You Shouldn’t Have Run Joe

26 Friday Apr 2019

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Conservatives, Discrimination, Ethics, Gender Issues, Generational, Government, Honor, Politicians, Politics, racism, Respect, United States, US History, Voting, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

2020, career politician, Joe Biden, Politics, President, United States

Joe Biden disqualifies himself to be President

An Open Letter to Joe Biden

Dear Joe Biden,

What the hell are you thinking? Seriously, you think you can begin a campaign to be President of the United States by quoting a document that was written angry white men who didn’t believe that slaves or women were equal, and no one is going to notice?

Don’t get me wrong, the Declaration of Independence is an important document in our country’s history, but if you’re trying to talk about equality you need to talk about the journey our country took to recognize that all are equal, not just what a group of wealthy white men wrote down about equality for wealthy white men.

You also apparently believe that you can make one call to an African American woman and apologize for your inappropriate behavior and that qualifies you to be President. When our son doesn’t do his homework, then later apologizes for not doing his homework, he still doesn’t get to do a sleepover.

If you were truly attempting to atone for your behavior you would have called Anita Hill, apologized, then told her that your behavior against her and other women is why you shouldn’t be President. That is what sincerity is about. That is atonement.

You shouldn’t have run Joe. This was a mistake before you made your announcement and your announcement itself proves why you should be President.

I don’t dislike you. You have worked hard in your life to try and correct the mistakes you have made, but you still don’t understand why old white men are not the people who should lead our country out of this mess created by old white men.

White Racists: Always About Power Over Non-Whites

04 Tuesday Dec 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Conservatives, Discrimination, Ethics, Government, History, Honor, Politicians, Politics, racism, Religion, Respect, Small town, United States, US History, Water

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Colorado, Craig, Massacre, Meeker, Moffat County, Nathan Meeker, Native Americans, Rifle, Rio Blanco County, Utah, Ute Indians, Utes

Racism has always been about power. The power to dominate another group of people is at the core of white supremacist groups. When the South formed the Confederate State of America, they were provoking a civil war in order to maintain their power and control over African Americans. Historically, racism has been the tool of the Caucasian race to threaten and intimidate non-Caucasians.

But African Americans were not the only target of white racists.

Nathan Meeker: Tool of White Power

In 1878, Nathan Meeker was appointed as the Indian agent overseeing the Ute Indians of northwestern Colorado. Meeker was not qualified, nevertheless, he was appointed. He needed the job to pay off loans to the daughters of Horace Greeley. Meeker took out those loans to establish a religious-based utopian colony at what is now Greeley, Colorado. Meeker’s colony was a failure and he found himself in a financial bind when his loan was called due.

Nathan Meeker: Indian agent, racist

As the Indian agent of the White River Agency, Meeker saw the Native Americans as lesser people. In an article published shortly before his appointment he said:

…They are savages, having no written language, no traditional history, no poetry, no literature . . . a race without ambition, and also a race deficient in the inherent elements of progress. Vermin abound on their persons,…

Nathan Meeker

Shortly after Meeker assumed his job as Indian agent, Frederick Walker Pitkin became Governor, in part, on a slogan, “The Utes Must Go!” He and others exaggerated claims of ‘Indian problems’ in an effort to justify a forced relocation of the Utes off of land with valuable resources.

Meeker was the tip of the racist sword as the Indian agent. Meeker decided it was his job to pound the Utes tribes into submission. His goal was to force the Ute Indians to adopt his agricultural and religious values. The Utes were nomadic hunter-gatherers but Meeker wanted to make them farmers. This resulted in tension between the Utes and Meeker that led to an altercation.

The Utes had created a place for gathering and competing in horse races. Meeker objected to this and decided to plow under the area. It was a racist move to provoke a reaction. He got it. When confronted by the Utes, Meeker claimed he was attacked by the Ute chief and severely injured. More reliable versions of the story say he was push and fell to the ground.

Chain of Tragedies

Meeker wired for military support and used the incident as cause for immediate action. On 21 September 1879, Major Thomas T. Thornberg led a force of about 175 men from Fort Steele in South Central Wyoming. The Utes knew or suspected that Meeker had requested troops to be sent to the area.

On 29 September, a band of Ute Indians attacked the White River Agency and killed Meeker and ten male employees. They then took some of the women and children as hostages.

By accident or design, the Utes met the incoming army later that day about 30 km from the White River Agency. The Utes pinned Thornberg’s force down and killed the Major and 13 of his men. The troops held out several days until 35 of the all-African American Buffalo Soldiers arrived from southwestern Colorado.

After rescuing the remain Thornberg forces, negotiations took place to gain the release of the hostages.

Aftermath of a Provoked Attack

There is no doubt that Nathan Meeker’s incompetence and aggression provoked the attack. There is no doubt that many white people settling in Colorado wanted the Native Americans out. There is also no doubt that the Ute’s involved in the attacks were wrong in taking a drastic action against the agency and the U.S. Army. It was a mistake for which their people would pay dearly.

The attacks were the perfect excuse to move the Ute Indians out of Colorado. Initially a deal was struck for one tribe of Ute Indians to remain, but eventually, the government renigged on the deal and forced all Utes to a reservation in Utah. Within three years after the attack, all Native Americans had been relocated.

The white racists of Colorado got what they wanted. Ranchers and miners moved in quickly. Soon after the turn of the century, homesteading began and hundreds packed up everything they owned to claim a new life in Colorado.

Postscript

It is somewhat ironic that all this resulted in little benefit to the incoming white culture in the area. The current population of both Rio Blanco and Moffat Counties in northwestern Colorado is less than 20,000 people in an area that is about the size of Massachusetts (12,800 km.) The population is almost the same as it was for the 2000 census. The economy is almost completely dependent on coal mining, an electric generating plant, and hunting/fishing tourism.

‘Rigor’ is About a School’s Public Image, Not Education

18 Tuesday Sep 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Business, Conservatives, Discrimination, Education, Ethics, Generational, jobs, Nevada, parenting, Politicians, Politics, Public Image, racism, Reno, Science, Taxes, United States, Universities

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Education, Education methods, learning, middle school, parents, pedagogy, public education, rigor, schools, teachers, Teaching, Teaching methods

Education 2020 Series – Part II: Rigor

Rigor: An End That Ignores the Means

Rigor is a catch phase in education. Rigor is touted by business and conservatives as preparation for college and/or the ‘working world.’ The application of rigor is often interpreted by educators as ‘making the students work hard.’ The argument is a continuation of the belief by conservatives that all the problems in the world are the fault of the individual. Schools would be great if only the students worked harder.

The irony is that the definition of rigor doesn’t match the conservative use of the word. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary uses the following words to define ‘rigor.’

“…severity, unyielding or inflexible, strictness, austerity, an act or instance severity or cruelty, a condition that makes life difficult, challenging, or uncomfortable, strict precision: exactness…”

All of these words indicate that rigor is a cruel and inflexible education system that ignores everything we have learned about best practices in teaching.

Emphasis on Test Performance

My son is in the seventh grade in the gifted and talented education (GT or GATE) program of his school district. This his third year in the GT program and he is no stranger to a heavy homework load. Prior to joining the GT program, he attended a public charter school run by a Turkish Islamic group. In that school, he was also subject to rigor in the form of hours of homework designed to facilitate high test scores on standardized test required by the State of Nevada.

The purpose of rigor at the public charter school was two-fold. First, the public charter school administration used the high test scores as a shield to protect it from scrutiny by the school district and those test scores created an image of quality education for the school. Second, rigor was used to wash out all but the best academic performers in order to retain only college-bound students. The school has been in operation for 18 years; however, since they have had a K-12 program, the school graduates less than 25% of the students that were at the school in seventh grade. The rest of the students presumably move to other schools, which allows the charter school to brag about its 100% college-bound rates.

This week I attended my son’s “Parent Open House” His instructors pointed out their elaborate ‘agenda’ boards that covered the curriculum each day of that week. The agenda detailed in-class activities as well as assigned homework. They listed the multiple websites that are primarily established for one-way communication from instructor to student. Students are expected to constantly monitor the information provided and bear the burden of being aware of all requirements made by every instructor from every class.

Corporate Job Standards For Children?

It was a display of organization of information that any middle manager or corporate executive would envy. No student could possibly say that they didn’t know what was required of them. In the corporate world, we call these type of complicated objectives “Job Standards.”

Job Standards in the working world are used by managers to set expectations, then allow the manager to judge an employee’s performance. It sounds great, but Job Standards fail to provide mentoring for the employee, nor do they identify the shortcomings of the manager. If an employee has not been given the necessary training or resources, Job Standards create a situation to punish the employee. If the manager is partially, or completely at fault for an employee not achieving the expectations set down in the Job Standards, the employee potentially will be penalized.

Like corporate job standards, the concept of rigor in education create a system designed to produce results regardless of the objectives are realistic or not. It puts all the pressure on the victim of rigor and absolves the one who inflicts the rigor. If the student succeeds, the instructor and school can claim victory. If the student fails, it is the fault of the student.

To Mentor Students Or Throw Them In the Deep Water?

Instead of following an educational model that is based on mentoring the student, rigor is the educational model that follows the conservative concept of ‘sink or swim,’ and if the student sinks, it’s their fault. The fact that students are overwhelmed by the hours of homework and the confused by all the information coming at them from multiple instructors is acknowledged as a fact of life, not a problem. Counselors are sympathetic but cite the problem as the student’s need to adjust, not the school overreaching.

This is not to suggest that students need to be coddled, or that a challenging curriculum is wrong….let me say that again…this is not to suggest that students need to be coddled, or that a challenging curriculum is wrong;

This is not to suggest that students need to be coddled, or that a challenging curriculum is wrong…

…however, the conservative belief that education is simply a matter of demanding a heavy workload and establishing Job Standards for students is not appropriate. Twelve, thirteen, and fourteen-year-olds are not corporate employees, nor should they be subject to extended periods of excessive heavy workloads.

The Ugly Side of Educational Rigor

It should also be noted that educational rigor benefits specific groups. Students from wealthy families have more resources for tutors, computers, etc. to help them cope with the heavy workload and digital format. Students from Caucasian or Asian families also tend to have an advantage as their cultural background has established decades of high educational expectations. This means that the students from poorer economic situations and other minorities will not have the same support and become more at-risk under the rigor model.

The failure of the rigor model is that it de-emphasizes a mentoring model and focuses on a ‘sink or swim’ model. Not only is rigor wrong for the pedagogy used in our schools, but it also is biased towards certain socioeconomic and ethnic groups. It will only be a matter of time before there is enough research to prove that schools that employ ‘rigor’ in the curriculum are discriminating against certain ethnic groups.

