3rd From Sol

~ Learn from before. Live now. Look ahead.

3rd From Sol

Category Archives: Pride

5 Reasons I No Longer Feel The Bern

04 Friday Mar 2016

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Branding, Communication, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Taxes, US History, Women

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

2016, Bernie Sanders, Conservatives, Democrats, Donald, GOP, Hillary Clinton, Howard Dean, liberals, Politics, President, Republicans

Nevada was an early caucus state. Caucus is Latin for a divisive meeting of unified people and, from the word, ‘caca,’ meaning excrement.

Hillary Clinton: In her 3rd decade of fighting for a government by the people

Hillary Clinton: In her 3rd decade of fighting for a government by the people

Prior to the Nevada caucus I was unsure who I was supporting. I always have liked Hillary Clinton, but I have been a little frustrated with the moderate viewpoint that we can all work together, when extremist conservatives have proven that we really can’t. I considered myself leaning towards Bernie Sanders until the February 11th Democratic debate, and then I began to realize that Bernie is not the man to lead this country.

1. Bernie: The One-Song Musical
In the February 11th Democratic debate I realized that Bernie Sanders has latched on to a handful of speaking points and beats them to death at every rally. I don’t really care what Hillary Clinton said in her speeches to any big bank, but I do appreciate she has their attention. Bernie’s harping on a few minor meaningless issues is exactly what conservatives have been doing for decades and I’m sick of it. We don’t need a leader to spend four years of blaming other people for small faults when we have the rise of a second Confederacy in our country that seeks to destroy everything we stand for in the United States.

2. Bernie Supporters:  All Flash, No Dignity, No Honor, No Substance
I live next to the University of Nevada, so we have a lot of college students in our precinct. Needless to say our precinct went almost entirely for Bernie Sanders. They were all excited about themselves and how they were the voice of change. They were also rude and undignified in their manner of supporting their candidate. Both the elected President and Secretary of the caucus were Bernie supporters and wearing Bernie tee shirts and buttons. At one point, the Secretary, who did nothing during the meeting, walked in front of the fifteen Clinton supporters and announced to the room, “I’m not voting for Hillary. I’d never do that.”

But the real issue for me was when an envelope was passed around to help the Democratic Party. I went to at least thirty people before me, and none of them put any money in it. Not even a quarter. I put twenty dollars in it, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it came back with only that amount. None of the Sanders supporters were committed to helping the Democratic party. They were just there to pleasure themselves.

We don't need screamers for leaders
We don’t need screamers for leaders
Bernie Sanders is passionate, if he is anything
donald-trump-funny-face

3.  Bernie:  Howard Dean’s Scream Over and Over Again
Every time I see Bernie Sanders speak, I see Howard Dean. Sanders is not passionate, he’s irrational. After he loses an election or caucus, he starts talking about momentum, as if losing is a good thing because the campaign is about momentum, not issues.

“What this entire campaign has been about is the issue of momentum….”

                       Bernie Sanders, after losing Nevada

It’s the ‘say nothing’ approach to communication that has no meaning, just key words strung together to incite applause. It’s not leadership, it’s Trumpmanship.

4.  Bernie:  Leadership Via Destruction
Much of Sanders campaign has devolved into leadership via destruction. I agree with him on most of the issues, but in his speeches he tends to present himself as a dragon slayer and yet, he comes off more like Don Quixote. I supported him when he stayed on topic, but now he seems stuck on a message of attack rather than building. That’s not the route I support for someone to become President.

5.  Bernie:  Bottomless Pit of Promises
It the past seven years have proven anything, it has proven that the President can do very little if he or she has a Congress that is not on the same page. Promises by a presidential candidate are the fairy dust of politics. What we need to hear from a Democratic Presidential candidate is:

…elect me, AND elect these Democrats for Congress, and we will get Citizens United overturned, a ban on assault weapons restored, improve the healthcare system, ….

Speeches are the leverage of action. If a candidate for President of the United States of America is truly seeking action, he or she needs to accept that their speech should acknowledge the path to action requires the citizen to do more than just elect her or him.

The Joy of No

01 Tuesday Dec 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, Club Leadership, College, Communication, Consulting, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Education, Employee Retention, Ethics, Generational, Government, Higher Education, Honor, Human Resources, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Membership Recruitment, Membership Retention, Passionate People, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Re-Imagine!, Relationships, Respect, Rotary, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, The Tipping Point, Tom Peters, Universities

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

bosses, committees, dictators, Human Interaction, meetings, No, organizations, Social Interaction, workplace

_DSC1990No is a perfectly acceptable answer….providing,

  • The idea or suggestion lacked thought or had no basis in fact. (e.g.; Would Donald Trump be a good President?)
  • The idea or suggestion has obvious flaws. (e.g.; Should we let a gun be in a room with a bunch of 2nd grade children?)
  • Is a matter of personal opinion or seeks personal approval. (e.g.; Would you go out with me?)

But when an idea or suggestion doesn’t fall under any of these categories, the “no” answer becomes a potential weapon of personal destruction for the person saying it, and a beautiful opportunity for the person on the receiving end.

Being the youngest of four boys, my brothers and parents became accustomed to telling me ‘no.’ I was constantly asking questions and making suggestions, and the ‘yes’ answer was likely to encourage me. In those situations where I actually had a good idea, it was enough that as the youngest member of the family, a ‘no’ answer was valid.

As an adult, I never had any expectations that my ideas and suggestions would be better received, so hearing ‘no’ was an irritation, but I accepted it as part of life.

However, I as grew older I noticed that some people seemed to enjoy telling other people ‘no.’ Often these people were in leadership positions and their tactic was to dominate and/or intimidate others. In some cases people would act as a dictator within the organization, silencing the ideas and opinions of others with a type of ‘no’ answer that implied dire consequences if the person didn’t drop the subject, or the idea was treated so lightly as if the person was unintelligent for making the suggestion. For years I thought that part of being a good manager was to have the privilege and responsibility to tell others, “NO!” 

Then several years ago I joined a service club and became very involved in the organization. I served on several Boards and committees. I discovered that I could manipulate some people because I always knew their response to whatever I suggested would be, ‘no.’

