carrot at the finish line.

The most searing problem with Obama’s Race to the Top program may have been the requirement that a teacher’s performance had to be linked to the student’s test scores. This concept of Pay For Performance suggests that teaching professionals must be threatened with a financial stick, forcing teachers to teach students to be successful on the tests by sacrificing all other educational values. It also discourages teachers from working with groups of challenging students who will not be able to produce the test results of more privileged and economically stable students.

NEXT: Part II: What is Common Core?
To be published Wednesday, 25 March, 0700 PDT/1400 UTC

NEXT NEXT: Part III: An Answer to the Question – Good? or Bad?
To be published Wednesday, 25 March, 1200 PDT/1900 UTC

Epilogue : The 2010’s

20 Friday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, College, Communication, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Higher Education, History, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Religion, Respect, Science, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Space, Taxes, Technology, Traditional Media, Universities, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Caucasian, college graduates, Conservatives, Equality, GDP, high school graduates, poor, racism, racists, Reagan agenda, Republicans, Ronald Reagan, The 1%, un-wealthy, wealthy, White politicians

The 2010’s – End of Civility

White Conservatives: “Go F**k Yourselves America”

Population: 308.7 million
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita: $47,805
Median Annual Income: $47,793
Life Expectancy: 78.7
Average Age at Marriage: Men 28.2, Women 26.1
% of pop. w/high school degree or higher: 87.0%
% of pop. w/college degree or higher: 30.0%

REAGAN: The Killer of America’s Prosperity
From 1950 to 2010 the population of the United States of America doubled (+104.0%.) The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) tripled (+218.1%.) The median annual income is eleven times more than 1950 (+1028%.) Life expectancy has increased by over 15% (15.4%.) Men AND women are marrying an average of over five years older in 2010 than they did in 1950 (men +23.7%, women +28.6%.) The percentage of people with at least a high school degree is now almost 90% versus 34% in 1950 (+153.6%.) Today, 30% of our citizens have at least a college degree versus 6% in 1950 (+383.9%.)

Something went right for America in the last 60 years. But that is changing.

Prior to the Great Depression, Republicans controlled the House and Senate for the majority of the previous 70 years. After the Great Depression both the House and Senate was under Democratic control until 1980. In 1980, America began folowing the conservatives agenda (Reagan 1980-1988, Bush 41 1989-1992, Republican control of Congress 1994-2008) of dismantling the government at all levels, start more wars, give more money to the wealthy, and give less help for the un-wealthy. Since 1979, the wealthiest 1% after-tax income has increased by 200%.

U.S._Income_-_Changes_by_Income_Group_1979-2011

The 1% are 200% wealthier since conservatives took control of the government

Since 1980, annual increases in U.S. Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has stalled and fallen.

ANNUAL GDP GROWTH: Post World War II, U.S. annual GDP began a steady growth until shortly after Ronald Reagan became President.

GROWTH SACRIFICED FOR GREED
Post-war prosperity was spurred by significant federal government projects and programs. Conservatives derailed that by blaming government for economic issues that were caused by corporate and business greed.

Despite the obvious failure of the Reagan agenda, conservatives have taken a position of complete denial and fantastical thinking. They no longer believe they have any obligation to acknowledge or respect the rest of America. Conservatives are behaving as a child would behave when they are not getting their way, even though their request is completely inappropriate. Rather than accepting that President Obama was elected twice by a majority of Americans, Republicans have blocked all efforts to move forward on measures proven to generate American prosperity because it would make those that have more, give more.

Reagan conservatives have failed and they are backed in a corner of failure. They will not accept reason, nor facts. Civility would force them to accept their failure, so they must be uncivil. They are willing to destroy America, rather than acknowledge failure.

WHY ARE WE HERE?
America has experience massive change in the past 65 years. Most of that change has been good, but the one aspect of the American concept, the idea that we are all created equal, is the one issue in our country that has cast a shadow over us for centuries. White males believe that they are superior to all others and as our demographics have changed Caucasians have worked to obstruct equality rather than accept it.

Segregation was not considered racist until it became obvious it was motivated by whites who were racist. Dismantling government programs that benefit the poor and those in need may not be considered racist, until we realize that these ideas have been pushed forward almost exclusively by white politicians. Telling America that the rich are too burdened to pay a fair share of their taxes is not considered racist until you examine the loop of rich white people giving money to white politicians to pass laws that will reduce taxes on the wealthiest who are almost all white.

America is a country that has yet to commit to everyone being equal. In the 1950’s, white people took their money and ran away to the suburbs. In the 1960’s, the federal government finally stepped in and paid attention to the unequal treatment of African-Americans. In the 1970’s, we became distracted by unethical leaders, war, oil shortages, and inflation. In the 1980’s, we were conned into the idea that our government was to blame for all our problems in the 1970’s, while the Reagan spent money that America didn’t have to spend. In the 1990’s, the conservatives regained control of Congress and began dismantling the federal government and ending ethical business oversight. In the 2000’s, Republicans led America down a path of war and destruction that almost wiped out our economic system.

Why we are here is because we have become weak. We have listened to fools and we know they are fools. They are willing to tear America apart for greed and their own racist ideals. To a racist, compromise is unthinkable, and that is why conservatives will never work towards a unified nation.

THE SERIES: The 1950’s The 1960’s The 1970’s The 1980’s The 1990’s The 2000’s

This is Why (2015 vs the 2000’s)

19 Thursday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, College, Communication, Crisis Management, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Higher Education, History, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Politics, Pride, Print Media, Privacy, Public Image, Public Relations, Religion, Respect, Science, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Space, Taxes, Technology, Traditional Media, Universities, US History

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

2004 Tsunami, 9/11, Afghani, Amazon.com, Anthrax, Assault weapons ban, Conservatives, Election 2000, Facebook, Florida vote counting, George W. Bush, Global Financial Disaster, Global warming, Hurricane Katrina, Iraq, Mars, NASA, Opportunity, Pope John Paul II, President, President Barack Obama, Republicans, Rovers, Saddam Hussein, Smartphone, Space Shuttle Columbia, Spirit, Supreme Court, Texting, Twenty-ohs, Twitter, Virginia Tech Massacre, Wikipedia, YouTube

The 2000’s – The Defeat of America

Decade of Fear: Y2K, 9/11, WMD’s, Katrina, Banking Collapse, Unemployment, Global Warming

Population: 281.4 million
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita: $44,492
Median Annual Income: $40,703
Life Expectancy: 76.8
Average Age at Marriage: Men 26.1, Women 23.9
% of pop. w/high school degree or higher: 80.4%
% of pop. w/college degree or higher: 24.4%

TWENTY OH’s
If the 1990’s were a seismic event of technological and social change, the twenty-oh’s is when the tsunami of change hit. Had nothing else happened but the advancement of the Internet, the changes by that alone would have drastically remade the world as we knew it; however, the twenty-oh’s were not content in merely redefining society and the way we communicate, the first decade of the new millennium was going to do an extreme makeover of all our expectations in life. Here are twenty things that made us say Oh!