Educational Landmines: Questioning the Pedagogy of Your Child’s School

17 Monday Sep 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Business, College, Conservatives, Discrimination, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Higher Education, jobs, labor, Life, Nevada, parenting, Politicians, Politics, Public Image, racism, Religion, Reno, Science, Taxes, Universities, US History, Voting

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

administration, Conservatives, Education, Education methods, Management Practices, pedagogy, public education, Public Image, school boards, teachers, Washoe County School District, WCSD

Education 2020 – Part I: Criticizing Pedagogy

Dangers of Discussing Pedagogy

Before any discussion of education begins, one must accept that if a parent questions the pedagogy (the methods and practice of teaching) of their child’s school that they risk being attacked, especially by other parents. My personal experience has been that other parents may become passionate about how wonderful the school is, even if there is clear documentation of problems within the school.

Sadly, parents who do criticize their child’s school often lack the knowledge and understanding of pedagogy to intelligently discuss issues and concerns. This has created a long history of parent’s crying ‘wolf’ about problems in the school. Now, all parents are assumed to be uninformed and overprotective, and their concerns and issues to be insignificant.

However, parents do have a legitimate perspective on the education of their children. It must be assumed that the parent will be biased toward their own child, but that does not completely negate the perspective.

Who Are the Experts For Pedagogy?

Ideally, pedagogy should be influenced by people who have expertise in education. Experience and or advanced degrees in the field are factors, but should one educator’s opinions determine the pedagogy for all educators? Research is also a factor; however, simple data (graduation rates, test scores, etc.) is not research because this data is not peer-reviewed. Without peer review, critical questions are left unanswered regarding the validity of the data.

In our country’s current political climate, the idea of equal opportunity in education for all has been supplanted by education to meet the needs of corporations and religious interests. The decades-long effort of lower taxes and attacks on public schools have led conservatives to invade the school boards and districts to plant a new agenda that benefits particular groups. To support their agenda, conservatives often use single viewpoints of an expert touting his or her ‘years’ of educational experience, or advance degrees to support their political agenda.

Who Speaks For the Children?

Is there a legitimate voice in determining the pedagogy of our schools? Yes and no. Teachers and students are the core of education of our youth. Mentoring, not rigor should be the core of pedagogy in any legitimate school. Pedagogy should not be guided by what will make a student a better worker, but by what will develop the skills and ability of the student to make them a better person. Parents are biased, but parents should serve as an assistant to teachers regarding their child’s education.

Most administrators and politicians should not have a significant role in pedagogy simply because they may have a corrupted interest in what is best for the student. Cutting costs, serving political and/or religious interests, etc. should not be part of the teacher/student interaction.

Finally, research, not data, should be at the core of pedagogy. The research should be unbiased for gender, race, and/or socioeconomic status. Graduation rates are meaningless unless there it can be documented that graduating from high school has led to personal, economic, and social success in adult life after graduation. College-bound rates are meaningless unless the student actually succeeds in college and completes a degree. Test scores and standardized tests are meaningless unless it can be proven that high test scores relate to success in adult life.

The Education 2020

It is dangerous territory to initiate a discussion on pedagogy and education in the United States of America; however, it is absolutely necessary. The future is determined by the wisdom of the present. Now is the time to discuss and correct the derailment of pedagogy in our schools.

The purpose of the Education 2020 series is to continue the discussion, identify the problems, and seek solutions.

Starbucks: The Adults In the Business World

18 Wednesday Apr 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in All Rights Reserved, Branding, Business, Communication, Crisis Management, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Discrimination, Employee Retention, Ethics, Honor, Human Resources, labor, Lessons of Life, Life, Management Practices, Nevada, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Respect, Social Media Relations

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

CEO, employee relations, Kevin Johnson, Philadelphia, racism, Starbucks, United Airlines

When you have with 238,000 employees, most of whom interact with the public all day, someone is going to do something stupid. That is a fact of human nature. The question is, how the leadership of a company deals with an incident? In the case of Starbucks, you be the adult and not the five-year-old.

Racists Don’t Think They’re Racist

Racism is a major problem in this country. Racists usually don’t know they are a racist. In their minds, they do what they think is ‘natural’ from their cultural perspective. What is natural is what is correct. This means most racists are in the bigot closet and don’t even know it.

There is no racism test for an employer to give a job applicant. If there were, a lot of people would be unemployable. Closet racists are going to be hired at all major corporations. Sometimes, like at Cracker Barrel, the racism is condoned by the employer; however, most companies avoid hiring overtly racists employees. At least that’s what they claim.

Regardless, when an employee does something that is racist, many executives will attempt to minimize the incident, or attempt to deny the issue was about race. The public relations (PR) people are experts at diluting the obvious by reminding the media that motivations can’t be proven. From a PR perspective, a company, like United Airlines, can do no wrong, even when it does something wrong.

Starbucks Policy of Responsibility

The leadership at Starbucks is probably not perfect, but at least they make every attempt to be aware of what is correct from what is wrong. That is why Kevin Johnson, the CEO of Starbucks wasted no time in responding to one of his employees calling the police on two African Americans for trespassing in a Starbucks when they didn’t purchase something in the store.

In this incident is noteworthy that at least six officers were present to arrest two non-combative African American males. It was overkill that the police were called, and overkill that six police responded. If a white man had robbed the Starbucks it is likely that it wouldn’t have had this response.

The victims of this incident were held for over eight hours after being arrested. They were released after the police admitted they had no crime to with which to charge them.

What Starbucks Didn’t Do

Johnson didn’t offer excuses for his company. He didn’t say the video doesn’t really tell the whole story. The CEO didn’t even hint that it might not have been a racist act.

Instead, Johnson offered apology after apology. Johnson met directly with the men involved. He called the act “reprehensible.” It is unclear what happened to the employee in question, but the employee is no longer at that store.

Most companies today look like children trying to cover up their misbehavior after a public relations incident such as this one. It is good to know that Starbucks is capable of using common sense and decency in responding to this situation.

Sadly, the rest of the employees at Starbucks will be impacted by this one person’s act. We all pay for the bad behavior of others.

Ethics Wins…Always

15 Sunday Apr 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in All Rights Reserved, Business, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Discrimination, Donald Trump, Ethics, Gender Issues, Honor, Lessons of Life, Life, Management Practices, Marketing, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Relationships, Religion, Reno, Respect, selling, The Tipping Point, United States, Women

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Car Dealerships, diabetic supply costs, Donald Trump, Ethics, unethical behavior, Unethical Business Practices

People who believe in a deity believe that there is a guiding force in our lives. Most people cling to the idea that, in the end, good will prevail. They want to know that whatever Judgment Day looks like, that ‘bad’ people will fail, and ‘good’ people will win. The need for a deity is secondary because what we really seek is the hope that ethical behavior will triumph over unethical behavior. And it does.

Ethical?: Price of Life for Diabetics

Ethics, Dual Harm Theory, and Time

When someone acts unethically it harms all parties. It, of course, harms the victim(s) of the unethical act, but it also harms the party responsible for the act. Neither of the parties may realize the harm caused at the time of the act. The victim(s) may take years to realize the offense committed. The party responsible may actually have a feeling of pleasure in committing the act. If an unethical act were obvious to the victim(s) and unpleasurable to the perpetrator, we wouldn’t have unethical acts.

But over time, the victim(s) will realize the harm and it will form a negative feeling or reaction that person or party. That negative feeling will become the foundation of the relationship between the two parties and will only be undone by multiple acts of contrition by the perpetrator.

As for the perpetrator, it may take much longer for their feeling of pleasure to spoil. They may even develop a lifestyle based on repeating the unethical behavior, but eventually, they will experience negative repercussions from their unethical acts.

Reaping What They Sow

The first impact of unethical behavior on a perpetrator is mistrust and anger from the victim(s.) This essentially defeats any opportunity for a positive relationship as the betrayal of the perpetrator will determine the relationship.

CASE STUDY: A service department representative at a car dealership gives an estimate of $725 for routine maintenance on a car purchased from them, new, three years prior. When questioned, he offers two other options for lesser maintenance at $600 and $450. The routine maintenance would cost less than $150 anywhere else.

The perpetrator may also become involved in reactions from the victim(s) and/or people who are sympathetic to the victim(s.) Revenge is only one of the possible reactions, as the perpetrator will have people they didn’t even know harbor ill-will toward them. There is no limit to the damage caused by unethical behavior.

Over time, the perpetrator is tainted with the unethical behavior, and all other actions are viewed in light of the previous behavior. Eventually, the perpetrator may realize the offensive nature of the behavior and face an internal conflict of self-loathing compensated with a delusional sense of ego.

Support of Enablers

Some perpetrators of unethical behavior are reinforced by an enabler or enablers. These people prop up the unethical behavior and act as cheerleaders for the perpetrator, while vicariously enjoying the acts of unethical behavior.

The problem for enablers is that a person who is routinely unethical will likely be unethical at some point with the enabler. This eventually leads to enablers to have a limited lifespan of supporting the unethical person.

CASE STUDY: Donald Trump has had 30 notable members of his staff resign or be fired in less than 30 months after being elected President. Most of these people were enthusiastic supporters of Trump. Some of them were let go with little or no notice. In at least one case, the victim learned through a Trump tweet that he was no longer in the position.

Ethical Behavior Builds, Not Destroys

The destruction of unethical behavior is punished over time; however, ethical behavior is rewarded over time. Ethical people tend to be trusted, build lasting relationships, enjoy life more, and have a positive outlook. There is a perverse immediate pleasure that can come from fooling another person into doing something that is not in their interest. That feeling is temporary. Lasting satisfaction comes from doing the correct thing, even when there are other options.

The Dichotomy of Small Towns: Good People, Small Minds

04 Wednesday Apr 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Aging, All Rights Reserved, College, Communication, Conservatives, Discrimination, Donald Trump, Education, Generational, Gun control, Gun Extremists, Higher Education, History, jobs, Lessons of Life, Life, Nevada, parenting, Politicians, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Relationships, Religion, Reno, Small town, Travel, United States, Universities, US History, Voting

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

aging, CO, confirmation bias, Craig, groupthink, Music Man, Roosevelt, small town life, Small towns, UT

Small communities are two kinds of special. A small community can be a place of good people who would do anything for each other and will help out a stranger if needed. They also can have a darker side of illegal activities, whispered gossip of secret knowledge, and a narrow view of the rest of the world. It is the Jeckle and Hyde personality of a small town that is never discussed, but almost always there.