It was then I realized that when someone says ‘no,’ it is a gift. The “No-ee” has done all they are required by making the suggestion or asking the question. The “No-er” has put their reputation and respectability on the line. The ‘no’ answer gives them all the responsibility, and, as a situation plays out, their failure to consider someone else’s idea or suggestion may be the fatal decision that brings them down.

I still find enjoyment of sometimes asking a perfectly legitimate question of someone I know will give me a ‘no’ answer. It is even more interesting to do this when I have more information about the issue or situation than they do and they can’t help but give me an answer that will eventually haunt them.

Still, I have learned that organizations and relationships with ‘no’ people are typically doomed. There’s a time to experience the joy of ‘no,’ and then there are times it’s best to walk away and shake the dust off your sandals.

Living in the Imminent

27 Tuesday Oct 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Government, Honor, Passionate People, Pride, Random, Science, Space, Technology, Travel

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

astronauts, cosmonauts, death, ESA, International Space Station, ISS, Japan, NASA, orbit, Russia, scientists, Space, USA

international-space-station-completeSix people near death 

Don’t they know?

They show no fear

They have to know.

They live surrounded by a monster that kills without effort

Yes, in this millisecond they live in peace

In the next they could die in horror

We have no reason to fear walking outside

But these six

They should have reason

Death awaits outside with the tools of the universe

Radiation, heat, cold, or even nothing can kill

These six live where no one should

Yet, these six rob Death

These six live flawlessly where perfection matters

These six know Death and know his tools

Yes, these six know and know the risk

Just before sunrise or just after sunset

We watch them go by

We walk outside and watch them go by

For them, sunrise comes, sunset goes many times a day

But rarely do they go outside to watch

They know what is waiting outside

They know the risk

And three by three they will come and go

Three to rob death, three to come home

Three to look up to, and three to celebrate

Six people near death

But alive and well

GOP Presidential Race is Over

27 Sunday Sep 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Ethics, Government, Health, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Religion, Respect, The Tipping Point, US History, Women

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

2016, America, conservative, Conservatives, Elections, GOP, House of Representatives, House Speaker, John Boehner, Marco Rubio, Pope, President, Republicans, resignation, right-wing extremists, Tea Party, United States of America

Marco Rubio basking in the glow of Boehner's resignation

Marco Rubio basking in the glow of Boehner’s resignation

House Speaker John Boehner’s resignation last week has brought reality to the Republican party. The smallest minority in Congress is the right-wing extremists and they have been the tail wagging the GOP dog. House Speaker Boehner has been attempting to keep up appearances that common sense conservatives and right-wing extremists all want the same thing, but they don’t. Boehner’s resignation was the showdown between conservatives who believe in the founding principles of our country and conservatives who want to dismantle our country.

Senator and Republican Presidential candidate, Marco Rubio announced Speaker Boehner’s resignation to the cheers of a political group that desires to overthrow our 240 year-old government and replace our Constitution with Taliban-like laws based on mythology. Rubio then went on to say that it is time to “turn the page” on a government that sees all people as equal and install a government that dictates who people can love, what women can choose, and how people can worship.

House Speaker John Boehner takes the high road

House Speaker John Boehner takes the high road

Senator Rubio’s victory speech is premature. Boehner’s resignation exposes the Republican party’s festering wound and the hysteria of the mob mentality of right-wing extremists. The Republicans have two choices. They can either capitulate to the right-wing extremists and select a Presidential candidate that will not be electable, or they can finally stand up to those people who seek to overthrow our government and find a moderate conservative that might draw some support from left leaning voters.

In either case, it is unlikely that any Republican candidate can rid themselves of the poisonous environment created by extremists in their party. The right-wing extremists have devolved into a group that has lied and deceived so much that their social media posts are only propaganda for incestuous consumption of other extremists.

However, the right-wing extremists are not an unstoppable force. Their lies and deceit may entertain them, but disgust intelligent, loyal citizens. Right-wing extremists are parading stupidity as if it is something to be proud of in a country of highly intelligent people. The only question is whether common sense conservatives will stay on the right-wing band wagon until it goes off the cliff.

Rebirth of the Liberal

25 Friday Sep 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Education, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, Green, Health, Higher Education, History, Honor, Passionate People, Politics, Pride, Religion, Respect, Space, Taxes, Technology, Universities, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

anti-American, Bernie Sanders, conservatism, Conservatives, Elizabeth Warren, Liberal, liberalism, liberals, Pledge of Allegiance, President Barack Obama

Liberals, Inc.

Liberals, Inc.

The values and traditions of liberalism in the United States of America is experiencing a Renaissance. This is a not a time for a cautious return to a government by and for the people.  It is a time to boldly stand up for intelligence in political office.

The disastrous policies of George W. Bush, coupled with decades of conservative efforts to put our country in retreat have met with consistent failure. Those failures have forced conservatives to put up artificial issues that appeal to a distinctly anti-American segment of the population, but that has only driven them into a corner.

Conservative politicians strain to win applause from the stupid and the ignorant, but the United States needs and deserves smart, not stupid. Liberals must now step up and engage our citizens and remind them that politics in our country is not to be entertainment for small minds. We have to expose the absurdity of 2015  “conservative values:”

When everyone has guns in public, innocent people die. Gun ownership without rules is anarchy. Laws protect people from those who are too stupid to know better. It’s not about taking guns away; it’s about protecting the innocent from the stupid.

Our government is a blessing, not a curse, and we pay for the privilege of living in this great country by paying our taxes and doing so without complaint.

Unregulated business is the playground of the unethical and immoral. Business is motivated by greed and destruction of competitors. Without government, ethical businesses can’t survive.

If a group of people on an island were running out of fresh water, the liberal mind would determine how to obtain more water, and the conservative mind would begin planning on who they can kill.

The confederate flag is the symbol of racists and traitors who tried to steal part of America away from then attempted to overthrow our country. The confederate flag is a heritage of losers and has no place among a nation of winners.

Government is not a place for religion, nor a country where a majority religion is to dictate the beliefs and morals for all citizens. America is a country that offers freedom FROM religion, not slavery to a religion.

War is the opium for the 2015 conservative. When in doubt the conservative wants to wage war, but war never results in a quick and easy peace. War devastates all involved and it is rarely the leaders who started the war who pay the heaviest price.