Y2K, the disaster that never came (Jan. 2000)
Elections of 2000
1. Florida election fiasco (Nov./Dec. 2000)
2. Supreme Court appoints George W. Bush as President (Dec. 2000)
Attacks of September 11, 2001
Anthrax letters
Wars of Just Because
1. Afghanistan (2001-2014)
2. Iraq (2003-2011)
Rise of Smaller and Smarter Technology (Entire Decade)
1. Smartphone
2. Texting
Space Shuttle Columbia destroyed on reentry (Feb. 2003)
Mars Rovers bounce to successful landings and missions
1. Spirit (June 2003)
2. Opportunity (July 2003)
Saddam Hussein captured (Dec. 2003)
Assault weapon ban expires (Sept. 2004)
Online Wonders
1. Amazon.com
2. Facebook
3. Twitter
4. Google
5. YouTube
6. Wikipedia
Indian Ocean Earthquake/Tsunami (Dec. 2004)
Pope John Paul dies (Apr. 2005)
Global Warming
Hurricane Katrina (Aug. 2005)
Virginia Tech Massacre (Apr. 2007)
Global Economic Disaster (2007-08)
1. Financial giants collapse
2. Housing market collapses
3. Auto industry collapses
4. Massive unemployment
Price of gas soars, and falls….as a function of conservative politics
Barack Obama elected as President (Nov. 2008)
Nuclear weapons
1. Iraq
2. North Korea

The Twenty-oh’s began with the most bizarre Presidential election in American history, followed by the most shocking attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor, followed by two United States initiated wars that would be fought simultaneously, followed by the loss of the Space Shuttle and its crew on reentry to Earth, followed by an earthquake/tsunami that would kill almost a quarter of a million people in 14 countries in one day, followed by a massacre at Virginia Tech, followed by a near meltdown of our global financial system, followed by an African-American being elected as President.

THE GREAT CONSERVATIVE FAILURE
Despite all that happened, it was politics that defined the 2000’s. Keeping with the two-faced Reagan policy of “America Can’t” and money must be taken from the poor and given to the rich, President George Bush took the cost of running two wars off the books so that he could look like he was cutting government spending when he was, in fact, putting the government deeper in debt and running massive deficits.

Behind the scenes, a decade of conservative-driven deregulation in the financial industry created a bad debt bomb that exploded in 2007-08. Almost overnight, America’s economy was devastated by greed and a lack of common sense. People who saw the disaster coming took the attitude that everyone else was unethical, so why should I be the only good person? When the curtain fell on Wall Street, Republicans, who created the environment for the disaster, quietly stepped away and whistling as if they were unaware there was a problem.

Bush 43, was completely out of his league in dealing with the problem. To repair the damage to our economy would require taking actions that was would essentially prove that the Reagan doctrine was the cause of the disaster, and President Bush was not willing to take the necessary actions. Fortunately, Barack Obama had just been elected and, with Bush impotent in action, the 44th President stepped up and began to manage the crisis and establishing a plan of recovery.

The Republican caused disaster did not cause conservatives to humbly acknowledge their failure, but rather pushed them to further deny the facts. As the economy began recovering, conservatives began blaming Democrats for not making the recovery happen faster. As conservative predictions of Democratic policy failure began to be proven wrong, conservatives began raising absurd and meaningless issues to redirect people’s attention (e.g.; Obama was not an American, Obama was a Muslim, Obama had a secret plan to take everyone’s guns away, etc.)

Because the Reagan doctrine was based on white, 1950’s suburban thinking, the hate for President Obama came naturally to the white, male voter. Instead of a political correction for the failed Reagan agenda, conservatives became even more rabid and illogical. By the end of the decade America was heading for defeat at the hands of conservatives who had taken away American prosperity and were unwilling to accept any idea that didn’t match their failed version of the world.

NEXT: Epilogue

THE SERIES: The 1950’s The 1960’s The 1970’s The 1980’s The 1990’s

This is Why (2015 vs the 1990’s)

18 Wednesday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, College, Communication, Crisis Management, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Higher Education, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Politics, Religion, Respect, Science, Space, Taxes, Traditional Media, Universities, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

1990's, Americans with disabilities act, Bill Clinton, Congress, Contract With America, George H. W. Bush, healthcare reform, Immigration, immigration laws, Manuel Noriega, NAFTA, World Wide Web

The 1990’s – A World Turned Upside Down

An Explosion of Change

Population: 248.7 million
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita: $35,145
Median Annual Income: $28,149
Life Expectancy: 75.4
Average Age at Marriage: Men 26.1, Women 23.9
% of pop. w/high school degree or higher: 77.6%
% of pop. w/college degree or higher: 21.3%

POLITICS: The Clean Up Man
George H. W. Bush was sworn in as President on January 20, 1989, as the 41st President of the United States. Having served as Vice President under Ronald Reagan, he was loyal and didn’t interfere with President Reagan’s destructive agenda. As President he then was left to clean up the messes created by Reagan and deal with new problems. Despite all that he had to deal with, President Bush managed to restore some of what Reagan had destroyed. This angered extreme conservatives who then refused to support him in his second term election.

Bush dealt with 1) an inflated deficit left by Reagan, 2) a revenue shortfall that required higher taxes, 3) restoring democracy in Panama and capturing Panamanian leader Manuel Noriega, and, 4) liberated Kuwait and drove Saddam Hussein’s Iraqi army back in a humiliating defeat. In addition, President Bush pushed through Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the North American Free Trade Agreement, and the Immigration Act of 1990, that opened the borders for a 40% increase in legal immigrants. He maintained a conservative stance on most issues; however, President Bush did not hesitate to act against Wacko conservatives. When the National Rifle Association (NRA) sent out material slandering Federal Agents as “Thugs,” he ended his lifetime membership to the organization.

POLITICS: Clinton’s Capitulation
From a political standpoint, the Presidency of Bill Clinton was a study in contrasts. His election was considered a victory for Democrats and liberals, yet he constantly compromised his positions to pacify aggressive conservatives. Almost all efforts for additional programs to help Americans in need, including healthcare reform, failed to move forward during the Clinton administration. Conservatives, who were disappointed at Bush 41’s rollback of Reagan’s efforts to dismantle the federal government, were determined to win Congress and reignite the agenda that favored white and wealthy Americans.

In 1994, conservative Republican Newt Gingrich was elected on the basis of his Contract With America. This document (co-authored with Republican Representative Dick Armey) outlined several reasonable goals to bring more accountability to Congress and the government, but was laced with several goals that followed Ronald Reagan’s vision to cut funding and eliminate the government’s role of overseeing fairness in business. President Clinton was faced with vetoing all legislation, or caving in to conservatives. In his 1996 State of the Union address Clinton delighted conservatives when he announced that “the era of big government is over.”

As a result of Clinton’s capitulation, many laws were passed in his second term that continued Reagan’s destruction of good government. The financial disaster in 2007-08 can be directly traced to legislation passed and/or repealed in the 1990’s during the Clinton administration. Congress removed federal government eyes off of key areas of financial interactions. The laws and rules that had set standards on key banking and investor interactions were eviscerated allowing a ‘no questions asked’ environment. The natural evolution of this environment was for greed to take priority over common sense, which is exactly what happened.

THE SEISMIC EVENT IN PERSONAL COMMUNICATION
Outside of the political landscape, the rest of America was becoming comfortable with the concept of owning ‘personal’ computers, and the new World Wide Web offered to interconnect computers creating a digital network of communication. It’s hard to overstate the impact of the marriage of computers and the Internet. It turned everything we knew upside down. Consider the following:

While personal computers increased the efficiency of certain tasks, it was the computer hooked into the Internet that made world-wide instant communication and sharing of information commonplace.
Television, radio, and newspapers shaped the public perception of world events until the Internet gave access to massive numbers of people who often had more timely information than traditional news media sources.
Younger generations adapted quickly to the possible uses of the Internet while older generations scoffed at its impact. As young generations rode the tide of the Internet, Older generations were left aground, looking foolish and ignorant.
Unethical governments and corporations would discover too late that their version of events would be exposed as lies and distortions by citizens who had access to the truth and shared it through the Internet. It literally brought down some governments.

The tsunami of change caused by the Internet wouldn’t hit the world until the next decade, but the earthquake of the Internet was felt in the 1990’s.