Small towns: The Pretty

Ruts of a Small Town

Change happens in small towns, but it often follows a counterintuitive logic. If the change is rational, involving a relatively workable plan of implementation, it is often viciously opposed by some people in the community. If the change is a Music Man-type (see video clip below) change consisting of unproven goals with lofty promises, a small community often embraces it.

Small towns. The Ugly

What that means is that small communities often don’t change significantly over time. The ‘BIG’ change that is going to reinvent the community typically falls flat. That results if a fear of change. Without change, life becomes a rut that everyone falls into.

Aging and Small Towns: The ‘Comfort Zone’

Growing up in a small town is an interesting window into human development. Ask high school students what they want to do when they graduate and often the response is, “Get out of this hick town as fast as possible.” Small towns often don’t have enough jobs for high school graduating classes. College is often the best way for children to break out of the small town cycle.

But even those who go off to college sometimes return because there is a ‘comfort zone’ in living where hu grew up. As people grow older, the desire to ‘get out of Dodge’ is replaced with the fear of living somewhere else. That fear is eventually replaced by an intense loyalty to small-town life. Usually, older the person, the more defensive they are about living in a small town.

Small Towns and Confirmation Bias

In a small town, everyone knows everyone. As people age, they have a select few friends that they have significant contact. In some cases, daily contact. Unlike cities, people in small towns may see the same people at work, at school, at the grocery store, at church, etc. This immersion with other people creates intimate friendships that are as close, possibly closer, than marriage relationships.

People in small towns have limited experiences with people outside of their community and intimate friendships. They tend to develop a groupthink about the world and people outside their community. When all your close friends have the same lack of knowledge and experience with the rest of the world, people are exposed to ‘confirmation bias.’ This bias occurs when friends confirm a person’s beliefs, and other information that might counter those beliefs are ignored or unknown by the group.

Typically, confirmation bias fosters negative attitudes about people who are not like them. That leads to a conservative mindset that is easily exploited. It is not a coincidence that rural environments are ripe for politically conservative influence because they focus on telling rural communities exactly what they want to hear.

Small Town Black Holes

All of this is a generalization of small town people. To be fair, problems of larger communities, such as traffic, noise, pollution, homelessness, etc. are not the ideals of any community; however, small towns have an environment that generates the same patterns over and over. Children in a small town will often grow up to be like hu’s parents. People living in a marginal society disjoined from the world.

April Fool’s Day is Donald Trump Day

01 Sunday Apr 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, All Rights Reserved, April Fools Day, Assault Weapons, Communism, Conservatives, Discrimination, Donald Trump, Economy, Ethics, Gender Issues, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Green, Gun control, Gun Extremists, Health, History, Honor, Mass Shootings, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, Pride, racism, Relationships, Religion, Reno, Respect, Russian influence, Second Amendment, Soviet Russia, Taxes, United States, US History, Vladimir Putin, Women

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

April Fool's Day, April Fools, Donald Trump, GOP, Republican, Republicans, Soviet Republicans, Trumpsters

On the third Monday of February, our country celebrates the great Presidents. For Donald Trump, we have a different holiday. For this day the western world can join in a celebration that even predates our country. We used to call it April Fool’s Day, but now we have the poster child of April Fool’s Day as our President.

Our Biggest April Fool

Donald Trump Day isn’t just for the man who became the Resident of the White House, but it recognizes all Trumpsters who adore hu and hu’s foolish ways. It is a day that the new Soviet Republican party can be remembered for their Collective Closed Mind. This is a holiday that has been in search of its people and now its people have been found!

On this special day let’s remember how special Donald Trump and the Trumpsters are as Fools of Humanity. To be a Fool:

One must believe that freedom of religion means a Taliban-like State where Christian extremists inflict their made-up racist-based mythology on everyone.
A person must accept that gun deaths are caused by non-Trumpsters, and the solution is more guns.
One should know that a man has the obligation to rule over women as subservient beings.
A person must believe that a book of mythological stories of life written over 2,000 years ago. They should think that it is how we should govern all citizens of the United States of America in the 21st century.
One must ignore all facts that contradict what you want to believe.
One must read the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America without the words “militia” and “well regulated.”
One can declare that all non-whites are illegal immigrants and that nullifies all laws prohibiting racism.

We Look Forward to the Day

There are many more, but this is a day for Donald Trump and hu’s Trumpsters. Let them speak for themselves. For the rest of us, we look forward to the day when the holiday only reminds us of Trump reign. Remind us of when Soviet Republicanism briefly took over our country. Remind us of why we celebrate April Fool’s Day only once a year, instead of suffering through it all year.

Trump’s Soviet-Style Government

30 Friday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Communism, Conservatives, Donald Trump, Economy, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, History, Honor, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, Pride, racism, Reno, Republic, Respect, Russian influence, Soviet Russia, United States, US History, Vladimir Putin, Voting

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Communism, Communist, Communists, Donald Trump, GOP, Republicans, Soviet America, Soviet Russia, Soviets, USSR, Vladimir Putin

Soviet Russia (1917-1991) had an oppressive government where one party ruled with complete authority. Soviet offices were all held by loyal communist party members and corruption was rampant. Donald Trump is creating his own Soviet-style government using the Republican party. They are not concerned about disenfranchising a majority of the citizens, but rather, treat opposing voices as disloyal elements that are to be ignored.

The United Soviet States of America?

Lenin’s Vision of His Soviet Party

Vladimir Lenin held the belief that a government could only be run by one person or a small group of people. He also believed that there were only two kinds of people in the world: friends or enemies. Obviously, friends believed what Lenin believed and everyone else was an enemy.

Like Lenin, Donald Trump sees only two kinds of people. His adoring supporters and disloyal people who are his enemies. Trump seems to see himself as a heroic figure in a tragic situation, besieged by his enemies. His inability to accept any responsibility for his failings and poor judgment is part of his leadership style.

Soviets and Republicans: One Party, One Mind

Lenin divided his party when he demanded that membership must consist of only loyal followers. His groupthink party rejected all other ideas and discussion that contradicted his will. Those who were not loyal were not allowed to participate in his government.

Trump has followed a Lenin-like path with a constant stream of changes in his administration. He has reduced his White House staff to yes-people who do not offer different points of view and seek to please Trump with constant praise and admiration.

Like Lenin, Like Putin, Like Trump

The United States of America defeated Communism by being a nation of diverse ideas and opinions. Debate and compromise have been the strength of our country’s political system. After the fall of Soviet Russia, the idea of open discussion led to chaos in the new Russia. In less than a decade, Vladimir Putin rose to power and built a system of government that was a return to Soviet Russia in all but the name.

Trump is following the example of Lenin and Putin in his attempt to establish a Soviet-style government in our country using the Republican party as his version of the Communist party. If he is successful he will essentially be handing the defeat of the United States of America to Putin and Soviet Russia, 27 years after the fall of communism.

GOP Disease: Say It, Then Apologize

23 Friday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, All Rights Reserved, Assault Weapons, Communication, Discrimination, Donald Trump, Ethics, Generational, Government, Gun control, Gun Extremists, habits, Honor, Information Technology, Mass Shootings, Mental Health, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, Pride, Public Image, racism, Respect, Russian influence, Second Amendment, Social Media Relations, United States, US History, Violence in the Workplace, Voting

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Carl B. Nett, character, CIA, Donald Trump, gun extremists, gun laws, gun lobby, Kentucky, NRA, Secret Service, Secretary of State, Tweet, Twitter, United States, values, Violence

Republicans have a consistent problem. They first say what they are thinking…and then they apologize for it. It’s the GOP disease. In incident after incident a Republican office holder, or a Republican candidate will say something that is completely inappropriate and then smirk. They are proud of it. Then when it becomes national news, they suddenly grow a conscience and apologize for the remark…some of the time.

Former CIA Turned GOP Candidate Jokes About Killing Opponent

The most recent incident to make national news is when a Republican candidate for Kentucky’s Secretary of State, Carl B. Nett, office suggested in a tweet that he could use an anti-NRA pin for a target if his opponent would move the pin closer to the center of his body.

The tweet itself is disturbing. What is more disturbing is that Nett is a former CIA and Secret Service agent. He was one of the people that our country entrusted with the use of deadly force because he supposedly was trained to control his impulses. As a former agent, the expectation is that he knows that killing someone is not a joking matter.

Nett has caused the world to question the training and discipline of our country’s CIA and Secret Service agents. He has made all of them look like cowboys out for a party with little or no self-control.

Trump As A Model

Donald Trump has been the model for Republicans in breaching intellectual and civil boundaries of behavior with his practice of saying anything that comes to his mind. Trump reveals his inner thoughts and expresses them in a diarrhea-type flow of violent, subhuman, and racist comments.

Unfortunately, Trumpsters love Trump because he says what they are thinking. That, in itself, is also disturbing.

Qualifications To Be a Public Servant

When someone says what they think, that is honesty. Honesty is good; however, when honesty reveals that the person is of a vile nature, they are not qualified to be a citizen of this country, let alone elected to public office. An apology is not the measure of a person. The person is measured by hu’s* actions.

Nett’s apology was a self-serving statement that he’s just a normal human:

I now join the long list of imperfect human beings with “foot-in-mouth” disease. Once again, I apologize to Congressman Yarmuth and his family and ask for their forgiveness.

— Carl B. Nett (@realCarlNett) March 20, 2018

Nett is not a normal human. Hu is representative of the nature and character of the Republican party. Hu’s values are Putin-like values that belong to a society of corruption and terror. We don’t need the excuses of people who can’t respect the ideals our country. We need people of character. Republicans are not those people. Carl B. Nett is a case in point.

[*Hu’s: a gender-neutral pronoun for his/her. Hu: a gender-neutral pronoun for he/she.]

Why Are Conservatives Anti-Society?

13 Tuesday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, All Rights Reserved, Business, Conservatives, Discrimination, Donald Trump, Economy, Education, Ethics, Gender Issues, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Gun control, Gun Extremists, Higher Education, History, Housing, labor, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, racism, Religion, Reno, Respect, Second Amendment, Taxes, United States, US History, Voting, Women

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

anti-society, Conservatives, Donald Trump, GOP, Gun control, gun extremists, gun laws, guns, hu, Immigration, immigration laws, Republicans, society, taxes, Trumpsters, Women

The conservative agenda is not society friendly. It is designed to benefit few and ignore the rest. The ideology of conservatism is based on an idea of keeping what is perceived to be good and avoiding risk-taking in the future. It assumes that there will be winners and losers so life is about making sure they are the winners.