The time to coddle the wealthy is past. Money is not the measure of a human, nor does it give special privilege to a person in a country where all citizens are created equal.

For 35 years conservatives have been shouting down common sense and intelligence with false accusations, deceptions, and biased fear mongering. It’s time that loyal Americans regained their voice.

To be liberal is to be an American that loves our country and our government. We believe that all humans are created equal. We believe that our country becomes stronger, not weaker through diplomacy and respect for other countries. We believe that education is the foundation to a better life and schools should be more than a cheap training ground for dead-end service jobs. We believe that when government spends money it provides jobs and needed infrastructure that helps grow our economy.

The call of liberalism is not for everyone, nor is it restricted to one party. Our country’s founders were liberals who broke away from conservatives who wanted to stay loyal to the English King. Republicans were liberal when Abraham Lincoln stood up against domestic enemies that sought to defile our Constitution. Franklin D. Roosevelt was liberal when he made our citizens believe in the greatness of our country. Dwight D. Eisenhower was liberal when he made the Interstate Highway System a reality. John F. Kennedy was a liberal when he said we could go to the Moon and back.

Elementary school children can grasp the values of conservatives. The egocentric concept that everyone else exists to serve their needs is a common attitude of children and conservatives.

However, it takes significant maturity and intelligence to understand liberal values. It requires the person to see themselves as part of a greater society. A liberal knows that respect, cooperation, humility, and honor cannot be compromised for a free society to function. Our original 1942 Pledge of Allegiance reinforced these values:

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the UNITED States of America, and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands, ONE NATION, INDIVISIBLE,  with liberty and justice FOR ALL.

We are a republic, not an oligarchy. We are one nation that shall not be divided. We shall have liberty and justice for all, not just for those with the most money, nor the most guns. 

We are a nation founded by liberals, built by those who believed in “Yes We Can.” Liberal ideals have been a part of every great achievement in our country. Conversely, conservative leadership has maligned and crippled this nation. It’s time we took our country back.

Bashing “Respect For Others” By Calling It “Politically Correctness”

01 Wednesday Jul 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Communication, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, History, Honor, Information Technology, Internet, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Religion, Respect, US History

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

African American, America, American, Confederate Flag, Donald Trump, Facebook, GOP, Hispanic, Mexican, political correct, respect for others, Twitter

2014 May (17)I grew up in a small town. Mrs. Wick was the cranky old lady that lived next door. Mr. Valdez lived down the street and was a law enforcement officer.

It would have been easy to make fun of Mrs. Wick, but my mother would not allow us to do that, and in fact, we were taught to offer to help her whenever she needed it.

It would have been easy to disrespect Mr. Valdez in our small, almost-all-white town because he was Hispanic, but I would have never thought to do that, and his son was one of my best friends in elementary school.

Basic respect for the people in our town was how I was raised. It wasn’t being ‘politically correct,’ because it was part of being a decent person. Sure there were times when people failed to be decent, but the rodeo was only in town once a year and city people who pretend to be cowboys are idiots.

Today, our neighborhood is much larger. A Facebook post reaches around the world. Our community is no longer bound by city limits, county or state lines, nor national boundaries. What we say and do is part of a recorded history that will exist for hundreds, or possibly thousands of years.

It is not easy to be respectful of other people, but it is required. There should never be a question of whether or not to fly a confederate flag. It is always wrong to wave a symbol of traitors and racists in the face of our brothers and sisters around the world.

It is never appropriate to malign a group of honorable people who often risk their lives to have a better life in the United States by characterizing them as drug dealers and rapists. We have a responsibility to speak and act with respect to others. It is not a matter of being ‘political correct,’ it is a matter of personal honor and decency. That value has been the foundation of the strength of our country. It is why, when America faces a real threat, we drop everything and respond as one.

It is why Hitler failed, and Putin hates us. The test of a true American is the ability to respect others who are different in race, gender, religion, who they love, and where they are from.

Gay Marriage Legitimizes Marriage

26 Friday Jun 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, History, Honor, Politics, Pride, Relationships, Religion, Respect, US History, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

gay marriage, homosexual, human rights, law, LBGT, Supreme Court

gay_marriage_81102178Today’s Supreme Court ruling acknowledges that the United States of America is legitimizing marriage, and it is about time.

Historically, marriage was created to establish a legal bond or contract of property ownership. Sometimes the property was just the woman, but typically marriage included the transfer of land, animals, money, or other material items. A woman was not a party in the contract, but the subject of the contract, meaning she was irrelevant in taking part of the terms of the contract.  The woman’s opinion or love was not needed, nor wanted in most marriages.

As a society we have moved away from the marriage-as-a-contract concept; however, even today we still have men and women in the United States who cling to the misogynistic idea that a woman is property to serve and bear a man children. These men and their Stepford spouses cite the historical aspect of marriage as the justification for demeaning a human being (or allowing themselves to be demeaned.) 

Gay marriage has only one purpose, the expression of love between two people. There is no property exchange and no issue of who is the master and who is subservient, (unless both parties agree to a 50 Shades of Gay-type relationship.) You can’t attach outdated expectations of a gender-based owner/property understanding to a marriage between two people who are of the same gender.

Perhaps now heterosexuals shed the mantle of the woman as property and confirm marriage a legitimate expression of love.

The Day the World Will Stop: Changing of the English Throne

09 Saturday May 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Generational, Government, History, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Religion, Respect, Women

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Crown, England, Great Britain, Her Majesty, leadership, Prince Charles, Prince William, Queen Elizabeth II, Royal, Royalty, Succession, The Queen, Throne, UK, United Kingdom

Queen_Elizabeth_II_March_2015

Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II

In 114 days (as of May 9, 2015,) Queen Elizabeth II’s legend will take one step further into history. On September 9th of this year she will become the longest-serving royal (63 years, 217 days) to ever grace the English throne. If you are younger than 65 years old you will not have known anyone other than Queen Elizabeth as the leader of England.

It is said she will not abdicate her throne, but will reign until her death. That is the expected choice, but possibly not the wisest.

It is likely her Majesty does not understand the impact her death will have on the world. Humans cling to the idea that some things do not change, and there are few people in the civilized world who don’t have a mental and/or emotional attachment to her and her place in our world. She is the constant that we all rely on to know that some things do not change.