NEXT: The 2000’s

THE SERIES: The 1950’s The 1960’s The 1970’s The 1980’s Epilogue

This is Why (2015 vs the 1980’s)

15 Sunday Mar 2015

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

1980, 1980's, Afghanistan, American Hostage Crisis, civil war, Cold War, Communism, FBI informant, George Bush, Grenada, Iran, Iran-Contra, Lebanon, Libya, Middle East, patriotism, Ronald Reagan, Russia, Soviets, USSR

The 1980’s – Political Con Game

President Ronald Reagan: Actor, Cowboy, FBI Informant

Population: 226.5 million
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita: $28,957
Median Annual Income: $16,354
Life Expectancy: 73.7
Average Age at Marriage: Men 24.7, Women 22.0
% of pop. w/high school degree or higher: 66.5%
% of pop. w/college degree or higher: 16.2%

THE COWBOY PRESIDENT
The Republican leadership had been tainted by President Nixon’s Watergate scandal. In order to move back into power they needed a fresh face, and Ronald Reagan, an experienced actor, became that face. Reagan mostly had played nice guys and cowboys in the movies which formed the basis of his political persona. He was twice elected as Governor of California but twice (1968 and 1976) failed to gain the Republican party nomination in his quest to be President.

Ronald Reagan, who, in 1976, had fallen just short of winning the Republican nomination from incumbent President Gerald Ford, had finally won the party’s nomination and found himself as the beneficiary of the perfect storm of political crisis in 1979, that sunk President Jimmy Carter. As if to emphasize his luck, the American hostages in Iran were released on January 20, 1981, the same day that Ronald Reagan was sworn into office as President.

THE ERA OF WE CAN’T
President Reagan believed that government was to blame for America’s woes. Despite the role of the American corporation in damaging the our public image in the Middle East and their greed in price gouging that spurred inflation, Reagan proposed that it was the government that was at issue, not American business. He sold the idea to the public that America Can’t, meaning that government can’t and shouldn’t help its citizens to a better life. Reagan convinced the public that the wealthy are to be worshiped and the poor are guilty of laziness, so the government shouldn’t interfere with the natural order.

In his first year as President he pushed through tax cuts for those in the upper tax brackets (70% down to 50%) and in the lowest tax bracket (14% down to 11%,) buying him goodwill with all citizens; however, in 1986 he pushed through additional tax reform that cut the upper tax bracket down to 28% and increased the lower tax bracket to 15%, making the lowest wage earners pay more in taxes than they did when he took office. The irony of his tax increase on the lowest tax bracket was that his “Supply Side Economics” depended on people having more money to spend, which they didn’t by the end of his second term.

FALSE PATRIOTISM
Like many conservatives, Reagan’s patriotism was limited to only those who were of the same mindset. He was staunchly against communism and during the late 1940’s, he and his wife served as FBI informants, ratting out anyone in Hollywood they thought to be sympathetic to communists. This hate for communism manifested during his presidency in massive funding of weapon systems that forced the Soviet Union into military spending that they could not afford while they were also in an active war in Afghanistan.

Reagan, like most post-Vietnam war conservatives learned that showy patriotism for the American soldier as a warrior was vital in keeping the younger generation at bay when they were sacrificed to protect American business interests around the world. Reagan involved America in the invasion of Grenada (1983,) Lebanon Civil War (1983, ) and the bombing of Libya (1986.)

Reagan’s administration also defied Congress by secretly selling weapons to Iran, the country that held Americans hostage for over a year, and gave the money to an anti-communist group in Nicaragua. Later investigations could not prove Reagan’s direct involvement in the scandal; however, the reasoning behind the incident matched Reagan’s staunch anti-communist sentiments.

REAGAN’S TOPPLING OF THE CARDBOARD SOVIET UNION
President Reagan biggest con with the American people was his two-faced position on spending. He wailed loudly about the government spending too much and took money out of the hands that needed it the most, but in reality he was the Big Spender when it came to the military. He tripled the deficit during his eight years as President leaving his successor, George Bush, to try to find ways to pay for Reagan’s uncontrolled military spending.

Fortunately, for President Reagan, America was able to survive his addiction for spending, which was not true for the Soviet Union’s effort to keep pace with the United States. After spending too much on the Soviet space program, (that failed to advance technology for the common Russian citizen,) Soviet involvement in a 10-year war in Afghanistan, (that sent the mighty Russian army home without any significant achievement,) and building up the military might to match Reagan’s excessive spending, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic went bankrupt.

The internal economic meltdown in Russia had a chain reaction with all of the Soviet aligned countries. Desperate East Germans sought to flee the economic disaster in their country and rejoin their cousins in West Germany. This eventually forced the East German government to either kill millions of their citizens, or open the borders completely. The fall of the Berlin Wall within a year after Reagan left office was quickly credited to him by conservatives who lauded his prowess in defeating a cardboard empire. The fact that it was self-inflicted wounds that caused the collapse of USSR and the other communist countries was ignored by those who wanted to glorify a cardboard President.

A LEGACY OF DEFEAT
As Reagan passed the conservative baton to George Bush at the end of the decade, America was fading as the world’s economic and technological leader. Government had been the catalyst in bringing America out of the Great Depression, beating the odds in World War II, improving our roads, building dams and power lines, and in countless other projects that no private business would dare attempt. The money spent by our government went directly into the hands of the private contractor, who then used it to pay employees and buy services and equipment from other private businesses.

But President Ronald Reagan ended that by using the government as the scapegoat for the misdeeds of the corporation. Without any proof the public accepted his premise that government was the problem and then he began to dismantle government and give the money to the wealthy. It was a master deception by the actor/cowboy who pulled off one of the greatest political cons since Hitler.

NEXT: The 1990’s

THE SERIES: The 1950’s The 1960’s The 1970’s The 2000’s Epilogue

Sinclair Opinion Survey is an Epic Fail of Research

09 Wednesday Apr 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Branding, Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Honor, Management Practices, Opinion, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Technology, Traditional Media

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Affordable Care Act, Galen Institute, Grace-Marie Turner, Kevin Kuhlman, Kristine Frazao, KRNV, Manhattan Institute, MyNews4, National Federation of Independent Business, NFIB, poll, SBGI, Sinclair Broadcast Group, survey, survey design

Kristine Frazao – SBGI Corporate News Correspondent

Kristine Frazao, National Correspondent for Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. (SBGI,) delivered another anti-government news story that was aired on Reno’s NBC affiliate, KRNV, on Monday night. Her stories tend to be one-sided, Fox News-type reports that are long on manipulation and short on facts.

But on Monday, April 7, she came armed with a new ‘”weekend online poll” conducted by her employer (Sinclair) and she was ready to prove that she finally had undisputable evidence to back up her report.

The piece used two clips in three seconds of ‘people on the street’ comments, followed by a third man in an eleven second response in broken English:

“very, very,…ah,.. big…uhm…debt, …uhm,….and is growing exponentially”

It was fourteen seconds of everyone’s life that can’t be recovered. Then Frazao revealed her ‘data.’

The Online Poll Fiasco
Frazao probably doesn’t know that for a survey to be valid, there are certain standards that have to be met. One is that the group surveyed has to be unbiased. Most researchers use random survey techniques to prevent harvesting the opinions that represent a biased group. That involves the researchers, 1) selecting the survey participants and, 2) utilizing a scientific method that allows anyone in the population being surveyed to be selected.

For example, randomly calling people is not usually scientific because it only lets the people who have telephones to be surveyed. An online poll is almost always considered unscientific because it only represents those who have Internet, understand how to use a computer, and find the web page with the survey.

So how did Sinclair post this survey? It took me several hours to find it because Frazao offers no information about how the survey was taken in her story. I finally found it as part of a larger survey on mostly Fox News station websites. In Reno, the survey can only be found on KRXI, the Fox affiliate, not on KRNV, nor Sinclair’s other station, KAME.