Fear and Hate are the Entrees for Conservatives

Religions As Safe Harbor For Conservatives

Religions are typically conservative because most religions are built on a paradigm of preserving past traditions. Even the Christian religion is filled with rules and rituals that preserve the thinking of the past and are resistant to change. This is why so many Christians identify themselves with conservative thinking.

The idea that everyone is worthy and equal is usually rhetoric in religions mixed with a condescending effort to help those less fortunate. Often religions and conservatives blame the less fortunate for their own problems. They are the losers and a conservative often consoles hu’s* conscience by making offerings or volunteering to help the less fortunate.

A Liberal Perspective is in Direct Conflict with a Conservative

A conservative, by definition, is focused on preserving what they believe with the assumption that any other belief is irrelevant. It is easy to understand why anyone who has a liberal perspective is worthy of ridicule to a conservative because liberals tend to have a less cynical view of humanity.

Conservatives are driven by fear and self-preservation, while liberals are driven by hope. Conservatives need to believe that they are under threat. Examples of conservative thought consumed by selfishness and fear are:

Taxes

All efforts in a society should be of direct benefit to the person paying taxes. Any money spent for the welfare of others is a target to conservatives and considered a waste of money. Conservatives often use rare examples of waste to ridicule spending for the benefit of less fortunate.

Gun Ownership

Conservatives use their fear of humanity to base a belief that a system of laws and impartial judgment are not effective. Conservatives believe that they should have the right to judge the actions of another person and execute them without trial. To the conservative, the term ‘defense’ justifies the instant execution of an unarmed person based on hu’s fear of that person.

Immigrants

Conservatives typically interchange hu’s racists beliefs with issues that target a particular race. Even though there is no significant immigration problem in the United States, conservatives manufacture a fear that immigrants are a threat. Immigration enforcement targets non-Caucasian races and typically ignore Caucasians.

Women

Historically women have endured a subservient role in society. Conservatives want to preserve that subservient role and consciously and unconsciously act as if women are a lesser gender. In religion, a fear of women has pushed them into a role of service to men and the church.

Conservatives Anti-Society

The problem with conservative ideology is that the fear and hate of non-conservatives places them as the adversary of society. It divides the population, often along the lines of race and power. In their mind, everything is an ‘us-versus-them’ battle regardless of a lack of evidence.

This attitude impacts the effectiveness of our society as the concept of a few winners is at the expense of the rest of the population.

(*’Hu’s’ is a pronoun meaning ‘his’ and/or ‘hers.’)

Are We Ready For Gender Neutral Language?

12 Monday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Communication, Discrimination, Education, Ethics, Gender Issues, Generational, History, Honor, Language, parenting, Pride, Public Image, racism, Relationships, Respect, Traditional Media, United States, Universities, US History, Women, Writing

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

definite article, English, Female, femininity, French, Gender, gender bias, German, hu, hu's, Italian, male, masculinity, nouns, pronouns, Spanish, transgender

In an age where gender issues are rising to the surface, language demonstrates the depth of gender discrimination. In centuries of the spoken and written word, a division between male and female became part of communication. The only logical reason for creating this division of masculinity and femininity in language is to create bias.

Language begins the division of the genders

Implied Gender Embedded in Language

English has shed most of the masculine and feminine constructs; however, pronouns remain a roadblock to gender-free writing or speech. Many other cultures face an almost impossible task of removing gender from their language. Masculine and feminine are embedded deep into the language of Spanish, French, Italian, German, and many other languages.

In many of these languages, not only the pronouns are gender defined, but the definite article (the, a) is gender-linked to the noun, which is also gender-linked.

Table 1.0 Gender Differences in Different Languages

Gendered Language Creates Social Issues

There are many studies that consider the issues of gender in languages. Most demonstrate an insidious bias caused by using words to define a person or thing as male or female. One significant issue of gendered language involves people who are transgender. Defining a person as male or female is offensive and harmful to a person whose physical form does not match her or his internal perception. It also creates undo awkwardness with people who are androgynous in physical appearance.

Gender is an unnecessary problem as there is almost never a need to establish masculinity or femininity using language. The reasons for using gender in writing and speech were attached to a patriarchal society where men were assumed to be dominant. Keeping gendered language is a failure to let go of the past and move forward.

Introducing ‘Hu’

I can’t change how people use language but I can experiment using a non-gendered pronoun in my writing. Because the he/she/him/her/his/hers pronoun is unnecessary, I am going to use the word ‘hu‘ for a non-gendered pronoun and ‘hu’s‘ as a non-gendered possessive pronoun.

Are we ready? We will never know unless we start somewhere. I’ll be interested in your reactions.

Three Myths That Gun Extremist Believe

09 Friday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in All Rights Reserved, Crime, Donald Trump, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Gun control, Gun Extremists, Health, History, Mass Shootings, Mental Health, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, racism, Reno, Russian influence, Second Amendment, United States, US History, Violence in the Workplace

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

District of Columbia v. Heller, gun, Gun control, gun extremists, gun laws, gun lobby, gun rights, gun violence, guns, NRA, Second Amendment, Supreme Court

Gun Extremists have been fed a steady diet of misinformation by the NRA. Decades of crafting a lie have resulted in gun owners being one of the most misinformed groups in the history of the United States. When you talk with an NRA gun extremist you hear the following statements:

1. Gun Extremist’s Myth versus FACT:

The Second Amendment gives me a constitutional right to own an assault rifle and the government can’t take away my guns.

False. The Second Amendment begins with “A well regulated militia…” That is the focus of the amendment. Everything that is stated afterward is subject to the topic of a well regulated militia. Well regulated clearly means that the government is expected to regulate gun ownership.

Guns are not trophies

2. Gun Extremist’s Myth versus FACT:

The Supreme Court ruled that the government can’t take our assault rifles away.

False. The Supreme Court ruled in The District of Columbia v. Heller that the government can’t ban handguns in the home, providing the person meets the qualifications required to own a gun. The Supreme Court specifically stated that more dangerous weapons could be banned from public use.

In fact, a ban on assault rifles existed from 1994 until 2004 when Congress failed to renew the ban. The ban was constitutionally legal.

3. Gun Extremist’s Myth versus FACT:

I have a right to defend myself with a gun.

False. If you use a gun to injure or kill someone it must be proven that it was in defense. It is true, that in many states if someone enters your home it is considered allowable for a homeowner to shoot that person even if they are unarmed. The law does not give a person the right to be judge, jury, and executioner.

However, it is rare that a gun death is a legitimate ‘defensive’ act. In 2013, of 33,636 deaths due to “injury by firearms,” 21,175 (63%) were suicides and 11,208 (33%) were homicides, 505 (1.5%) were deaths due to accidental or negligent use of a gun. We are the most well-armed nation in the world and over 97% of all gun deaths were not because someone killed the bad guy.

Leadership Madness: Time To Check Trump’s Urine Color

08 Thursday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, All Rights Reserved, Crisis Management, Economy, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Health, History, Lessons of Life, Management Practices, Mental Health, Politicians, Politics, Public Image, racism, Republic, Russian influence, Taxes, The Tipping Point, United States, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

bipolar disorder, Congress, Donald Trump, GOP, Hitler, King George III, Leadership Madness, Mad King, Mussolini, porphyria, Republicans

King George III was an odd man in his later years. Sometimes talking without stopping for hours. He had a vengeful hate for the United States and hoped to war with our country incessantly until our spirit was destroyed. King George had episodes of odd behavior and his urine was allegedly blue. He was the focus of the American colonies desire to gain independence, and he was considered ‘mad.’ Maybe it’s time to check Donald Trump’s urine.

Enablers Surround Donald Trump

Destroyer of Nations: Diarrhea of a Leaders Thoughts

The final analysis of King George III’s reign is that he didn’t have the disease (porphyria) that turns urine purplish but rather had a bipolar disorder possibly caused by arsenic poison. His behavior towards the American colonies was a major factor in the cause of the American Revolution and his need to express himself verbally and in written words inflamed the situation.

A sentence containing 400 words and eight verbs was not unusual. George III, when ill, often repeated himself…

Historically, when a leader of a country becomes aggressive and vengeful, it often creates the devastation of that nation. Hitler, Mussolini, and even the Emperor of Japan took an aggressive stand that destroyed their countries. Aggressive and vengeful political leadership is a dangerous sign in for the well-being of its citizens.

Donald Trump is out of control, much like King George III. He is randomly lashing out and leaving his closest supporters desperately trying to explain his actions. We have never had a leader of the United States so out of balance in his words and deeds. He is a man who believes that he is unstoppable.

March 5, 2018

Leadership Madness: Raiding the Vault In the Chaos

The problem is that the Republicans in Congress are using this as an opportunity to take outrageous steps motivated by greed and ideology. They have no motivation to intercede and bring back stability. Our government was designed to have checks and balances but we are in a situation where that concept has become impotent.

Civility is a delicate balance of a conscious effort by a society. When that balance is destroyed there is no easy way to restore it. It is a crime for which everyone is punished.

Trump’s Trade Deficit Talk Proves Lack of Knowledge

07 Wednesday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in All Rights Reserved, Business, Donald Trump, Economy, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, History, jobs, labor, Management Practices, Nevada, Politicians, Politics, Public Image, racism, Relationships, Russian influence, selling, Stock Market, Taxes, Technology, Trade deficit, United States, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

APM, Art of The Deal, Donald Trump, Kai Ryssdal, Marketplace, npr, protectionism, protectionist, tariffs, taxes, Trade Deficit, trade war

Trade deficits are bad. Everyone knows a trade deficit is bad. So when a person goes to a store and buys a product they have a trade deficit with that store. That’s bad, correct? They have the product that has value but they don’t have the money. The person has less money and the store has more. That is a trade deficit. So why don’t we build, mine, and/or grow everything so we don’t have a trade deficit?

Tariffs and Trade Wars Kill an Economy

Kai Ryssdal of American Public Media’s (APM) Marketplace had Ryan Kailath explain this on Tuesday using a sandwich shop. The point he made with his report was that we don’t ‘lose’ money in a trade deficit. It’s a point that Mr. “Art of the Deal” Donald Trump should understand, but his words and actions indicate he that he doesn’t understand the basics of international trade.

Trade Deficit: It’s Not Just About Jobs

Many people focus on jobs when discussing the trade deficit. When other countries make stuff that we buy they create jobs for people in their country. It’s easy to argue that when they have the jobs, we don’t. That’s not necessarily true, nor relevant.