Royal_Coat_of_Arms_of_the_United_Kingdom.svg

The Queen’s Royal Coat of Arms (UK)

During her reign as Queen we have had twelve Presidents in the United States (Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush (41,) Clinton, Bush (43,) and Obama.) We have seen movie stars, rock stars, athletes all come and go, but Queen Elizabeth has always been there.

In a world of instant communication, her death will affect more people than anyone in the history of the world. People will remember where they were and what they were doing the moment the news is announced. If her death coincides with a change in royal leadership, it will magnify the impact on the world.

Queen Elizabeth 1953

Queen Elizabeth II in 1953

The event of her death and the passing of the English crown will be seen by some as the perfect opportunity to take advantage of an emotional situation. The majority of the world will pull closer together in grief, but those who seek radical changes in politics, government, the economy, or just seek to hurt the Western world, will use the chaotic feelings of the loss as a way of creating more chaos.

The royal family will be dealing with the loss, and the matters of royal duty at the same time. The coronation of the new King may not happen for a year or more; however, the details of transitioning power from Her Majesty to the His Majesty will involve changes in staff, new protocols, and a thousand other items that have not been done for over six decades. All this will happen at a time when few will be able to focus on anything beyond the loss of woman and icon that has been an unflickering beacon of the Western World.

However, if she reached this milestone in four months and then decided to abdicate sometime in the next year, a calm, undramatic transition would preserve the stability of the royal role the hearts and minds of the world. As the former queen with over sixty years of experience, she would become the most valuable and trusted counsel for the new King.

Her eventual passing will still devastate the emotional state of the world, but with a new King already on the throne, the world will know that England’s royal, non-political leadership will live on.

God Save the Queen.

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/US News and World Report

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 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

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

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

Image credit: J. Scott Applewhite/AP.

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.

GDP Growth by Year

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, Putin, ISIS

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!

  1. Y2K, the disaster that never came (Jan. 2000)
  2. Elections of 2000
    1. Florida election fiasco (Nov./Dec. 2000)
    2. Supreme Court appoints George W. Bush as President (Dec. 2000)
  3. Attacks of September 11, 2001
  4. Anthrax letters
  5. Wars of Just Because
    1. Afghanistan (2001-2014)
    2. Iraq (2003-2011)
  6. Rise of Smaller and Smarter Technology (Entire Decade)
    1. Smartphone
    2. Texting
  7. Space Shuttle Columbia destroyed on reentry (Feb. 2003)
  8. Mars Rovers bounce to successful landings and missions
    1. Spirit (June 2003)
    2. Opportunity (July 2003)
  9. Saddam Hussein captured (Dec. 2003)
  10. Assault weapon ban expires (Sept. 2004)
  11. Online Wonders
    1. Amazon.com
    2. Facebook
    3. Twitter
    4. Google
    5. YouTube
    6. Wikipedia
  12. Indian Ocean Earthquake/Tsunami (Dec. 2004)
  13. Pope John Paul dies (Apr. 2005)
  14. Global Warming
  15. Hurricane Katrina (Aug. 2005)
  16. Virginia Tech Massacre (Apr. 2007)
  17. Global Economic Disaster (2007-08)
    1.  Financial giants collapse
    2.  Housing market collapses
    3. Auto industry collapses
    4. Massive unemployment
  18. Price of gas soars, and falls….as a function of conservative politics
  19. Barack Obama elected as President (Nov. 2008)
  20. 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 1980’s)

15 Sunday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, College, Communication, Crisis Management, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Higher Education, History, Honor, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Respect, Space, Taxes, Technology, Traditional Media, Universities, US History

≈ 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

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

This is Why (2015 vs the 1970’s)

15 Sunday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, Crisis Management, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Health, Higher Education, History, Honor, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Taxes, Traditional Media, Universities, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

1973 oil embargo, Afghanistan, American Hostage Crisis, Arab, Conservatives, Democrat, Egypt, fuel, GOP, Iran, Israel, Middle East, Munich Massacre, Munich Olympic Games, OAPEC, oil, oil prices, oil shortages, OPEC, petroleum, President Gerald Ford, President Jimmy Carter, President Richard Nixon, Republican, Russia, Soviets, Syria, USSR, Watergate, Yom Kipper War

The 1970’s – American Implosion

The Decade of Oil Domination

  • Population:  203.2 million
  • Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita:  $23,381
  • Median Annual Income:  $7,559
  • Life Expectancy:  70.8
  •  Average Age at Marriage:   Men 23.2, Women 20.6
  • % of pop. w/high school degree or higher:  52.3%
  • % of pop. w/college degree or higher:  10.7% 

ENEMIES DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN
America was rocked by the internal conflicts during the 1960’s, and the 1970’s did little to sooth the hearts and minds of the citizens. Inflation slowed slightly in 1970, only to be followed by recession. Then the White House was rocked in 1972, by an ever-growing scandal called ‘Watergate’ after the place where Republican operatives attempted to break into Democratic headquarters. Over the next year it would be revealed that the Republican party, including President Richard Nixon played dirty politics during the President’s re-election campaign and then used power tactics to cover up their misdeeds.

In the Fall of 1972, the world was shaken by a group of Palestinians that took Israeli athletes hostage in Germany’s Summer Olympic Games. The Palestinians were given logistical assistance by German Neo-Nazis which helped them penetrate the athlete’s living area and capture eleven of the Israel delegation (two of the eleven were killed during the invasion of the Israeli rooms.) As the world watched, the Germans eventually attempted a botched night rescue as the hostages were moved to an airport. The German snipers were untrained and had no night vision equipment. Every aspect of the German rescue plan was flawed and the Palestinians eventually made a decision to kill all hostages during a stalemate in the fighting.

In October of 1973, Israel responded to a surprise attack by Egypt and Syria (the Yom Kipper War) with a counter attack. The United States and Russia quickly began resupplying their allies (US/Israel and USSR/Syria-Egypt) with arms and materials. In response the Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries (OAPEC, later OPEC) began a six month oil embargo that created massive fuel shortages in the United States. This caused the price of oil to rise from $3/barrel to $12/barrel and sparked a new round of inflation.