That issue alone destroys the credibility of the survey, but it gets better.

Image by Paul Kiser taken from MyNews4 newscast

Which question do you answer?

The survey question is designed to ask two questions. First, do you trust President Obama? Second, Do you think the Affordable Care Act will improve your coverage? If a respondent doesn’t trust President Obama, then the answer is going to be ‘no’ to both questions regardless of what the person thinks about the second question. Since this survey was on Fox News stations, it’s actually surprising that anyone answered ‘yes’ to the question.

But it gets better still.

Frazao read out the results as they appeared on the screen.

2 + 7 = 9, carry the 1…goes this advanced math is hard!

Did you catch the problem? Yep, the numbers add up to 90%, not 100%. My guess is that the ‘Maybe’ group is supposed to be 11%, but the fact is that Sinclair people didn’t recognize the error, and Frazao didn’t either.

Anti-ACA crusader from Monday’s (7 April) news story

The rest of Frazao’s story brought out the usual conservative ‘experts.’ Grace-Marie Turner and her 19-year crusade against health care reform, wearing exactly what she wore for last week’s ‘expert testimony’ against the Affordable Care Act. Once again she threw out numbers that predicted doom and despair, but Turner had no supporting data .

Image by Paul Kiser taken from video of KRNV newscast 1 April 2014

From last week’s story…is she wearing the same….?

Frazao also presented Manhattan Institute chart of the United States showing the difference in health care insurance premiums for a 27-year-old, by State, before and after the Affordable Care Act. Of course, prior to the Affordable Care Act the 27-year-old might not have been able to get coverage, and the chart doesn’t account for government subsidies.

And the Manhattan Institute? Another conservative think tank. At least Frazao is consistent in her ‘experts.’

Frazao brought out another conservative for more doom and gloom. She introduces Kevin Kuhlman, of the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) by saying:

“Kevin Kuhlman with the National Federation of Independent Businesses (sic) says small businesses are already feeling it in their bottom-line.”

The only problem with that statement is that the provisions effecting businesses have been delayed until 2015, so how is the Affordable Care Act hitting the bottom-line in 2014?

Frazao does have one final person-on-the-street interview who praises the Affordable Care Act for the mental health benefits, but then Frazao ends by going back to her poll, and the ‘pessimism’ it shows about the future of Obamacare…the poll that doesn’t even add up.

NEXT: What happened on Tuesday? Has KRNV decided to go back to responsible journalism?

Local TV Affiliate News Reputation Displaced With Conservative Propaganda Makeover

07 Monday Apr 2014

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

ABC, ABC News, based, CBS, CBS News, conservative, Cunningham Broadcasting, Deerfield Media, Disney Co, FCC, Federal Communications Commission, Fox, Fox News, journalism, KAME, KRNV, KRXI, LMA, local affiliate, Local Management Agreement, NASDAQ, NBC, NBC News, News, News4, On Your Side, propaganda, SBGI, Sinclair Broadcast Group, television, TV

Sinclair Broadcast Group (SBGI) and related companies have been buying up local non-Fox affiliated stations and pushing conservative biased news stories into the local news programs.

Sinclair stock hit its high at the beginning of 2014, but has been sliding downward for the last three months (from NASDAQ website)

Since September of 2011, Sinclair Broadcast Group or their affiliated companies (Cunningham Broadcasting, Deerfield Media) have acquired or obtained a Local Marketing Agreement (LMA) for almost one hundred local television stations. According to its website, Sinclair now operates or owns 29 ABC, 26 CBS, and 17 NBC local affiliated stations in addition to 41 Fox and 54 other affiliated stations.

Fox News Masquerading As Reputable Journalism
By snatching up ABC, NBC, and CBS affiliates, Sinclair masks itself under the traditions of reputable journalism of the three historic broadcast giants. The public trust of news anchors built over decades is used to distract viewers from news stories slanted to provoke outrage at the United States government and policies opposed by conservatives. News stories for Sinclair stations are manufactured by the parent organization and inserted into the local news. The stories employ interviews with conservative sources, often with no interview with the agency or organization being accused of fraud, waste, or corruption.

In Reno, Nevada, the NBC affiliate, KRNV, has run stories on almost a daily basis from the parent organization that suggested and/or accuse waste or government conspiracy. In some cases, clips from Fox News are used, rather than from the NBC parent organization. Recently KRNV 6 PM broadcast ran ‘A’ Block stories (headline news) regarding the Affordable Care Act (e.g.; March 26, April 1) and gun laws (e.g.; March 28) that used people with a known conservative bias as their sources.

The LMA Loophole
Federal Communication Commission (FCC) rules do not allow licensing of more than one television station in a market to a person or company; however, during the first George Bush administration (1991) Sinclair Broadcast Group convinced the FCC to allow Local Marketing Agreements (LMA’s) that would allow a person or company to own one station and “operate” another station providing the latter station was licensed to a different person or corporation.

This has allowed Sinclair to go on a buying binge of television stations in the same market as their Fox stations. Sinclair uses Deerfield Media and Cunningham Broadcasting to own the licenses of stations where Sinclair already owns a television license. All Deerfield and Cunningham licensed stations are operated by Sinclair, and the family that owns Sinclair controls 90% of the stock in Cunningham Broadcasting.

In Reno, Nevada, the Sinclair Broadcast Group owns the license for Fox affiliate, KRXI, and operates the MyNetworkTV affiliate, KAME (licensed to Deerfield Media,) as well as the NBC affiliate, KRNV (recently licensed to Cunningham Broadcasting.)

This allows Sinclair to effectively control three stations in one market and supplant reputable journalism with conservative propaganda.

The Lingering Question
There is ample evidence that Sinclair Broadcast Group is using loopholes in the FCC regulations to control multiple stations in a single market. It is also apparent that news stories manufactured by Sinclair are shoddy and biased. The question is whether or not the people behind Sinclair are trying to pander to conservatives in order to increase profits or if they are perverting journalism for a conservative agenda. In one case it is a matter of greed, in the other, a matter of a betrayal to the American citizen.

An audit of all of the communications, finances and contributions of the companies, vendors, Board of Directors, and owners involved is the only way we will know.

Reno NBC News Station Runs Another Conservative-Laced Story

07 Monday Apr 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Branding, Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, Information Technology, Management Practices, Opinion, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Technology, Traditional Media

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

A Block, ACA, AEI, Affordable Care Act, American Enterprise Institute, biased, Chris Vanocur, Columbus, Fox News, Galen Institute, Grace-Marie Turner, health insurance, Healthcare, Joe Antos, Jon Lovitz, journalism, KRNV, KSNV, NBC, NBC News, Obamacare, Ohio, SBGI, Sinclair Broadcast Group, WSYX

Is KRNV a Fox or NBC affiliate?

On April 1, Reno’s NBC affiliate, KRNV, has ran another biased ‘A’ Block (headline news) story attacking the Affordable Care Act (ACA) featuring a reporter from the Sinclair Broadcast Group (SBGI) network. This is at least the third incident of Fox News-type reporting on KRNV in less than a week. This report suggested that the most of the seven million people who signed up for health insurance under the Affordable Care Act already had insurance.