We are the 362.874 kg gorilla in the room when it comes to buying goods. We don’t need menial jobs that pay low wages in this country. We have spent a lot of money to educate people so they don’t have to work menial jobs for low wages. We need jobs that challenge workers and the pay living wages.

Buying inexpensive materials and goods from other countries we put those types of jobs there and have the products to use and raw materials for final manufacturing at a lower cost than if we did the work in this country. We save money and resell those products at a profit, but lower cost.

We create jobs in the secondary outcome of trading with other countries. That system may create a trade deficit, but that is a good thing. Trade deficits mean that a country is saving money because let’s face it, why would a company pay for a product that they could build here for less cost?

Managing a Trade Deficit

Protectionists believe that the United States is the center of the universe. They want to create a trade war with other countries because they believe our country doesn’t need them. It is driven by a racist point of view. Protectionists believe that our economy would be perfect if we didn’t interact with any other country. It is a childish mentality that is fatal in an adult world.

A trade war using taxes and tariffs to prevent trade doesn’t create jobs in the United States. A trade war makes businesses import products at a higher cost and makes other countries angry. A trade war is akin to telling your local grocer that you are going to charge them to allow you to buy food.

Trump is about to ignite a fuse that will blow our country up. The “Art of the Deal” guy isn’t artistic, and he’s giving our country a bad deal.

Pence’s White Greed National Space Council

06 Tuesday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, Discrimination, Ethics, Exploration, Generational, Government, NASA, Politicians, Politics, Public Image, racism, Science, Space, SpaceX, Taxes, Technology, United States, US History, US Space Program, Women

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

bigotry, Board certified, Buzz Aldrin, Conservatives, Donald Trump, Eileen Collins, FAA, Mike Pence, NASA, National Space Council, racism, science teacher, SpaceX

Mike Pence, who is Donald Trump’s Number 1, but acts like he’s a Number 2, has recreated the National Space Council in his own image. The purpose of the group of is to channel taxpayers money out of government space program projects and give to the wealthy corporations. He seems blissfully unaware that the 29 member Council has the scientific qualifications, and diversity of race and political ideology of Republican fundraiser in Mississippi.

Pence’s Space Council of Non-Diversity

Mike Pence: The No Science Guy

Pence, who has less charisma and intelligence than former VP Dan Quayle, has put together a Council of primarily investor-owned corporations. No current NASA staff is included, and the former NASA employees on the Council have been retired from the agency an average of over 19 years.

In order to make sure the Council does not get caught up in any science issues, Pence has added five people who were selected because of their politically conservative resume, but devoid of any scientific qualifications.

However, there is one science teacher on the Council. No one seems to know who she is or what her qualifications are, but she is a “Board Certified Science Teacher.”

The National Space Kangaroo Council

The qualifications and interests of the National Space Council members are as follows:

Current NASA Staff (0)

None included

Current FAA Staff (0)

None included

Former NASA Staff (7)

Buzz Aldrin, (Retired from NASA 46 years ago)

Walked on the Moon in 1969, retired from NASA 1971, retired from Air Force 1972, a proponent of space exploration, punched faked-Moon-landing-conspiracist Bart Sibrel in the face (Sibrel had it coming.)

Eileen Collins, (Retired from NASA 12 years ago in May)

Flew Space Shuttle four times, speaker at 2016 Republican National Convention

Homer Hickam, (Retired from NASA 20 years ago)

Former NASA engineer and author

Pam Melroy, (Retired from NASA 9 years ago)

Space Shuttle astronaut, former Lockheed Martin staff, former FAA staff, former DARPA staff.

Harrison ‘Jack’ Schmitt, (Retired from NASA 42 years ago)

Apollo 17 Astronaut and former conservative U.S. Senator. Believes climate change is natural, not human-caused

David Wolf, (Retired from NASA 5 years ago)

Space Shuttle astronaut and physician

Pete Worden, (Retired from NASA 2 years ago)

Former Air Force General and NASA Ames Center Director

Minor Space Background (1)

G.P. Bud Peterson, Served as a visiting research scientist for NASA during summers of 1981 and 1982. Chairperson of the National Science Council and President of the Georgia Institute of Technology

Private Corporations Seeking Taxpayer Money (15)

Tory Bruno, Formerly with Lockheed Martin. President and CEO of United Launch Alliance
Wes Bush, CEO of Northrop Grumman
Mary Lynne Dittmar, Former Boeing employee and NASA advisor, currently President, and CEO of the private space industry advocacy group Coalition for Deep Space Exploration
Former Admiral Jim Ellis, Board of Directors Lockheed Martin, Retired 4-star Admiral, former head of STRATCOM, and member of the Space Foundation Board of Directors
Tim Ellis, CEO of Relativity Space, a corporation seeking to build rockets with 3D printers and using no labor or astronauts
Marillyn Hewson, CEO of Lockheed Martin Corporation
Les Lyles, Only African American on Council, Director for multiple corporations, retired Air Force in 2003 after a long history of working in various military defense missile capacities.
Dennis Muilenburg, CEO of the Boeing Company
Fatih Ozmen, CEO of the Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC) with headquarters in Nevada which doesn’t have income or corporate taxes; however, the operations are in Colorado.
Gwynne Shotwell, President and COO of SpaceX (Space Exploration Technologies Corporation)
Bob Smith, CEO of Blue Origin
Eric Stallmer, President of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation
David Thompson, Founder and CEO of Orbital ATK
Mandy Vaughn, President of VOX Launch Company
Stu Witt, Founder of Mojave Air and Spaceport, former Navy pilot, former Chairman of the Commercial Spaceflight Federation

Conservatives Appointed For Their Political Ideology (No space industry qualifications) (5 + 2 Former NASA)

Dean Cheng, Political conservative working for the Heritage Foundation, a politically conservative organization
Eileen Collins, (See former NASA staff)
Steve Crisafulli, Former conservative politician, Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives
Newt Gingrich, conservative politician and former Speaker of the House
Governor Kay Ivey, Conservative Governor of Alabama
Fred Klipsch, Conservative promoting the defunding of public schools, Founder and Chairman of Hoosiers for Quality Education
Harrison ‘Jack’ Schmitt, (See former NASA staff)

Unknown (1)

Pamela Vaughan, Science Teacher

Maybe we didn’t win the space race after all.

Breaking News: Trump Panama Hotel Taken Over By Real Owner

05 Monday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Crisis Management, Ethics, Government, Honor, Management Practices, Panama, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Real Estate, Traditional Media, Travel, United States, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Breaking News, Donald Trump, Panama, poor management, Trump, Trump Ocean Club

For several weeks there has been a battle at the Trump Panama Hotel, Donald Trump’s vagina-shaped condo/hotel in Panama City, Panama. Trump employees have been attempting to keep control despite orders by the majority owner to leave. Today, ABC News has reported that the employees were met with Panamanian police and judges and peaceably removed. Almost immediately the ‘Trump’ name was removed from the exterior. This effectively ends Trump operations in the hotel/condos, though legal battles are expected to continue in both Panama and the United States.

Formerly the Trump Ocean Club Hotel in Panama City, Panama

Trump Panama Team Poor Management Style

Orestes Fintiklis obtained a majority of the units in the hotel/condo last year and has claimed that the Trump organization has mismanaged the property. He has been attempting to end the contract with the management organization led by the Trump organization.

Trumped No More?

A recent attempt by Fintiklis to fire the Trump organization and remove the employees resulted in his removal; however, today he returned with the full force of Panamanian law and successfully ended the Trump occupation.

If the takeover is not struck down in court it will mark a vindication of Fintiklis and his claim of mismanagement. The Trump organization has apparently not disputed Fintiklis claim of mismanagement, but rather has attacked Fintiklis claiming that he agreed to the Trump management contract and its fees and he acted in bad faith.

Trumpless Ocean Club in Panama

Trump To Use Position To Retaliate?

There is now a growing question of whether Trump will use his power as President to retaliate on Panama for the support of Panamanian authorities in ousting his management team. That would be a clear violation of U.S. law; however, it a real concern about a man who has manipulated markets to benefit his allies as he did last week with an announcement of a new tariff on steel and aluminum.

Maybe North Korea can breathe easier now.

Could David Brooks Be Correct About Being Wrong?

05 Monday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, All Rights Reserved, Communication, Crime, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Gun control, History, Journalism, Mass Shootings, Mental Health, parenting, Politicians, Politics, Print Media, racism, Religion, Respect, Second Amendment, Traditional Media, United States, US History, Violence in the Workplace

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Conservatives, David Brooks, GOP, Gun control, gun extremists, gun laws, gun lobby, NRA, Republicans, school shootings, Trumpsters

Damn him! Just when David Brooks seems to be defending a position on gun control that blames liberals for not being warm and fuzzy with gun extremists, he turns around and reconsiders his position. This is unacceptable! How can we establish a clear line in the sand when he says, “Maybe I’m wrong.” THE NERVE of that man!

David Brooks on Gun Control: Let Red Be Red

David Brooks has at least twice indicated that gun users should have a significant role in determining the parameters of gun ownership. Most recently he suggested that liberals should let the gun owners lead the discussion.

So if you want to stop school shootings it’s not enough to just vent and march. You have to let Red America lead the way, and to show respect to gun owners at every point.

David Brooks – 19 February

His position was to let gun extremists continue to do what they’ve been doing and maybe…maybe, someday they will let common sense return. For me, that position is a nonstarter. I know these gun extremists. They are from small towns like where I grew up. For at least 40 years they’ve been on a steady diet of “When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” (I saw that bumper sticker on a truck in the 1970’s.)

Gun extremists have not been rational for decades. The constant statements that “they’re coming to git your guns” is oxygen to gun extremists. These are not gun owners, they are gun cultists. They have no business being part of a discussion about guns, let alone lead it.

He Said What??

But last Thursday David Brooks took a different perspective on the issue. He said:

Continued school shootings could be just the thing that persuades the mainstream that conservatism is vulgar and socially illegitimate, somewhere between smoking and segregationism.

David Brooks – 1 March

This is an understatement. Slaughtering seven-year-old children with an assault rifle should never be compared to smoking or segregationism.

However, his realization is something that our country hasn’t heard from conservatives in a long time. It is not likely to be shared by many gun extremists, but if it were, we would have the assault weapon ban reinstated in a matter of days.

The rest of the country is watching the trainwreck of conservatism. The lead engineers of Donald Trump, Mitch McConnel, and Paul Ryan are putting more power to the engine even as it falls off the trestle. The Trumpsters onboard are laughing and whooping with joy.