OUTCOME: American Politics
By the late 1974, the Watergate scandal had ended in resignations by the Vice President and President. Gerald Ford, who had just replaced the Vice President, became the President and limped his administration through the end of Nixon’s term. By the 1976 elections people were done with the Republican party and Jimmy Carter was thrust into the job of restoring faith in government.

OUTCOME:  Oil, Greed, and the Middle East
The OPEC oil embargo and the Munich Massacre sent a message that America should be focusing on the Middle East, but the Watergate scandal had caused an information overload, so many Americans still saw Russia as the main foreign threat. However, because the Middle East had massive oil reserves it became the most strategic region in the world for oil consuming countries. This caused the governments of Russia and the United States to attempt to secure the region for each country’s own self-interest.

The questionable tactics of unscrupulous American oil companies opened new wounds in the Arab world.  Our public image had been defined by U.S. business and political interference in internal matters of many Arab countries. Americans were caught off guard by the festering hate for America in the Middle East.

OUTCOME:  Economic Instability
The roller coaster of inflation, recession, inflation left Americans with a sense of fear about the economy. The typical American was caught by surprise in 1973 when the oil embargo practically put the United States on its knees. The pride America had after beating the odds in World War II and putting a man on the Moon were all erased by one unethical President and our country’s economic vulnerabilities.

THE NEW HOPE EXTINGUISHED
Jimmy Carter’s election in 1976, brought a new hope to America. That produced a new fear for Republicans. Nothing could hurt conservatives more than to have a Democratic President restore America’s self-confidence. President Carter focused on peace and humanitarian initiatives that conservatives said made America look weak. Fortunately for conservatives, the Middle East would be what they needed to derail the Democrats and return to power.

In 1979, Russia invaded Afghanistan and students in Iran overran the American Embassy and took hostages. At the same time a mythical oil crisis (world oil supply dropped by only 4%) drove oil prices up to $39.50 per barrel in one year. The events dominated the news and overshadowed Carter’s re-election campaign. Republicans successfully used political ads to paint Democrats as out of touch during the worst political crisis of Carter’s administration. The events of 1979 could not have been more perfect for the resurgence of the disgraced conservatives.

NEXT:  The 1980’s

THE SERIES:  The 1950’s    The 1960’s    The 1990’s    2000’s    Epilogue

This is Why (2015 vs the 1950’s)

15 Sunday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Communication, Crisis Management, Education, Generational, Government, Higher Education, History, Lessons of Life, Politics, Pride, Science, Space, Technology, Traditional Media, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

1950, 1950's, post depression, post war, Space, space race, television

Why is the world like it is?

It is an interesting question. Unfortunately it is the wrong question. The world is what we perceive it to be and our perceptions are based largely on our experiences…or at least the experiences we tend to remember. This is why attitudes about the world are vastly different between generations. This doesn’t mean that age determines attitude, just that age contributes to attitude. 

So why do different generations tend to see the world differently?

The 1950’s – The Calm After the Storms

Mass Production of New Technology

  • Population:  151.3 million
  • Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita:  $15,029
  • Median Annual Income:  $4,237
  •  Life Expectancy:  68.2
  • Average Age at Marriage:   Men 22.8, Women 20.3
  • % of pop. w/high school degree or higher:  34.3%
  • % of pop. w/college degree or higher:  6.2%

POST DEPRESSION, POST WAR

If you were an adult, you just survived through the most massive conflict in history. Millions died directly or indirectly because of the war. The United States of America was expected to fold after the attack on Pearl Harbor. Instead, Americans pulled off a miracle by sacrificing normal daily life for a united country at war.

With victory in World War II came a fierce pride, but nobody was ready to rush into another war anytime soon. Despite that, a growing fear of Russia’s aggression put everyone on edge that they might be plunged into even a more horrible war than the one they survived.

Children of the 1950’s were witnesses to a traumatized adult population. Their grandparents lived through the Great Depression where the unthinkable financial disaster became everyone’s reality. Both grandparents and parents survived World War II. An event that stopped normal living and put everyone under the shadow of death and fear. Children also became a victim of the Cold War where fear of a global extinction event was a real possibility.

NEW ECONOMY
The massive industrialization for World War II created new jobs, more money, and a sudden burst of growth in the economy. Companies grabbed up anyone with advanced training or knowledge to incorporate advancements in technology created during the crisis of the war. People suddenly could afford luxuries like televisions, phones, cars and new homes. This prosperity was juxtaposed against the horrors that the world had experienced in the previous 20 years. It was truly the best of times and the worst of times. 

NEXT:  The 1960’s

THE SERIES:  The 1970’s    The 1980’s    The 1990’s    The 2000’s    Epilogue

How to Choose Your Favorite Son or Daughter

20 Saturday Dec 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Lessons of Life, parenting, Pride, Relationships

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

children, Colorado, daughter, Denver, Favorite child, love, Nevada, offspring, parent, Parent Development, parenting, Reno, son

And the favorite child is?

And the favorite child is?

Every family that has more than one child faces a question as to which one is the favorite child. When asked, a parent will typically say, “They’re all my favorite,” which is BS and we all know it. Every parent should be able to know which child is their favorite, even if they can’t be honest about it.

Evaluating Your Offspring

Trying to determine which is your favorite is not as easy as it sounds. Flight attendants giving the pre-flight safety briefing on Southwest Airlines sometimes encourage parents of flying with more than one child to determine which child has the best earning potential in case they have to choose one to give oxygen in the event the cabin depressurizes. This is funny the first 20 times you hear it, but that doesn’t stop  them from delivering the joke 100 hundreds of times.

However, earning potential is a poor criteria for determining a favorite child…unless you have a binding contract that gives you a kickback as a quid pro quo for favorite child status. Quite frankly, successful adults often start out as horrible offspring, so I would not use earning potential as a factor.

Ease of child-rearing is also not a reliable criteria. Often it is the badly behaved child that teaches us the most about ourselves and our skills as a parent. Bad children can also become grateful adults, although one shouldn’t bank on that either.

Children who are ‘Mama’s boy’ or ‘Daddy’s girl’ should not be considered as an indicator of favorite child status. Sweet young children can become Satan’s spawn as teenagers, leaving the parent to wonder what they did wrong…as if the parent is at fault.