As in the other biased news stories on KRNV, a non-local reporter presents an anti-government tirade. Chris Vanocur of the ABC affiliate, WSYX in Columbus, Ohio, one of Sinclair Broadcast Group’s 167 stations, starts out by saying:

“Seven million Obamacare new enrollees sounds like a lot, but…”

Grace-Marie Turner, crusader against healthcare reform

Vanocur then introduces Grace-Marie Turner, who has only one mission: oppose any change to healthcare’s broken free-market system. She founded the Galen Institute in 1995 to combat healthcare reform. According to her website, one of the key goals is to:

“Educate policymakers about the dangers that government control over the health sector pose to our economy and our society”

Turner clearly is dedicated to maligning anything regarding the Affordable Care Act. Despite her anti-ACA crusade, Vanocur refers to her as an ‘expert.’ Turner doesn’t hesitate to bear witness against the seven million new enrollees in Obamacare:

“Many of these, if fact, the great majority, are not newly insured people..”

Vanocur continues to say:

“Turner says only one-quarter to one-third of those who signed up didn’t have health insurance before.”

Turner claims to know that 25% to 33% of the seven million had insurance before and switched to Obamacare. She cites no study, nor does Vanocur offer any evidence of the source and/or reliability of the data. Rather, Vanocur offers another ‘expert’:

“…and she’s not the only one questioning the seven million number”

Vanocur is referring to Joe Antos, his next ‘expert,’ of the conservative think tank, American Enterprise Institute For Public Policy Research (AEI.) Antos also claims to have reliable data on the new enrollees:

“It’s very likely that it’s no more than 1.5 million people who are actually new customers who were not already insured.”

Antos testifies that only 21% of the total enrollees had no insurance. Again, no source is presented for the ever dwindling number of previously uninsured. The only thing that kept this new story from becoming a Jon Lovitz sketch was Antos saying, “Yeah, yeah, 21%, That’s the ticket!”

Like other Sinclair generated anti-government ‘news’ stories (See articles on KRNV news stories of March 26 and March 28,) only one-side of the topic is presented and no data supports the claims made by the reporter, nor his sources. The irony is that on the same day, KRNV’s sister NBC affiliate in Las Vegas, KSNV, ran a locally produced news story on the ACA enrollment that discussed sign up issues, but kept a more balanced perspective.

NEXT: How Sinclair Broadcast Group is using a FCC loophole to control multiple stations in one market. (Read article)

Sinclair Reporter Taints Reno NBC Affiliate With Fox News Story…Again

07 Monday Apr 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Branding, Business, Communication, Crime, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, Honor, Management Practices, Opinion, Politics, Privacy, Public Image, Public Relations, Traditional Media, Violence in the Workplace

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Center for American Progress, conservative, Cunningham Broadcasting, Emily J. Miller, Emily Tisch Sussman, Fox News, Gun control, Herring Broadcasting, Joe Hart, Kristine Frazao, KRNV, law abiding, Mark Witaschek, MyNews4, NASDAQ, NBC, NBC News, News, Ronald Reagan, RT, Russian Television, SBGI, Second Amendment, Sinclair Broadcast Group, Sun Myung Moon, Unification Church, Washington D.C., Washington Times

Kristine Frazao – SBGI News Correspondent

On Friday, March 28, the NBC affiliate in Reno, Nevada (KRNV) again aired a Fox News type report on the 6:00 PM telecast, and this time actually used a Fox News clip. During the ‘A’ Block (top stories,) local news anchor Joe Hart gravely announces:

“….National Correspondent Kristine Frazao reports, some are concerned that this could be a sign of things to come in our country….”

The news clip, manufactured by Sinclair Broadcast Group (SBGI,) which operates KRNV, features Kristine Frazao, who has three years national experience with Russian Television (RT,) and was hired in the past year by Sinclair. She tells the story of a Washington D.C. resident who violated local laws on ammunition ownership, and who had his ex-spouse tattle on him to law enforcement.

Convicted Mark Witaschek interview on Fox News and shown on Reno NBC affiliate (From KRNV newscast)

The clip starts with Mark Witaschek, explaining his surprise that he had committed a crime. The graphic with his name on-screen is a Fox News logo and banner, indicating the original source of the story. Frazao did not include an interview or statement from the law enforcement agency involved, nor does she offer any other examples of people charged or convicted of the law that Witaschek violated.

Instead Frazao interviews Emily J. Miller of the The Washington Times; who declares that Witaschek is a law-abiding citizen even though he has been convicted of violating the law in Washington D.C.:

“It’s just an outrageous violation of his rights.”

Miller continues and links this one case to a larger conspiracy without any proof:

“This is a pattern in Washington D.C. and states that are anti-gun, which is to go after the law-abiding who are exercising their Second Amendment Rights….”

Miller, is a Senior Editor for The Washington Times, which has an interesting history and has a strong conservative bias.

Founded by the Unification Church in 1982, The Washington Times was once lauded by Ronald Reagan as the only newspaper that told the truth to the American people. In 2002, Church Founder, Sun Myung Moon stated:

“The Washington Times is responsible to let the American people know about God” and “The Washington Times will become the instrument in spreading the truth about God to the world.”

In March of 2013, the Herring Broadcasting announced that it would team with Miller’s Washington Times newspaper to create One America News, a conservative cable news network to rival Fox News.

Frazao’s uses a source that is as biased as asking a Boston Red Sox fan to discuss the negative aspects of the New York Yankees. By using Miller as her primary source, Frazao betrayed any aspect of responsible investigative journalism.

The final 41 seconds of the news clip, which may or may not have been part of KRNV’s live broadcast¹, does include Emily Tisch Sussman, Campaign Director for the Center for American Progress. Sussman represents a liberal viewpoint; however, during that 41 seconds she is edited down to two sound bytes of four seconds and ten seconds. The rest of the time Frazao speaks for her in a voice over. Of the two sound bytes, it was difficult to determine what questions Sussman was responding to because the editing didn’t seem to match Frazao’s edited-in commentary.

This was at least the second time in one week where Sinclair Broadcast Group’s National Correspondent has presented a story that had an overt conservative bias (See article.)

NEXT: KRNV does it again. (Read article) TO BE PUBLISHED 7 APRIL 2014 at 6:00 AM

(¹I watched the live broadcast and I don’t remember the last 41 seconds that appears in the on-line clip of the ‘A’ Block. If it was included it would have put the broadcast 34 to 65 seconds longer than the two previous night’s broadcast, and 94 seconds longer than the next two weekday 6 PM broadcasts. At 41 seconds, Kristine Frazao seems to wrap up the piece, and the next 41 seconds could have easily been edited out for time on the original live broadcast.)

Corporate Religion Decision Will Determine Supreme Court’s Corruption

27 Thursday Mar 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Employee Retention, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Human Resources, Management Practices, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Religion, Respect, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Affordable Care Act, business owner, Christian Taliban, contraception, Employee, Employer, Freedom of Religion, government mandate, Hobby Lobby, Justices, Supreme Court

Healthcare decision to force Supreme Court to judge themselves

This week the Supreme Court heard arguments on whether or not the government can require private businesses to provide contraception coverage as part of the healthcare benefit package for employees. Ironically, the decision may expose the level of political corruption of the Court, rather than resolve a legal issue.

Contraception: Individual choice or employer usurpation of individual right?

The issue before the court is simple. Religion is a mythology, not a constitutional right. An individual has the right to indulge in religious beliefs, providing they are legal, and don’t infringe on another individual’s right to believe in their own mythological dogma or not.

Because religion is, by its nature, manifested by humans, anyone can invent the restrictions of ‘their’ religion. Many of those restrictions are classified as sins by that religion.

However, a person, who is by law a voluntarily participant in any church, has the right to abide by those restrictions or not. Punishment for not abiding by those restrictions may result in banishment from the religion, but most violations are considered to be a matter between the individual and their mythological God.

What the owners of Hobby Lobby, Conestoga, and Mardel argue is that their mythological beliefs trump their employee’s own mythological belief, along with the employee/doctor relationship. Not only do the employers want to force the individual into the restrictions of the employer’s mythological beliefs, they are also asking the Court for control their employee’s right of choice outside of the employment environment.