Conservatives have used a desperate tactic of building a coalition with racists, religious extremists, gun extremists, and corrupt people of wealth. An idea is growing among people of common sense. The question is not just asking how do we stop the madness. The question is how do make sure it never happens again. The answer to that question should have Trumpsters soiling their underwear. There is a cost to arrogance, and arrogance is only temporary.

My Diagnosis of David Brooks

I believe I know why David Brooks is able to consider different points of view on issues as divisive as gun control. First, he was born in Canada. (I’ll take a moment while most of you slap your forehead and say, “Of course!”)

Second, I believe that David Brooks has used,…please, hear me out,…I believe he has used LSD at some point in his life. Recently I read about a study where subjects were tested after they were given LSD and the results indicated that they were more open-minded.

So, my theory is that the combination of being born in Canada and taking LSD at some point can cause a conservative to consider issues from multiple viewpoints. Unfortunately, it is unlikely that our country has many conservative Canadians who have taken LSD.

Nobody said this would be easy.

(NOTE: David Brooks comments are published in the New York Times. Because this source uses a paywall to prevent sharing I have not linked to his full article per normal.)

Pigs In Space: Discrimination on the ISS

01 Thursday Mar 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Discrimination, Ethics, Exploration, Government, History, Honor, Management Practices, NASA, Politicians, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Russian influence, Science, Space, Technology, United States, US History, US Space Program, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Anne McClain, astronauts, bias, crew, discrimination, Expeditions, Female, Gender, International Space Station, ISS, Jeanette Epps, male, misogyny, NASA, racism, Russia, Serena Auñón-Chancellor, Space, United States

For the last 17 years, the International Space Station (ISS) has been the great achievement of the United States, Russia, and other nations working together to maintain a human presence in space. People around the world can look up and see the shining star of the ISS crossing the evening or predawn sky. Yet, ISS has a dark shadow that NASA and the other nations involved don’t talk about publicly. Space has a glass ceiling.

International Space Station not above discrimination

Man Cave In Space

Women have spent less than ten percent of the cumulative days on the ISS since the first crew came on board in October of 2000. In over 17 years, only 12 women have served on an expedition crew. One woman, Sunita L. Williams, served twice, and one, Peggy A. Whitson, served three times.

As of today, (1 March 2018,) women have logged only 2,527 days on the International Space Station compared to 23,493 days served by men. Most of those women have been from the United States with only two women serving from other countries. The problem of discrimination against women is bigger with Russia, as cosmonauts have spent the most time on ISS (47% Russia versus 40% USA) but only have allowed one woman to be part of the crew.

The irony is that women make up 63% of the population of Russia and yet women have had less than 7% of the days served on ISS compared to their male counterparts. The United States has also failed to utilize women as crew members, but at least in the case of the U.S., women have been 21% of the Expedition crew.

Discrimination Station

Jeanette Epps barred from ISS

The problem with the crew discrimination goes beyond gender. ISS has yet to have an African American crew member. Last year NASA announced that Dr. Jeanette Epps would be the first African American crew member before Donald Trump was sworn into office. This January NASA rescinded that decision without explanation. They replaced her with another woman, Serena Auñón-Chancellor, who was scheduled to fly in November.

Epps has been completely removed from the ISS crew rotation even though NASA claims she is still under consideration. It has been confirmed that she was not ill, nor were family issues a reason for removal. NASA has not explained whether Trump’s administration was involved in the decision, nor whether Russia has demanded that the African American woman be barred from serving as a crew member.

However, it is clear that women and minorities are shockingly underrepresented on the space station. The unexplained removal of the first African American crewmember, who also is a woman, reflects a continuation of the ongoing discriminatory behavior of the program.

Gender-Based Crew Selection

NASA has demonstrated that it has a plan for the crew assignment based on gender assignment. Jeannette Epps has a Ph.D in engineering. She was replaced by Serena Auñón-Chancellor who is a physician. Dr. Aunon-Chancellor was pulled off an ISS Expedition scheduled to begin in November 2018, and she was replaced by Anne McClain who is a West Point graduate, Major in the Army, and a pilot with Master’s degrees in Aerospace Engineering and International Relations.

It is obvious that these three women were not shuffled around on the basis of skills, education, nor experience. Epps, and Dr. Aunon-Chancellor were selected to be an astronaut in 2009. McClain was selected in 2013, and completed her training in 2015. None of them have been in space. The only rational explanation is that NASA was replacing a woman with another woman. NASA’s 90% male to 10% female crew assignment is intentional.

Five Versus One

Another issue is the male dominated crew Expeditions. Typically only one woman is assigned to be with five men for six months on ISS. Only twice have two women served at the same time on ISS. For three months in 2010, and three and a half months in 2014-5, two women were on board at the same time. For the rest of the 200 months of occupation, ISS has either had an all-male crew, or only one woman on board.

Lack of Qualified People?

Is it possible that NASA can’t find enough qualified women or minorities? The number of people who dream to be an astronaut may have diminished since Apollo, but the dream hasn’t died.

When less than ten percent of the ISS crew time is served by women, and no African Americans have served in over 17 years of operation it’s clear there is a problem. ISS shouldn’t be the icon of white male discrimination.

Trumpster ‘Hillary’ Excuse Proves Russian Influence

25 Sunday Feb 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Communication, Crime, Ethics, Generational, Government, History, Honor, Internet, Politicians, Politics, racism, Russian influence, United States, US History, Voting, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

2016, Benghazi, Congressional investigation, Donald Trump, Election, Election 2016, email server, FBI, Hillary Clinton, James Comey, Presidential election, Presidential race, Russia, Russian troll farm, Russian trolls, sexual assault, sexual harassment, Trumpsters, Vladimir Putin

Evidence of the Russian influence on the outcome of the Presidential election is readily available. People who voted for Trump make it obvious that they voted based on fake and false information, and even today they maintain the same belief in the misinformation put out by the Putin Troll Farm.

Here’s the statement I see social media from people who voted for Donald Trump:

When are liberals going to understand that we weren’t voting ‘for’ Trump, as much as we were voting ‘against’ Hillary Clinton.

On Quora by Jason Whitehurst (original question 25 AUG 2017)

Russian Influence For a Feckless Man

The statement itself is lacking in logic. It is akin to saying, “I didn’t want to eat dog poop as much as I wanted to avoid eating broccoli.” The person who makes the excuse that his or her vote for a feckless man like Trump was forced by his or her aversion to Clinton is either stupid, a liar, or under the influence of Vladimir Putin.

Fake News of Russian Trolls

‘Crooked Hillary’ is a common term by Trumpsters, but what is it based on?

Congressional Investigations

Clinton was investigated by bloodthirsty Republicans in Congress EIGHT times regarding the Benghazi attacks, the security beforehand, and the response afterward. The results? She did nothing intentionally wrong, and they could find no charge to file against her.

That is not the story promoted by the Russian trolls.

FBI Investigation-Private Email Server

The FBI began two investigations associated with Hillary Clinton in 2015. The first investigation was regarding Clinton’s use of a private email server. Also in 2015, the FBI began an investigation into donations made to The Clinton Foundation. The investigations coincided with the Democratic Primary campaign season.

The email server investigation was closed on 6 July 2016 by the Justice Department after FBI Director James Comey delivered a fiery news conference the day before. Comey admitted the FBI could find no intentional wrong-doing, but took the opportunity to scold the former Secretary of State for not following suggested protocol by using a private email server.

James Comey: Supported Russian Fake News

Less than a week before the election and after early voting had already begun, Comey made a sudden announcement that new evidence had been found in the email server case. The announcement by the FBI just prior to the election had the effect of a declaration of guilt by the FBI Director. Two days after the election, Comey announced that nothing found in the new evidence would change the decision to close the case.

FBI Investigation-The Clinton Foundation

There have been multiple accusations of people and countries ‘buying influence’ by making donations to The Clinton Foundation. The implication is that someone who knows almost every significant political and powerful person in the world might use a gift to her charitable foundation as a bribe to do special favors for that person.

To date, no charges have been filed even though the Trump administration has worked hard to use the investigation to throw off media attention on probes into Russian influence on his campaign and administration. One source close to the investigation said:

It was never a great case, but it’s still being worked…

What We Have Here is a Failure of Evidence

What is consistent in all of the accusations is that none of them are based on evidence, nor on truth. Regardless of what anyone believes about Hillary Clinton, there is nothing that supports any evidence of wrongdoing, and it is not for a lack of investigating. In 2015, it was reported that over $7 million dollars had been spent on the Benghazi investigations. Add to that all the FBI work, Department of Justice work, and other investigations, the cost of the fruitless chase of fake accusations is likely over $20 million.

Republicans have now opened additional investigations including an investigation of the investigators as to why the FBI couldn’t prove the fake charges against Clinton.

Still, Russian trolls gave a different version of the outcome.

Under Russian Influence?

In comparison to Clinton, Trump was guilty of real character issues before, during, and after the elections. Based on a summary by The Atlantic, voters knew:

Sexual-Assault Allegations

Based on a summary of sexual allegations compiled on Wikipedia, Donald Trump has had three cases filed in court, New York Times story interviewing 50 women revealing unwelcome sexual attention from Trump, and 13 accusations of unwanted sexual contact.

1. Accusations filed in court against Trump
- 1.1 Ivana Trump (1989)
  - Ivana Trump stated that in 1989, Donald Trump forcibly had sex with her during an episode of rage. Later she offered a carefully stated comment that indicated that it felt like rape, but she didn’t mean in the criminal sense.
- 1.2 Jill Harth (1992)
- 1.3 Summer Zervos (2007)
2. May 2016 New York Times story
- 50 women interview revealing unwanted sexual attention from Donald Trump
3. Recording controversy and second 2016 presidential debate
4. Public allegations of unwanted physical contact since 2016
- 4.1 Jessica Leeds (1980s)
- 4.2 Kristin Anderson (1990s)
- 4.3 Cathy Heller (1997)
- 4.4 Temple Taggart McDowell (1997)
- 4.5 Karena Virginia (1998)
- 4.6 Mindy McGillivray (2003)
- 4.7 Rachel Crooks (2005)
- 4.8 Natasha Stoynoff (2005)
- 4.9 Juliet Huddy (2005 or 2006)
- 4.10 Jessica Drake (2006)
- 4.11 Ninni Laaksonen (2006)
- 4.12 Erin Burnett’s unnamed friend (2010)
- 4.13 Cassandra Searles (2013)

Donald Trump has denied all of the accusations, entered into a paid agreement of silence with some women, and accused all of the women of being liars.