Children who remain in constant contact, calling their Mom or Dad daily, may seem like candidates for the favorite child, but this stalking technique is illegal in most states, so it doesn’t seem prudent to consider it as a factor?

So how does a parent determine the favorite child?

I have two adult daughters and a nine-year-old son. My daughters have successful lives, wonderful children and selected husbands that are more intelligent than their (my daughter’s) father. My son works hard to do his best and constantly impresses me with his development out of conservative it’s-all-about-me behavior into liberal, make-the-world better behavior. It would seem I would have a difficult time choosing the favorite….

….but I don’t.

The secret to choosing your favorite child is remembering that life is made up of moments. Every moment (in person or by phone or text) with one or more of my children is a moment with my favorite child or children. Our offspring don’t often understand why ‘family gatherings’ are so important to parents because they don’t realize that it is a time when a parent is rich with favorite children.

This doesn’t mean any of our children fall out of favor just because they are not with the parent at any given moment. Children are part of a parent’s life at all times, but when we have the opportunity to interact with our children, the moment is special.

Children are our legacy and we can move on in our lives reassured that we have accomplished all we needed to when we have raised a child. Our offspring become the painting of life we create as parents.We are artists and when we spend time with our children we can admire the grace and creativity of work that we did without a manual, training or degree. We can’t take credit for everything our children become, but we can smile and be content in that role we played in their lives….even if they don’t realize it.

This holiday season, remember to enjoy your favorite child and know that you are not limited to just one. Happy Holidays!

The Grade Negotiation Season

21 Wednesday May 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, College, Communication, Education, Ethics, Generational, Higher Education, Internet, Opinion, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Respect, Universities

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

college credit, Email, financial aid, grade point average, Grades, negotiation, professors, semester, student loans

Spring brings forth the failures as well as the flowers

Spring brings forth the failures as well as the flowers

Most people don’t realize that we are in a new season. It happens twice a year at the end of a semester when college professors are bombarded with emails from their students trying to beg, borrow, or steal a few points for a higher grade. It should be noted that the majority of these emails are not coming the students who attended class, turned in assignments on time, and studied for the tests. No, these are the students that missed class, turned in assignments late, and had a party to go to rather than study.

The emails are typically as follows:

Hi,

Could u look @my grade. I need 2 have a c n u’re clas or i lose my finansal aide. i was sure i had a c n u’re class.

Rach

The student often assumes that the professor knows in which class the student was enrolled, and writes as if she or he is texting a friend. The student probably knows that they didn’t deserve a “C” in the class; however, they hope that the professor will feel sorry for them and bump them up. Usually, nothing changes, but the student can say to her or his parents that they were sure they had a “C” in the class and that they even complained to the professor, but he or she wouldn’t change it.

For the professor, these emails take pointless hours of time to review the scores, confirm the grade, and respond. It turns the end of the semester into a circus where all the clowns come out of the woodwork after being absent most of the semester.

There is nothing wrong with a student questioning their grade; however, if a student is at the borderline of losing her or his financial aid, and/or falling below the required grade average for enrollment, the problem is not about one grade, but the overall performance in all classes.

Sadly, professors are not allowed to offer an appropriate response such as:

Rachel Smith
Student
ENG 203 – Writing For Business

Dear Rachel:

Thank you for your email. Your grade is based on your participation in my class and reflects the work you performed. The “D’ you received is not only correct, it is generous. I’m pleased to see that a student like yourself will no longer be offered financial aid, so that a better quality of student can now be a recipient.

I wish you well on your future in the world of menial labor for which you may or may not be qualified.

Sincerely,

Edward Terrell
Professor
University of  Higher Education

 

Is Reno’s NBC Affiliate Moving Back to the Middle?

09 Wednesday Apr 2014

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

ACA, Affordable Care Act, FCC, jFox News, journalism, Kai Jackson, KRNV, MyNews4, NBC, SBGI, Sinclair Broadcast Group, Standards, Unemployment benefits, WJZ

Image by Paul Kiser

KRNV reconnecting with the rest of the community?

Something happened at KRNV, Reno’s NBC affiliate, on April 8. It was not what they did, but what they didn’t do. Tuesday’s 6 PM newscast of the Sinclair Broadcast Group‘s (SBGI) station didn’t run an anti-government story.

It’s possible it they were just having an off day. It’s possible that NBC has applied pressure to the station to not run Fox News-type stories. It’s possible that the station’s staff has had enough of sacrificing personal reputations for the conservative agenda of their parent organization. It’s possible the parent organization has had an epiphany regarding serving all viewers, not just conservatives. Who knows? Regardless, it was a refreshing change.

The station did run a Sinclair produced story in the ‘A’ Block, but rather than presenting an overt bias, Kai Jackson, a former news anchor on Baltimore’s CBS affiliate WJZ, offered a story about the cost of extending unemployment benefits. Jackson, who joined Sinclair in December 2013, pointed out that $500 billion have been spent on unemployment benefits since 2008, which is an issue that connects with the conservative viewer. He then he offered the viewpoint of a small business person who says that the money has a positive impact on his revenue as it flows into America’s economy.

Image by Karl Merton Ferron / Baltimore Sun

Kai Jackson at the desk of WJZ CBS Baltimore

One could argue that the issue itself is more of a concern by Republicans, but that is not accurate. Democrats and liberals understand that unemployment benefits are not a long-term solution; however, the money paid out to the unemployed is not lost. It flows through the economy, which is also important. Jackson presentation of the issues was fair and educated conservatives and liberals on the complexity of the problem.

What Jackson didn’t do was line up a long list of rabid conservative ‘experts’ to manipulate the story, nor did he indicate his personal spin on the issue.

Giving the Viewer What They Want or What They Need?
A news team can either manipulate news to invoke an emotional response, or they can work to educate the viewer on  the issues of the day and let the viewer decide how they feel about those topics. In the case of the former the news is sexy and entertaining. In the latter case the news is less emotional and requires more intelligent thought.

The excuse that Fox News-type reporting is just giving the viewer what he or she wants is same rationale of a drug dealer or prostitute. Reporting news should not be an attempt to manipulate emotions. News shouldn’t be anti-government, nor should it be pro-government. This does not mean that news has to be neutral, just that it can’t be driven by a political agenda.