Employer mythology trumps Freedom of Religion?

To be clear, the Affordable Care Act does not require anyone to use contraception methods; therefore an employer can’t argue that their mythological beliefs are being violated as they are not being required to use contraceptive methods. The law only allows the employee and their doctor to have access to contraception as an option as part of their health plan.

The Supreme Court has no choice under the Constitution but to deny business owner’s attempt to usurp employee’s right of Freedom of Religion. A quid pro quo relationship is not a license to inflict an employer’s religious beliefs on individuals, nor does it elevate the employer to be the ‘hand’ of their mythological God.

Despite the obvious legal determination, the Supreme Court may rule in favor of the employer and that ruling will drop the robes of the Justices to show the naked corruption of the highest court in the land. The Court has been stacked with conservatives who have abandoned good jurisprudence for ultra-conservative perversion of the law.

Regardless of the outcome, the issue demonstrates that business woes in America are not due to government taxes or regulation, but simple stupidity of business management. Like many other conservative zealot business owners, Hobby Lobby and the other businesses in this suit will find that their religious and political issues have no place in a free-enterprise economy. Customers don’t like being forced into a business’ religious or political conflict, nor do employees want their employers to use them as pawns.

Air Travel Teaches Us Not To Listen

24 Monday Mar 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Government, Government Regulation, Management Practices, Opinion, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Re-Imagine!, Taxes, Technology, Travel

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Airlines, airports, audio, FAA, Federal Aviation Administration, gate agents, gate announcements, PA, public address systems, public announcements

Zombies are real people forced to listen to airport/airline announcements

Airports and airlines are dedicated to teaching people how to not listen.

There are multiple studies, solid scientific research, on how humans respond to communication and how we best learn and retain information. Unfortunately, air travel offers the antithesis of everything we know about communication.

Outdated Audio Technology
Consider the airport. We have the technology for crystal clear sound in any announcement system. Visit a Disney property and you will hear clear announcements. Every word will be perfect with little or no distortion or hiss.

“Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls…”
Disneyland announcement

If we can do it in Disneyland, solely for entertainment purposes, shouldn’t airports invest in the same quality of public announcement (PA) system when it involves matters of even greater importance? PA systems designed to go into ceiling tiles suck. Maybe it’s time we considered a system designed for the airport environment of 2014, not the office building of 1960.

Zoned Out
Every gate at an airport is a different audio zone, and yet few airports have designed PA systems for this environment. Because most airports have overlapping seating at every gate, passengers for one flight could be sitting in any of three gate areas or standing out in the concourse area just outside of the gate. Few airports seem to understand this geographic distribution. Some airports limit gate announcements to one gate area, resulting in flight announcements to be missed by those passengers not in that gate’s audio zone. Other airports group multiple gates into one zone, so that passengers four of five gates away are hearing boarding announcements for every flight in the area.

Over Communication
The greatest sin of airports is over communication. It seems that airports have a perverse need to create ongoing, excessive, annoying noise. Do these sound familiar?

Please keep your bags with you at all times. Unattended baggage may be confiscated and destroyed.

The Federal Aviation Administration allows you to carry up to three containers of liquids, aerosols, and gels. They must be in a clear plastic bag and removed from your luggage for inspection. Please check with your airline for more information.

Do not carry anything in for anyone else….

I have heard these announcements and many more like them while waiting in the gate area. The gate area within TSA’s secure zone. Anyone in this area has been through the security check point and they and their luggage has been searched and cleared. None of these announcements make sense in an area where everyone has been declared safe to board a plane. They are just noise.

At the gate you will also hear multiple announcements by the gate agent. If there is any training involved of gate agents on how to make PA announcements it would not be apparent from my experience in air travel. Recently, I was waiting for a flight in the Newark, New Jersey airport. The longest period I counted without an announcement was nine seconds. Between the meaningless airport general announcements and the multiple gate agent announcements the passengers were bombarded with endless noise.

The Solution
There is important information that passengers need before they board their flight; however, it is impossible for passengers to determine important announcements for the noise generated in an airport. The remedy involves the FAA, Airport Authorities, and the airlines to reevaluate the purpose of airline announcements…actually they need to assign a purpose to their communications.

Better equipment is a must, and better training on how to effectively communicate information over a PA system. Another possibility is to run all announcements through a centralized public address system where boarding announcements would be made by one trained person who filtered information and determined what audio zones would hear it.

There is another approach but it would involve a complete redesign of the concept of an airport. That’s not likely in an industry that took decades to determine that an iPod isn’t a threat to a plane’s avionics.

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.

Nugent Attempts to Assassinate Obama, Gets Wrong City, Shoots Self

01 Monday Apr 2013

Posted by Paul Kiser in April Fools Day, Crime, Fiction, Government Regulation, Opinion, Politics, Universities

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

guns, National Rifle Association, NRA, President Obama, Ted Nugent

Ted Nugent: America’s Epic Failure

Miami, Florida – April 1, 2013

Last April the 64 year-old rock musician Ted Nugent said that if President Barack Obama was re-elected:

“…I will either be dead or in jail by this time next year.” Ted Nugent

It was the latter and he still had two weeks to spare. On April 15, 2012, Nugent made the comment at the National Rifle Association (NRA) convention in St. Louis, Missouri. He was there to support Mitt Romney for President.

Nugent was arrested in Miami, Florida for attempting to assassinate the President; however, it may be hard for the prosecution to make a case against him since he was almost a 1000 miles away from the Commander-in-Chief. The President was scheduled to speak on the campus of the Miami University in Oxford, Ohio; however, Nugent went to the University of Miami in Miami, Florida.

Nugent apparently became enraged when he could not find President Obama and began waving a gun over his head yelling:

“WHERE IS HE! WHERE IS HE! I’LL KILL HIM! I’ll KILL HIM!”

Within minutes several campus police officers arrived and ordered Nugent to drop his weapon. Nugent apparently calmed down and began to tuck the gun under his belt at which point it discharged, wounding himself in the leg. He then yelled:

“You SHOT Me! You SHOT Me!”

The campus police then moved in, took Nugent’s gun and arrested him. It was several hours later that Nugent learned the police had not fired and that he shot himself. He is expected to make a full recovery, but doctors say that he may walk with a limp. When asked if the wound would affect his ability to play and sing, the hospital representative said:

“They’re doctors, not miracle workers.”

A spokesperson for the Secret Service was asked if they would be involved with the case and she said:

“The Secret Service focuses on credible threats, but somebody will probably have to go down to Miami anyway.”

Nugent will be arraigned in Miami on Monday.

Chinese Men Givien iPads to Control Birthrate

01 Monday Apr 2013

Posted by Paul Kiser in April Fools Day, Fiction, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Information Technology, Internet, Politics, Recreation, Relationships, Social Media Relations, Women

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Apple, birthrate, China, iPad, men, sex, sexual relationships

April 1, 2013 – Beijing, China

iPad in China: Better than sex?

It was revealed today that the Chinese government struck a deal with Apple to purchase significant quantities of iPads as part of a program to control the birthrate. Unofficial Chinese sources say that they have found that a male with an iPad spends 48% less time engaged in relationship-related activity including coitus.

“The iPad is the ultimate lover as it offers constant attention and requires very little in return,” according to one government source. China expects to reduce the birthrate by 25% or more through the alternative-stimulus program.

Apple had no public comment on the use of iPads to inhibit sexual intercourse; however, privately a reliable source did say that since iPad was launched in April 2010, the city of Cupertino, California, where Apple is headquartered, has seen no growth in population.

No one offered a direct cause for why the iPad might have an affect in inhibiting sexual activity, but one woman we asked said, “Are you just stupid, or what?”