VP Mike Pence: “I’m with Comrade Trump”

The Beauty Pageant Scandals

Donald Trump has been accused of using his authority as the sponsor to make an unannounced entrance into women and girls dressing rooms during beauty pageants. Wikipedia compiled this list:

Allegations of pageant dressing room visits:

Trump University

Trump announced that he would never settle the lawsuits against Trump University, then paid $25 million to settle under a condition he didn’t have to admit wrongdoing. Trump University was closed in 2010.

Trump Institute

Like Trump University, the Trump Institute was largely a fraudulent scheme with video of Trump making promises about the quality of the program and that he handpicked the instructors. In the end, he had only sold his name to the program, offered the recorded video, and the curriculum was plagiarized from other textbooks.

Tenant Intimidation

Trump bought a building with the intention of tearing it down and building luxury condos. From 1982 to 1986 he attempted to squeeze the existing, rent-controlled tenants out using hardcore tactics. He turned off the hot water and the building’s heat, he refused to make required repairs, and he threatened to fill the vacant apartments with homeless people. He finally lost the battle.

The Undocumented Polish Workers

Trump-run operations do not demonstrate ethical management. Despite being tough on immigration as President, Trump managers have employed undocumented employees. In 1980, they hired 200 polish immigrants to demolish an existing property. The workers were paid substandard pay, and at times, not paid at all. They were threatened with deportation if they complained about the back pay.

Undocumented Models

Former models hired by Trump have said they did not have the required documentation when employed by his organization.

Antitrust Violations

In 1986, Trump attempted a hostile takeover of two gaming companies. He violated anti-trust laws and was fined $750,000 for failure to report his purchase of the stock in those companies as legally required.

The Four Bankruptcies

Trump-run companies have declared bankruptcies four times (1991, 1992, 2004, and 2009.) Trump suggests that it is just part of doing business, but it reflects a consistent issue with his financial management ability.

Refusing to Pay Workers and Contractors

Trump has hundreds of complaints against him for failure to pay for services rendered. Trump has offered excuses, but the volume of the complaints indicate a consistent problem and a lack of financial ethics in business.

Suing Journalist Tim O’Brien for Libel

Trump had a libel $5 billion lawsuit tossed out regarding a Tim O’Brien book that stated that Trump was worth far less than he claimed. The Washington Post reviewed Trump’s deposition in the suit and determined that Trump lied 30 times under oath.

Refusal to Release Tax Information

Despite it being an informal requirement of every Presidential candidate, Trump has refused to release any of his tax returns. This is likely because his tax returns will confirm the book by Tim O’Brien that states that Trump is not worth what he claims.

Racial Housing Discrimination

In 1973, Donald Trump and his father were sued by the Department of Justice of multiple instances of racial discrimination. The Trumps countersued but settled out of court without admitting guilt.

The Trump Foundation

The Trump Foundation has violated rules on self-dealing. The Foundation is still under investigation and has been told to stop illegally accepting donations.

The Inauguration Fiasco

Trump’s Inauguration Committee received more money than was needed and said it would donate the extra money, and then didn’t do it.

Condo Hotel Shenanigans

Trump has been involved in multiple condo schemes that have failed or been fraudulent. In one case, his partners had a criminal past history. In each case, Trump has claimed limited involvement in the deals and has avoided admitting wrongdoing.

The Cuban Embargo

Despite laws against it, the Trump organization has been involved in commercial activity with Cuba since 1998. The involvement is still under investigation but appears to be illegal.

Breaking Casino Rules

Trump has been in trouble with gaming authorities and has been able to avoid any admittance of wrongdoing. He is no longer in the gaming business.

Buying Up His Own Books

During the campaign, Trump used donor money to buy his books. This illegally allowed money from the campaign to end up in Trump’s bank account and made his book sales look larger than they really were.

Mafia Ties

Multiple situations of Trump interactions with Mafia. No direct connection with Trump, but has been required to testify in court regarding the relationships.

Collusion With Russia

This Seattle Times article details twelve things we know about Russian involvement with the 2016 election and connections between Trump aides and Russian agents. It offers a clear connection between Trump and the Russian effort to influence the outcome.

The question is if it was successful. Based on the fake accusations made against Hillary Clinton and the known character issues of Donald Trump it is clear that those who voted for Trump to prevent Clinton from winning were influenced and continue to be influenced.

Or they are just stupid.

GOP Memo is Last Straw

06 Tuesday Feb 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Crime, Ethics, Government, History, Honor, Politicians, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Republic, Respect, The Tipping Point, United States, US History, Voting

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

115th Congress, 92nd Congress, Co-conspirators, collusion, Devin Nunes, Donald Trump, GOP, House Intelligence Committee, Putin, Republican, Republicans, Richard Nixon, Russia, Vladimir Putin

Last Friday the United State of America reached a point of no return when Republicans attempted to cast doubt on Trump campaign’s collusion with the Russians. Loyal Trumpster, Representative Devin Nunes, ignored all warnings and common sense in a desperate move to discredit the U.S. Intelligence community with a GOP memo claiming they were doing the bidding of the Democrats.

Trump and GOP Now Co-Conspirators

Any possible hope of Donald Trump and the Republican party maintaining their legitimacy as elected representatives ended with the release of a Republican-authored House Intelligence Committee memo that reconstructs facts to fit to create a manufactured story. Not only does the memo create a false version of the facts, but Trump was already promising a Republican that he was planning to release the memo as he was walking out after his of the State of the Union (or Uniom) speech.

Watergate Without a Democratic Congress to Stop Him

We are witnessing a more corrupt version of the Nixon administration without a Democratic majority in Congress to act on behalf of the people of our country. There is ample evidence to warrant a serious investigation into Donald Trump, his family, and his campaign regarding collusion with Russia to influence the 2016 election. The attempt to cast doubt on the legitimacy of the investigation by Trump and congressional Republicans is meant to reinforce the support of Trumpsters. It is an attempt to divide the country, not claim innocence.

Unfortunately, Trumpsters would likely not accept full video and audio recordings of collusion as evidence, so the release of the secret memo is simply a way for Trumpsters to maintain their belief that Trump is just a misunderstood genius. Trumpsters now have a way to reassure themselves that any evidence against Trump and his campaign is all part of a conspiracy by Democrats.

It is difficult to imagine a path toward normalcy in our country without some type of violent retaliation by some Trumpsters who will claim that Trump and the Republicans were illegitimately removed from office.

[COUNT TO 500: 495th Article in PAULx]

Why We Elect the Wrong People?: #2 We Don’t Understand the Purpose of a Republic

30 Tuesday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in About Reno, Aging, Business, Communication, Economy, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Health, Higher Education, History, Honor, Management Practices, Politicians, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Religion, Republic, Taxes, The Tipping Point, United States, Universities, US History, Voting, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

115th Congress, Business, candidates, Caucasian, democracy, Donald Trump, GOP, issues, Opinion, PAC's, platform, representatives, republic, Republican, uninformed, Voting, white male

Bad politicians are elected because the most voters don’t understand the purpose of a republic and because we don’t understand, we are manipulated by those who tell us what we want to hear. When anyone complains about Congress or the President we have to keep in mind that it is the voter that puts them in office and we are to blame.

Business Uses Republicans For Profit

Last weekend I published an article on why Big Business wants dumb politicians. Simply put, dumb politicians don’t interfere with unethical business practices and unethical business practices are more profitable than ethical business practices. Republicans have discovered that business will finance their campaigns if they are willing to restrict the function of government in a republic; however, Republicans are elected because they know how to manipulate a certain population in our country.

The Purpose of a Republic

Democracy is only effective if everyone is capable of researching all the information needed to make an intelligent decision on every issue facing a society. Even then, the ‘majority rules’ of a democracy is inherently unfair to the minority.

A republic accepts that not everyone will have enough information to make intelligent decisions on issues confronting a country so representatives are elected to research the issues and make the decisions that benefit the greatest number of people. The catch is that the representatives have to be capable of understanding complex issues and have to be honorable in the discharge of the duties of her or his office.

Opinions Are Irrelevant

What most voters don’t understand is that their ‘opinion is irrelevant in a republic,… and it should be. Opinions are based on the knowledge of the person. If the person is not qualified, not educated, and/or not experienced enough to understand the issue, his or her opinion is defective. When a ‘person on the street’ is interviewed, they are the least likely to have a valid opinion.

GOP Uses the White Male Voter

Republicans use uneducated and/or biased voter opinion to their benefit. They target issues that are based on misinformed or uneducated opinion that the voter is passionate about and elevate those issues in the political arena. Often these issues are based on the personal bias of the voter. Primarily, Republicans target opinions of the uneducated white male and exploit them by saying what the white male wants to hear to gain his support and trust.

The GOP reinforces the white male voter’s belief that he is correct. Republicans blame the government and liberals as the cause of the issue and convince white men that they will fix the problem if elected. Once they have gained the trust of the voter, it is relatively easy to plant other ‘issues’ in his mind. The twisted logic of giving money to the rich will create more jobs is a prime example of how Republicans plant an idea that completely defies common sense, and yet, Republican voters accept it as fact.

The Cure

If our country hopes to elect better politicians, then we have to choose those who are highly intelligent and honorable. We also must stop expecting candidates to take positions on issues before they are elected. Candidates with strong positions are often attempting to say what people want to hear. If our elected officials are intelligent and honorable, they will make good choices.

We also have to understand that our opinion is irrelevant unless we have expertise regarding the issue. Everyone has an opinion, but the only ones that count are the one with knowledge of the issue.

The State of the Union of the United States of America

29 Monday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, Crime, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Economy, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Green, Health, Higher Education, History, Honor, Management Practices, Panama, Politicians, Politics, Pride, Public Image, Public Relations, racism, Relationships, Religion, Respect, Science, Space, Taxes, Technology, United States, Universities, US History, US Space Program, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Congress, Donald Trump, economy, Education, GOP, ICE, Illegal Immigrants, immigrants, Immigration, Paul Kiser, President, public education, Republican, Republican Party, Republicans, roads, Space Program, State of the Union, Tax Cut and Jobs Act, tax cut for wealthy, tax cuts, taxes, United States, United States of America

Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice President, Members of Congress, the good citizens of the UNITED STATES of America:

We are a country of greatness, that has allowed itself to be taken over by the ungrateful. For centuries we have been the place that the world looks to as a model of what they hope to have for themselves and their families, and yet, in one year that model has become the example of what not to do.

The World Economy

We are the marketplace of the world. Companies in Africa, South America, Asia, Europe, and Austrailia want to capture the market of the United States of America. Our citizens support the world economy, and they know that when the United States falters, the world falters.