The conservative and liberal views in the United States are both essential to our prosperity. Both viewpoints tend to carve out policies that succeed. A perfect example is the Affordable Care Act (ACA.) It was the health care reform proposed by the Heritage Foundation decades before it became law under President Obama’s administration. Despite Fox News stories that are trying to paint ACA as a disaster, the facts indicate that the number of uninsured people has dropped significantly and the program is actually succeeding.

A local television news organization is not a blog. It operates under the rules created by the FCC to protect the public trust. For whatever reason, yesterday KRNV rose to the expectations of that public trust.

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

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.

Image by Paul Kiser taken from MyNews4 newscast

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.

Image by Paul Kiser taken from MyNews4 newscast

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?

Reno’s NBC Affiliate Runs Anti-Union Press Release As News

09 Wednesday Apr 2014

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

KRNV, labor unions, MyNews4, Nevada Policy Research Institute, NPRI, On Your Side, SBGI, schools, Shelby Sheehan, Sinclair Broadcast Group, teacher's unions, Washoe County School District, WCSD

Taking another step away from journalism, KRNV co-anchor Shelby Sheehan presented a press release from the conservative Nevada Policy Research Institute (NPRI) as news during the April 7th 6 PM broadcast. In what has been an almost nightly anti-government feeding frenzy, the NBC affiliated station, managed by Fox News operator, Sinclair Broadcast Group (SBGI,) announced that according to NPRI, 168 educators left the Washoe County teacher’s union.

Image by Paul Kiser from KRV newscast

Conservative NPRI spokesperson, Shelby Sheehan

Sheehan introduced the story by admitting that NPRI has a statewide campaign against the teacher’s union and they are:

“...letting teachers know when and how they can leave (the union,) so many are doing just that…”

The KRNV veteran anchor briefly mentions that the two percent loss in membership occurred in the Summer of 2013, and then wraps up the NPRI media release by suggesting that more teachers want to leave, but can’t because:

“…once they (the teachers) do (join the union) they only have a short period of time to get out of their membership, which they say (NPRI) prevents more teachers from leaving.”

Sheehan’s sole source for the story was NPRI, which is an anti-government think tank that, among other conservative agendas, is anti- public school and pushes for school vouchers and charter schools. They represent the polar position against unionized teachers. 

Other than her paraphrasing the information given to her by NPRI, Sheehan reported no information or statements from a teacher, the union, nor an independent source. She apparently didn’t even question NPRI’s information, nor why they were just now releasing data that was almost a year old.

NEXT:  Sinclair’s Survey of Shame (To be released 9 April 2014 at 6:30 AM PDT)

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

Image b Paul Kiser

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…”

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

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) 

A Cup of Like

26 Wednesday Mar 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Branding, Business, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Employee Retention, Ethics, Human Resources, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Passionate People, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Re-Imagine!, Relationships, Respect, The Tipping Point, Tom Peters, Travel

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Airlines, Coffee, hotels, Lady Gaga, like, people, Starbucks, tea

Grande cup of Like

Grande cup of Like

I don’t feel it’s appropriate for a business to ‘love’ its customers. Loving someone is a personal bond that shouldn’t be related to business, (unless you’re Lady Gaga, then you can love your ‘monsters.’)

However, I do feel strongly that a business should ‘like‘ its customers. When I go into a coffee house I can tell if they are serving drinks, or if they are offering a cup of like. Anyone can serve a drink, but serving like requires more than the mechanics of taking an order, knowing how much milk to put in a cup, and/or yelling, “I have a Venti Latte with two shots on the bar!”

My home Starbucks on 7th and Keystone in Reno, Nevada has ‘like’ down. They seem truly happy when a customer walks in the door. That doesn’t mean they don’t have their down days, but most of the time you will get more than your drink from the staff.

This is not what I experience when I travel. It’s easy to pick on airlines, because if there is one group of people who don’t ‘like’ their customers, it’s the air travel industry, but even finding hotel or restaurant staff that makes you feel liked has become harder and harder to do.

In fact, a business that likes their customer is so rare that a genuine friendly person stands out among the ugliness of customer service in most businesses. The opportunity to beat the competition is to simply like your customers.

The place to start is with management. Managers have to like their staff and like their job. If their not happy then how can the staff possibly be?

One more thought:  In a world of Twitter, Facebook, and Yelp, how can any business not afford to like their customers?

It’s Time To Drop the “C” From NCAA

25 Tuesday Mar 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, College, Education, Ethics, Government, Higher Education, Opinion, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Recreation, Sports, Taxes, Universities

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

basketball, Football, National Collegiate Athletic Association, NcAA, University of Nevada, UNR

Image by Paul Kiser

College football uses its stadium about 8 days a year. It stands as a monument to Higher Education’s waste of resources

Athletes making more appearances in court than in class. Millions of dollars spent to recruit athletes, only to have them jump to a professional league before they graduate. Athletes that have paid staff minders to make sure they go to class, do their homework, and study. Money donated by alumni to only benefit major athletic programs. When will universities admit that big sports is not compatible with higher education?

Money for nothing. Donors giving to big sport programs

Money for nothing. Donors giving to big sport programs

The excuses are wearing thin. The NCAA tries to sell the idea during every televised college football or basketball game that the athletes on the field or court will become great scientists, doctors, and lawyers. Of course, the success stories are of athletes of every other sport.

Maybe a donor that will only give to athletics is not the person to associate with higher education?

Maybe a donor that will only give to athletics is not the person to associate with higher education?

The marriage between sports and colleges is a joke and it’s time for a divorce. The National Athletic Association (NCAA) should become the National Athletic Association (NAA.) We know college basketball and football athlete’s first, second, and third priorities are in pursuit of a big professional contract. To deny this is just an excuse to make us feel better when they sit in the back of the college classroom playing on their phones.

Make the professional leagues pay for bringing along young athletes and let higher education focus on education.