Apple says it doesn’t expect any shortages of iPads despite the massive purchase; however, they don’t know when any more iPad will be delivered to the United States.

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.

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.

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

Why Job Creators Aren’t

15 Monday Oct 2012

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Business, Employee Retention, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, Management Practices, Opinion, Politics, Public Relations, Taxes

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

business friendly, Conservatives, Employment, job creators, jobs, Nevada, Reno, Unemployment

Job Creators in Nevada

Willard Mitt Romney and other conservatives try to promote the idea that private businesses are desperate to create jobs if only the government will let them; however, in May Romney gave a wink to the idea that Job Creators might be holding back millions of jobs to artificially stifle job growth to favor conservative candidates in the upcoming election. At the same time conservative businessmen are threatening their employees with layoffs if President Obama is elected.

Are Job Creators the victim of the federal government, or are conservatives trying to manipulate the citizens in order to make themselves wealthier?

Protest outside The Venetian during Republican debates

Nevada has led the country in high unemployment during this recession and has been increasing in July and August (now 12.1%.) Reno, Nevada was ranked the worst city in the nation to find a job. Yet, last week the conservative TaxFoundation.org ranked the Silver State #3 in its 2013 Business Tax Climate for the second year in a row because of its ‘business friendly‘ tax structure.

Since taxes are not holding business back from creating jobs, why is Nevada the Rodney Dangerfield of American employment?

PROFITS, ALWAYS PROFITS
The answer lies with the problems low unemployment cause for businesses. Low unemployment pressures employers (Job Creators) to offer higher wages and better benefits to attract and keep employees. High unemployment means employers can control the job market, which means higher profits. There is no reason for major Nevada employers like casinos to desire a change in the current employment environment.

This is probably why Nevada ‘Job Creators’ like Sheldon Adelson of The Venetian in Las Vegas are spending millions of dollars in support of conservative candidates who will make them wealthier rather than spend the money creating jobs.

Romney’s Concession Speech

20 Thursday Sep 2012

Posted by Paul Kiser in Crime, Education, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, Health, History, Opinion, Politics, Public Relations, Religion, Taxes, US History, Women

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Ann Romney, concession, Democrats, economy, GOP, job creators, Recession, recovery, Republicans, speech, Unemployment, Willard Mitt Romney

November 6, 2012 4:34 PM EDT

I know the polls have not closed in…well, anywhere, but the results of this election are obvious, even to a multi-millionaire like myself. We’ve lost…again.

Many complained that we lied and deceived the voters in an attempt to be elected. What were we supposed to do? Our choice was to acknowledge that President Obama did a great job in tackling the mess we created and began rebuilding the country, OR lie. We were not going to win any elections by telling the truth!

This campaign was built on the idea that we could fool people long enough to be elected President. As I said in May, 47% of Americans are too smart to be tricked by our twisting of facts, and we knew that 30% of Americans would vote for me no matter how bad we ran our campaign. So this campaign came down to sucking in less than 23% of the electorate. Unfortunately for us most of the citizens of this country are not as stupid as we had hoped.

But you have to credit us for our bravado in our attempt to buy and lie our way into the White House:

GOP Success: Stopping America’s Recovery

The Economy: Our fault, but that didn’t stop us from blaming President Obama. We almost convinced America that President Obama failed because he didn’t create full employment, didn’t pave streets in gold, nor had honey flow out of our taps in four years.
Unemployment: This one is funny, You’ll laugh. We told people that the wealthy are …ready for this..THE job creators! I know, I know. How stupid do you have to be to know that private business loves high employment. Low unemployment means employees can demand better pay, better benefits, better working schedules and all those other headaches that come when too many people have a good job. Employers now have employees by the short hairs and we’re never letting go.
The Recovery: It was remarkable under the circumstances, and conservatives fought hard to keep it from happening. There are no liberals in Big Oil and they worked with us to keep prices high this year. Still, no joy.
The Debt: The truth is that the Bush-era tax cuts cut knees out of the federal budget. That and two mega-wars, plus the devastation caused when my conservative banking friends wrecked the economy. Sure the stimulus and bailouts increased the nation’s debt, but none of that would have been necessary if conservative policies hadn’t put all the ingredients together for an economic disaster.
Big Government: We made it sound like President Obama made massive increases in government, and yet it was George Bush that created the TSA, and other massive increases in the size of federal government. Still, we just have to say ‘big government’ to stupid people and they start to sweat. It’s kind of fun.
Obamacare: We were blessed to have a major Democratic lead program that wouldn’t be effective until 2014. We could paint it to be anything we wanted and we wanted it to be evil. Who could argue with me?
Foreign Policy: Conservatives are warmongers. We love a good fight. We love a bad fight. We love it anytime we can send our young adults and technology to overseas to beat somebody up. I thought we had President Obama beat on foreign policy, but I sort of screwed it up in London…and Israel….and Poland. If you don’t like my foreign policy you can kiss my ass!

We also did a good job of ignoring what we didn’t want to talk about.

The Past: We had a Republican National Convention and we didn’t even invite either of the Bush’s. We didn’t need to highlight the past and good riddance to both of them.
Taxes: We didn’t want to talk about my taxes. As Ann said, if we let people see our taxes, “they will attack us!” Sure a President should have a thick skin, but who needs that when we can deny and hide? Richard Nixon taught me that.
Family History: I don’t want to discuss this, even now.
My First Name: Seriously, who would vote for someone named Willard?
Women: We probably should have been more sensitive to women’s issues, but really, who cares? Right Ann?
Education: Smart people don’t vote for idiots. Why did you think we didn’t want to talk about education?
Crime: We conservatives have always pushed a ‘lock’em up and throw away the key’ policy on crime. The problem is that it cost $30,000/year to house one inmate, and after they reach 55 years old, inmate costs go up to $60,000/year because of increasing medical issues. More inmates, higher costs. Who knew?

I know my mouth got this campaign into a lot of trouble, but honestly how can you only blame me for failed policies that are the very definition of being a conservative. Like everything else, it was the fault of the Democrats that I didn’t get elected as President.

Well, I guess I should end this before I say something stupid. I hope all of you feel better now that you won’t have Ann and I to kick around anymore.

Romneylans: A New Species of Stupidity

21 Tuesday Aug 2012

Posted by Paul Kiser in Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Higher Education, Honor, Politics, Religion, Science, Taxes, US History, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

ACA, Affordable Care Act, Christianity, Climate change, Conservatives, economy, George W. Romney, Global warming, guns, Healthcare, Immigration, Jesus Christ, jobs, Mitt Romney, New Testament, NRA, patriotism, Romans 14:10, Romneylans, Romulans, Todd Akin, Unemployment

Romulans of the Star Trek kind

Romulans (Star Trek Series): A alien race ruled by a hierarchical society that is always at war or in an uneasy truce with almost everyone, noted by an almost illogical egocentric society using cunning and deception to gain the advantage. Also identifiable by their pointy ears and uni-haircut.

Todd Akin: Romneylan of the stupid kind

Romneylans (rom-nee-lans): Similar to Romulans, but without the pointy ears and the spiffy haircut.

Romneylans have invaded Earth (specifically the United States) and if they are not defeated we risk losing everything that makes America great.

Ironically, Romneylans are NOT identified by their alleged support of candidate Mitt Romney. Romneylans are actually united by an irrational hate for President Obama. If Bozo the Clown were running against President Obama, Romneylans would vote for Bozo. (NOTE: Mitt Romney is NOT Bozo the Clown and my apologies to any clown named Bozo.)