And yet, the Republican party would have you believe that if our companies are required to pay their portion of support for the United States of America, they will move their jobs away. It is a twisted logic that accepts companies will move away from their customers, but that is what the Republican party would have you believe in order to fatten the wallets of those who don’t need more money.

It is true that companies in the United States of America have been allowed to hide their money in other countries to avoid supporting the people of the United States of America. The solution to this is not to lower taxes, but to refuse to allow a company to have access to our market if they won’t pay their taxes. The Republican model rewards companies that break the laws of the United States of America by legalizing nonpayment of taxes.

The Power of Government

The Republican party has convinced people that government is inherently evil and that the citizens of this country shouldn’t have to financially support it. They have lied to our citizens by claiming that taxes are wrong, government is evil, and business is holy.

And yet, when we closely examine the ‘waste’ of government we find that typically it is a private business that is stealing from the government, not government waste. Business is based on greed. Government, our government, the government established by our forefathers, the government that financed the railroads, the government that built the water systems, the sewer systems, the dams, the roads and highways, the bridges, government that helped our world neighbors win World War I and World War II, the government that established fire protection, law enforcement, national parks, national monuments, and the government that took us to the Moon and back, THAT government is not evil. THAT government is responsible for all the great achievements in the United States of America.

We are not strong because business made us strong. The history of corporations in the United States of America is one of abuse of workers, deception of neighbors and customers, of mismanagement, fraud, and greed. It has been consistent in our country that when the government keeps a close eye on business, business has succeeded. Government, our government, the government of the United States of America makes for good business, and when government is not there, business brings down our country and our economy, just as the banks did in 2007.

The United States

In this speech, I have not used the word, “Americans.” I don’t use that term to refer to the citizens of the United States of America. Brazilians are Americans. Peruvians are Americans. Panamanians are Americans, Canadians are Americans. And our friends south of our border in Mexico are Americans. All the people of North, Central, and South America are Americans.

WE are the UNITED STATES of America. We celebrate and demand the UNION of our country, not the divisions. What we have is unique. What we have is special. Those that use only the last word in our country’s name fail to understand the importance of the first two words.

As the United States, we are pledged to a government by the people, and for the people, ALL THE PEOPLE, of the United States of America. No one is superior. The wealthy are fortunate, not better. The poor are unfortunate and we have their backs.

Immigrants are our guests until they become citizens, and we will be judged on how we treat them. We don’t need walls, we need paths. Every immigrant should be recognized and assisted as they join our great nation. Anything short of heroic support of the visitors to our nation is beneath the character of the citizens of our country.

Education For All

A miracle has happened in the United States of America. Between 1950 and 2010, our country’s population doubled. In 1950, only 34% of the adults in our nation had a high school degree. Only 6% had a college degree. By 2010, Almost 90% of the adults in our country had a high school degree and 30% of our adult citizens had a college degree.

Our schools, our PUBLIC schools not only kept pace with the growing population, they expanded the gift of education to almost everyone willing to do the hard work of becoming better citizens.

We cannot stop now. Education is the foundation that this country stands upon. Education creates new job possibilities. Not just for the student, but for the employer. When a good employer realizes that her employees have a greater potential than his or her current job requires, they find ways to expand the challenges, and that means the company can stay competitive, and even outpace other companies in countries that don’t have the power of an employee educated in the United States of America.

It is Time

We have been deceived. The Republicans have tried to tear our country down and then claim they are building it up. Our country doesn’t need to be rescued by people who seek only to line the pockets of a few at the sacrifice of everyone else. The stock market is a measure of greed, not of wealth. Our economy is driven by millions with good jobs that pay them enough to have money to spend, not by a few investors making millions off everyone else.

Taxes are the lifeblood of our great country, and when the wealthy don’t pay their fair share, everyone suffers. It’s time we stopped the lies and deception. It’s time we remember who we are and what we stand for…We are the United States of America, and those that don’t support shouldn’t be leading our country.

Trump and GOP Causing Emotional Numbness?

25 Thursday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, Crisis Management, Economy, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Health, History, Internet, Journalism, Mental Health, Politics, racism, Religion, Respect, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Taxes, Traditional Media, US History, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Congress, Donald Trump, economy, GOP, government shutdown, Mental Health, post trauma, PTSD, Republican, Republicans, shock

There is a term for the state of emotional numbness. It is called depersonalization-derealization disorder (DD.) It is a feeling of emotional detachment from reality, and the United States seems to be experiencing DD in epidemic levels. Has Donald Trump and the Republican (GOP) steamrolling agenda created a state of emotional shock for our citizens? It would answer many questions as to the lack of reaction to the absurdity of what our country has become.

Stock Market Non-Event

This week I was listening to Market Place on National Public Radio (NPR.) Kai Ryssdal was pointing out (22 January 2016) how the craziness of Congress and the government shutdown didn’t seem to be affecting the stock market. His point seemed to be that uncertainty has become the new ‘normal’ so uncertainty no longer affects the stock market in the way it has in the past.

It seems that the United States is in a zombie-like state as more events pile on that, in the past, would have created turmoil throughout our society. Today, events like a government shutdown seem to have little, if any, effect on people.

Trauma as Normal

During and immediately following a crisis people affected tend to shut down emotionally. They cannot process all of the events that have happened and become numb to new events. It is a coping mechanism in our brains that protects us and prevents us from experiencing further emotional trauma.

Germany in the early 1930’s is an example of mass DD. The Wall Street Stock Market crash of 1929 brought a period of prosperity and stability to an end and severely damaged the German economy.

After a series of economic issues and with a government in chaos, the German people became numb to the constant state of crisis in their country. Conservatives and reactionaries in Germany began to seize power in the absence of a coherent strategy to bring order to the country. This opened the door for the Adolf Hitler and the Nazi party to rise to control the country as the people largely sat back and watched.

What Does It Mean?

We are a nation of in a state of shock from the actions of Donald Trump and the Republicans. We are likely to do nothing that will stop the racist agenda of the President and the GOP. This year’s elections may only serve to exacerbate the situation. If the Democrats take control of Congress, it may lead to a political war between Trump and Congress. If the Republicans maintain control they will feel justified in intensifying the racist agenda.

Our country is faced with a situation that threatens everything we stand for, and yet, we are numb. Let us hope there is a way out of this mess.

An Indictment Against NPR Journalism Standards

22 Monday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Communication, Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Higher Education, Honor, Journalism, Opinion, Politics, Pride, Print Media, Public Image, racism, Taxes, Traditional Media, Writing

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

coal mining, Don Gonyea, Donald Trump, energy, entertainment, Ethics, journalism, journalism standards, journalists, Morning Edition, National Public Radio, News media, newsworthy, npr, Pennsylvania, soundbite, soundbites, Steve Innskeep

National Public Radio’s (NPR) Morning Edition is not alone in the race to lower journalism standards. It is; however, the latest example of how hard-hitting journalism has become a game of tossing softballs to ill-informed people for entertainment and soundbites.

Interview With a Trumpster

Friday morning (19 January 2018) Morning Edition’s Steve Inskeep and Don Gonyea were discussing Gonyea’s report on Donald Trump’s support in southwestern Pennsylvania. Included in his report was a soundbite of an interview with a Trump supporter using the name, Paul Walker:

Trump was not a politician. He did not come up through all the bullcrap and the handshakes and the elbow-rubbing. He came in. And I think it’s a direct approach. I like his twitters (ph). If you watch my Twitter account, I retweet just about everything that he puts out.

Gonyea then implied that people from the coal mining areas like Trump because they believe government regulation is taking away coal mining jobs. The next soundbite was of Republican State Senator Camera Bartolotta who explained the rationale behind Trumpster’s alleged “war on coal” sentiment:

…we have to fight for our jobs… Of course coal mining is different now. Of course you’re not going to need 2,000 coal miners in a coal mine. We’ve got automation. We’ve got machines. We’ve got, you know, better technology. But you know what? We still need coal.

As Gonyea ended his report, Steve Inskeep asked what seemed to be a prepared question for Gonyea:

…people on the left, …anytime we put Trump voters on the air. They ask – why keep interviewing Trump voters? They never change. They’re out of touch. Why? Why? Why?…Why talk to Trump voters?

Gonyea gave what seemed to be a prepared answer:

Well, first, we talk to voters of all kinds – of all stripes…As for the Trump voters, it’s important to know, A, if they’re still with him. But it’s good to hear how they talk about him and how that may change over time, if there are shifts. Is there strong support suddenly?…Also, in states where the vote’s very close, any movement among any voter group can make the difference.

The Indictment against NPR’s Morning Edition

Morning Edition violated basic journalism standards in the following ways:

Most of the information was based on opinion, not fact.

The man using the name, Paul Walker, expressed his opinion. State Senator Camera Bartolotta expressed her opinion of other people’s opinions.

Walker, said: “Trump’s not a politician.” FACT: Trump has run for political office many times. Trump has been a political figure for decades.

State Senator Bartolotta explained why Trump supporters feel they have to fight the government for coal mining jobs, then gave reasons why it wasn’t the government stealing coal mining jobs.

None of the opinions expressed were newsworthy.

These opinions are typical opinions of Trump supporters. The apparent news was that Trump supporters have the same opinions as they have always had. It is the classic dog bites man story.

Information was meaningless.

The entire story was based on uninformed and/or incorrect opinions. The story was not exposing the lack of facts by the people interviewed but instead legitimized inaccurate and/or uninformed opinion.

End Didn’t Justify the Story

The exchange between Inskeep and Gonyea seemed to be an attempt to justify poor journalism. Uniformed opinions are not news. They don’t add to the debate, and to focus on inaccurate opinion rather than fact leads people to believe that their opinion is valid regardless of how uninformed, racist, or inappropriate it is to be expressed. It encourages people to become more extremist in order to attract the attention of the media.

*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*

Trumpster Babble Shorthand

Babble #1 – “Trump’s a straight shooter” = He doesn’t research or listen to people, he just says the first thing to come into his head.

Babble #2 – “Trump speaks for the little guy.” = Trump says what uneducated racist is thinking.

Babble #3 – “We have to stop giving all our money to the government.” = I don’t want to pay for the privilege of living in the United States of America.

Babble #4 – “Trump is keeping people from coming to America and stealing our jobs.” = I’m racist so I can blame people of color for taking jobs I would never apply for because they’re beneath me, or far beyond my qualifications.

Babble #5 – “Trump’s not a politician” = He’s inexperienced.

Babble #6 – “We need jobs!” = We need jobs that pay lots of money to people in a small town with few skills and only a high school degree…or less.