Reno, Nevada: Dead City Walking

04 Tuesday Mar 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Branding, Business, Crime, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Government, Management Practices, Opinion, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Re-Imagine!, Recreation, The Tipping Point, Travel

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Atlantis, casinos, Circus Circus, Eldorado, gambling, gaming, Grand Sierra Resort, hotels, Nevada, Peppermill, properties, Reno, RSCVA, Silver Legacy, The Nugget

The centerpiece of Reno's future

The centerpiece of Reno’s future

What makes Reno, Nevada unique? Here are some of the wrong answers:

  • Mountains – Plenty of cities the size of Reno are next to, or in mountains.
  • Outdoor Recreation — Again, there are no shortages of cities near outdoor recreation.
  • Arts — Many cities have art festivals, and most art festivals have more professional (paid) artists, but Reno relies mostly on artists working for free.
  • Gaming — Absolutely the most non-unique thing about Reno

Reno is Dying
The question about Reno’s uniqueness is critical to the survival of Reno. Over fifty years ago Reno discovered tourism and that vaulted a small desert town into easy money and big growth. The city learned that when people make their money elsewhere and spend it in Reno, the economy of Reno booms.

But for the last decade Reno has lost its uniqueness. Gaming is something you can do at the nearest Indian Casino. If you want to party and see gaudy construction lit up like game show on LSD, then go to Las Vegas. Reno is nothing when it comes to gaming.

Reno’s is Unique
The one thing that Reno has that no other city has is hotel room per capita. Nevada has one hotel room for every 14 residents, and Reno’s ratio equals or exceeds that average. Reno is a city designed for conventions. The problem is how to get convention organizers to consider Reno as a great convention town.

What won’t work is to keep gaming as the attraction. That industry is poison. It demands that the convention goer stay on the property and gamble, which defeats all the other great attractions that might attract repeat business, and American business people do not want to pay for their employees to go and party. The best thing that could happen in Reno is for gaming to be made illegal.

The other challenge is to get all the properties to work as one. That doesn’t happen that often. One property can shoot the city’s bid for a convention down by not cooperating.

However, if Reno can let go of gaming and focus on the big picture, it could be made into the premier convention town.

That’s a big ‘If.’

Exposing a Bully is Not Bullying

02 Sunday Mar 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Branding, Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Education, Employee Retention, Ethics, Generational, Honor, Human Resources, Internet, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Opinion, parenting, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Women

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

bully, bullying, Dr. Peggy Drexler, Kelly Blazek

During this past week much has been written (including myself) about the case of a person in a position of power, Kelly Blazek, the gatekeeper of a Cleveland, Ohio jobs listing for marketing positions, writing a nasty email to a job seeker. Blazek’s language in the email was unyielding in her attempt to embarrass and humiliate the job seeker. Blazek was using her power to bully someone who was in an inferior position.   

Therefore, I was shocked when I read an ‘Opinion‘ on CNN.com by Dr. Peggy Drexler, who wrote that by publicizing the email and seeking attention to the bullying, the job seeker:

“….acted with malice, and caused the older woman significant damage…”

The specific language suggests that Dr. Drexler is encouraging Blazek, the person who was the bully, to sue the victim on the grounds of malice, libel, and/or age discrimination. One might question as to whether Dr. Drexler’s motives were that of an ambulance chaser, seeking to be employed by Blazek as an ‘expert’ witness in a civil suit.

Dr. Drexler’s opinion piece did describe the nature of Blazek’s email; however, she softened Blazek’s misdeeds by saying:

“Blazek’s words were, of course, undeniably, and likely unnecessarily, harsh”

In her opinion piece, Dr. Drexler masterfully works around the most blatant language in Blazek’s email and, in at least one place, segmented the quoted language so that the most vicious remark doesn’t look like it was the climax of the rest of the paragraph. She also uses Blazek’s “Communicator of the Year” recognition as a reference of her skills, rather than the irony that is obvious after reading a complete version of Blazek’s blistering email. The most damning paragraph from Blazek’s email is missing from Dr. Drexler’s opinion:

“I suggest you join the other Job Bank in town. Oh wait — there isn’t one.”

Dr. Drexler admits that Blazek’s behavior was wrong:

“No question, Blazek lashed out first, with unprofessional behavior that can only be described as bullying.”

However, Dr. Drexler seems to enable Blazek’s behavior by accusing the job seeker:

“But Mekota responding in kind makes her no less a bully.”

In Dr. Drexler’s world, when bullied, sit back and take. Don’t fight back and don’t call out the bully. Other professionals have a different take on how to respond to a bully. In responding to adult bullying, Mental Health Support (from the United Kingdom) suggests the following :

“…if you find yourself the victim of bullying, a bully’s bad behaviour is entirely his or her responsibility, not yours,…”

The website goes on to say:

“Once you have identified a bully and know what to expect from him or her, you must choose not to be a victim, if you want the bullying to stop. Expose the bullying for what it is. Take a stand, and don’t back down…”

“…The important point here is to expose the bully and call him or her to account. Confrontation and exposure, with evidence to support a victim’s accusations, are what the bully tries hardest to avoid. Once exposure happens, the bullying is likely to stop.”

There was an injustice done to Ms. Blazek, but that was from Dr. Drexler in attempting to sanctify Blazek’s behavior by accusing the job seeker of an equal act. Dr. Drexler’s portrait of Blazek as the older woman, victimized by the young, evil job seeker, causing her to lose her career and disappear from social media is absurd. The job seeker did not write the email, nor did she make the decision to shut down Blazek’s websites and social media accounts. Blazek was in the wrong and the damage to her career rests solely in her hands.

← Older posts
Newer posts →

Other Pages of This Blog

  • About Paul Kiser
  • Common Core: Are You a Good Switch or a Bad Switch?
  • Familius Interruptus: Lessons of a DNA Shocker
  • Moffat County, Colorado: The Story of Two Families
  • Rules on Comments
  • Six Things The United States Must Do
  • Why We Are Here: A 65-Year Historical Perspective of the United States

Paul’s Recent Blogs

  • Dysfunctional Social Identity & Its Impact on Society
  • Road Less Traveled: How Craig, CO Was Orphaned
  • GOP Political Syndicate Seizes CO School District
  • DNA Shock +5 Years: What I Know & Lessons Learned
  • Solstices and Sunshine In North America
  • Blindsided: End of U.S. Solar Observation Capabilities?
  • Inspiration4: A Waste of Space Exploration

Paul Kiser’s Tweets

Tweets by PaulKiser

What’s Up

May 2026
S M T W T F S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31  
« Jun    

Follow Blog via Email

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 688 other subscribers

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Loading Comments...