Romneylans are also noted for their hate for liberals, rejection of reason, and an unshakable commitment to stupidity. Some examples:

Patriotism: Romneylans (A.K.A.: Conservatives) believe that if you don’t agree with them then you are not an American. That in itself is stupid, but what takes it to a new level is the idea that beating your breast about America’s military might is considered patriotic, but it is unpatriotic if you support the civil servants that serve our country with honor and have made America the envy of the citizens of most other countries. Romneylans think that dismantling our government is patriotic.

Religion: Romneylans claim to be Christians. Christianity is identified as the belief in Jesus Christ and his teachings that can be found in the New Testament. Romans 14:10 of the New Testament states:

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.

Romans 14:10 King James version

No need to interpret what is being meant by not judging others. Yet, Romneylans feel compelled to declare that the Bible gives them the right to persecute and pass judgement on almost anyone. Ironically, Jesus Christ is one of the most compassionate religious figures in human mythology, but Romneylans love saying “hate the sin, not the sinner,” which is quite possibly the stupidest thing ever said by a group of people known for stupid remarks. A glance at any Romneylan Facebook page and it is easy to determine that their hate is boundless and their compassion for anyone they hate is nonexistent.

Economy: The depth of stupidity of Romneylans is most evident with their take on the economy. The 2007-09 economic collapse in America occurred as a direct result of unbridled greed in private business and a lack of ethics throughout business in general. That is documented.

However, Romneylans believe that the economic collapse was caused by government regulation and that our economy can be restored by eliminating any of the safeguards that make ethical business possible. Romneylans depend on a permanent state of denial about what Conservatives and conservative policies did to bring America to the brink of disaster.

US Employment Data

Jobs: The impact of the 2007-09 Recession on jobs was felt through the first quarter of 2010. There is no magic bullet to recover the jobs lost during that time, but what is not going to help our nation’s unemployment is to eliminate civil service jobs that employ millions of middle class citizens. Romneylans rabid hate for government is the classic ‘biting the hand that feeds you’ syndrome.

Healthcare: One of the biggest problems America has faced in the last thirty years is the rising cost of healthcare. A major component of this issue is the uninsured citizen without access to affordable healthcare. The uninsured person can’t afford to see a doctor for preventive, or minor health issues, so this often results in that patient receiving no care until it becomes a major health problem. That increases the cost of treatment for which we all indirectly pay. The Affordable Healthcare Act (ACA) solves this problem.

However, Mitt Romney, nor his major contributors will ever have to worry about access to proper medical treatment, thus they don’t care about the millions of Americans who have no access. Ironically, many Romneylans will benefit from ACA either directly or indirectly. Unfortunately, stupidity rules the day with conservative voters and they have convinced themselves that ACA is akin to the Apocalypse, thus it must be stopped before it can take effect.

Another issue is women’s health, in particular, contraception and abortion. While some may say this is another religious issue, for Romneylans it seems to have more of a tie to the gender that is making most of the noise. (See Conservative Pig Influenza of 2012.)

Science: Anyone who seriously believes that Creationism should be taught in public and or private schools as an alternative option to evolution is certainly a Romneylan. Creationism has no basis as a rational explanation for how the universe and humans came into existence but that doesn’t stop Romneylans from declaring mythology as science.

Regarding climate change, science has demonstrated that we are witnessing an extraordinary change in Earth’s climate on a scale that exceeds any climate change during the last 600,000 years. A study funded in part by conservatives to disprove the science of global warming ended up confirming the data.

This doesn’t stop a Romneylan. They dispute science by being ‘skeptical.’ Skeptical is another way of saying, “I’m being stupid.”

Immigration: The Hispanics population in America is growing; however, Mexicans coming to America is not what is driving Conservatives panic attack on this issue. They are just scared white men. That’s sad, but Romneylans are taking their panic and turning into an issue that is long on fear mongering and short on facts. Romneylans are now trying to arm themselves and monitor the border. Guns and vigilantes can be entertaining, but not very smart.

One of the ironies is that most Romneylans nay not know that Romney’s father was born in Mexico when his family fled there to avoid prosecution by the United States of America. His family returned when they became concerned about violence in Mexico.

Romneylan with an open mind?

Guns: I was raised in one of America’s prime hunting communities. I was one of the first to complete an NRA (National Rifle Association) safety course. In addition, I was taught that guns and people don’t mix, so we had a rule to not come back into town with a loaded gun after hunting. Safety and respect for others was key.

Then the NRA became political and this was the cry of gun owners:

When guns are outlawed, only Outlaws will have guns

Clever. Here’s the reality. Almost every person will at some point in their lives be filled with so much anger that they will have a fleeting desire to injure or kill someone else. The NRA wants that person to have a gun accessible so they can act on that impulse. Does that seem smart or stupid?

Romney’s Medicare Dump and Run Strategy

18 Saturday Aug 2012

Posted by Paul Kiser in Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, Honor, Politics, Public Relations, Taxes

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Brian Sandoval, Conservatives, Gilligan's Island, Jan Brewer, Medicare, Mitt Romney, Nevada, Republicans, Rick Gorka, Thurston Howell III, white board

Pssst! Hey Rick! Rick Gorka! Rick, I’m sure you’ve learned not to say, “Kiss my ass!” to the media, but add one more thing to your ‘DO NOT DO’ list. Don’t give Mitt Romney a white board…ever. It makes him look stupid….er, which is an amazing feat, but you did it last Thursday.

Why?

Time travel? Was Thurston Howell III in the 1960’s based on the 2012 Mitt Romney?

First, it makes Romney look like Thurston Howell III from Gilligan’s Island trying to explain how poverty is not a bad as it seems. A multimillionaire, who is so embarrassed by his wealth that he won’t make is tax filings public, shouldn’t be discussing the financial future of the other 99%.

Second, when everyone knows that Medicare is facing insolvency in the near future unless SOME changes are made, Romney saying he is making ‘No Change’ and that the program will stay solvent forever makes it obvious he is stupid or lying or both.

Image thanks to BusinessInsider.com from ABC news telecast

Romney versus the White Board. The White Board won.

Third, most states, like Nevada, are drastically cutting government programs as fast as they can. Romney telling the public that dumping money in a block grant to a Governor like Brian Sandoval or Jan Brewer and telling them to take it and care for your elderly is like giving money to a wino and tell him to go invest it in the stock market. It’s not going to happen.

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan’s plan for Medicare is Dump and Run. Give states just enough money to create a bureaucracy but not enough money to help anyone. Does it make any sense to create 50 new bureaucracies as opposed to one central agency? Let’s leave the white boards to smart people. Like teachers who know how to use them effectively and who know the difference between fact and whatever it is Romney is trying to say.

3rd From Sol

~ Learn from before. Live now. Look ahead.

Category Archives: Government Regulation

Religious Liberty Laws Violate The Bible

Common Core: Are You A Good Switch Or A Bad Switch? Part III

Common Core: Are You A Good Switch Or A Bad Switch? Part II

Common Core: Are You A Good Switch Or A Bad Switch? Part I

This is Why (2015 vs the 1990’s)

The 1990’s – A World Turned Upside Down

This is Why (2015 vs the 1980’s)

The 1980’s – Political Con Game

Sinclair Opinion Survey is an Epic Fail of Research

Local TV Affiliate News Reputation Displaced With Conservative Propaganda Makeover

Reno NBC News Station Runs Another Conservative-Laced Story

Sinclair Reporter Taints Reno NBC Affiliate With Fox News Story…Again

Corporate Religion Decision Will Determine Supreme Court’s Corruption

Air Travel Teaches Us Not To Listen

Armed Teacher Games

Nugent Attempts to Assassinate Obama, Gets Wrong City, Shoots Self

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

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

Why Job Creators Aren’t

Romney’s Concession Speech

Romneylans: A New Species of Stupidity

Romney’s Medicare Dump and Run Strategy