The Trump Card

21 Friday Aug 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Ethics, Government, Opinion, Politics, Public Image, Religion, US History

Tags

2016, Alaska, Bernie Sanders, Democrats, Donald Trump, GOP, Hilliary Clinton, Jeb Bush, nominee, Paul Ryan, Presidential election, Republican, Republicans, Sarah Palin

Donald Trump: The anti-American candidate

Why is Donald Trump running for President? This American version of Muammar Gaddafi or Saddam Hussein is making no attempt to appeal to intelligent voters, and acts as if he is running for President of the Student Council by being anti-school.

The answer is that he is probably not running for President; however, Trump is vital to the hopes of the Grand Ole Party (GOP,) that consists of a vocal white, ultra-religious, anti-American group, and a smaller group of intelligent traditional conservatives.

In the Spring of 2015, it was chaos in the Republican party. Every day another new candidate was announcing his or her run for the White House. Each of them desperately sought the favor of the anti-American faction that would give them the nomination. As each candidate carved out smaller and smaller slices of their party it began to look hopeless for Republicans. None of them could win the Presidency because winning anti-American support would be poison to them in November 2016. At the same time, the GOP candidates were dividing up the party, making reconciliation with a legitimate prospect almost impossible.

Enter Donald Trump. Trump’s role in the party is to be the Pied Piper. He is to gather up all the misfits of the anti-American movement in the GOP and gain their trust. He can be as outrageous as he wants because it will only serve to help him in his role of winning the loyalty of those who love to hate America.

As he solidifies the anti-American vote he will force other GOP candidates out of the race, and Jeb Bush will continue to chart out a more moderate course that will give him the best chance of winning a majority in the general election. Next summer Donald Trump and Jeb Bush will likely be the only two viable GOP nominees. It is at this point Trump will ask his supporters to “fall on their swords” for the party. He will explain that if they don’t vote for Jeb Bush, the Democrats will win…again.

Trump As Vice President?

3rd Place in Miss Alaska, attended five different colleges in four years (one of them twice,) and 1/2 term Governor of Alaska (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Sarah Palin: 3rd Place in Miss Alaska, attended five different colleges in four years (one of them twice,) and 1/2 term Governor of Alaska

Paul Ryan, helped Mitt Romney lose in 2012

A fair question is whether Trump will be the Vice President candidate for the Republicans. That deal may already have been brokered with the Bush campaign, or it may still be a decision yet to be made. The problem is that Trump may bring too much baggage to the ticket. Attempts to use the Vice President as material to sew together a conservative coalition has failed in past elections (Sarah Palin in 2008, and Paul Ryan in 2012) as each made the Presidential candidate less appealing to moderates and intelligent voters.

Regardless, Trump’s ego is overflowing with the attention he is currently receiving from supporters and detractors. It is likely that he would see political office beneath him, but he loves being the center of attention. This is a win-win opportunity for him.

Republicans Deal With The Devil

20 Thursday Aug 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, History, Opinion, Politics, Religion, Taxes, US History, Women

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

anti-American, civil war, confederacy, Confederate Flag, Conservatives, GOP, hate, President Lincoln, racism, Republican, Southern Democrats, the Confederate States of America, The South, traitors

Republicans have a major problem. They are not the majority in the United States. They have managed to win congressional elections, and lesser political offices by convincing true conservatives and anti-Americans that they have the same goals. That strategy has worked because the anti-Americans originally were silent partners in the alliance and were easily led by true conservatives.

The problem is that the anti-Americans have managed use the Republican party to legitimize their 150 year effort to take over America and remake it in their image. That effort started when the white Southern Democrats were determined to make slavery the law of the new territories and they declared that if Abraham Lincoln (a Republican, ironically) were elected as President they would abandon the United States of America. The white, male, landowners of the South said they would disgrace our flag, country and Constitution by creating a new country where all men would not be equal all because their candidate lost the election.

What many Americans do not know is that the Confederacy lied. They were not content with stealing a handful of states and declaring themselves as a new country. Had that been their goal the Civil War would not have occurred. Lincoln was ready to let the six states abandon our country and be done with them.

However, after seceding, the Confederate States of America began attacking our country and sought to destroy the United States of America. Their intent was clearly to conquer us and put our citizens under their autocratic rule.

To defend our country, President Lincoln moved troops in to protect the capital but they were attacked in Baltimore by anti-Americans who attempted to disrupt the our military by operating inside our country. The result forced us into the Civil War.

The Confederate States of America incorrectly assumed that we would surrender rather than fight. That miscalculation not only caused them to lose the war, but also left them without a country. After the war the white, anti-Americans continued to behave as if they were not subjects to the United States of America, nor did they recognize African-Americans as equal despite laws that demand it.

One hundred years after the Civil War the anti-Americans were confronted by citizens who would no longer tolerate their lack respect to our Constitution and the rule of law. They continued to defy and disgrace our country and we were once again required to send troops into the South to force their compliance.

Making violent threats is part of anti-Americanism

Today they still maintain their defiance against America and our Constitution. They retain loyalty to the defeated Confederate flag, and seek to end American government. For the most part, our country has tolerated the anti-Americans and allowed them to use their right of free speech to disrespect our government and our country.

But over the last four decades Republicans, defeated by scandals and failed leadership, have sought to lure the vote of anti-Americans by promoting white supremacist ideals. Among the concepts promoted by Republicans have been a hate for minorities, claiming a religious doctrine that enshrines white males as dominant, pushing for absolute gun ownership that puts military weapons in private hands, interpreting the Constitution to use militias as a means to overthrow America, and promoting an ultra-patriotism that ironically claims that people who seek to overthrow America are patriotic. By using these tactics the Republicans have been successful in capturing the loyalty of the anti-Americans and that has kept the party viable.

Unfortunately, true conservatives have lost control of the Republican party to the anti-Americans. Now, a candidate has to practically pledge allegiance to the Confederate flag to be a viable candidate. Republican candidates must also pledge to bankrupt the government of the United States through no-taxes promises.

The result has created chaos in the Republican party. Like a shark feeding frenzy, anti-American candidates are leaping into the political arena sensing that this is their moment to be the Jefferson Davis of the 21st century.

Yet, America is still not ready to be overthrown. The last two Presidential elections have demonstrated that loyal American still have a majority, Now the Republican party is faced with two opposing facts. A true conservative cannot win the nomination as the Republican Presidential candidate, and an anti-American candidate cannot win the election. Republicans have to find a way to thin the frenzy, eliminate the anti-American candidates, and find someone who can appeal to moderate voters, conservatives, and anti-Americans.

Next: The Trump Card

Panama’s Historical Struggle For Self-Determinism

28 Tuesday Jul 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Education, Ethics, Government, Government Regulation, History, Honor, Panama, Politics, Public Image, Religion, Respect, Travel

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Columbia, independence, Panama, Panamá Canal, Simon Bolivar, Spain, United States, USA

Panamá has been the victim for most of its history. Because it is the narrowest land division between the Pacific Ocean and the Caribbean Sea (and to the Atlantic Ocean,) Panamá was a strategic gateway for world commerce long before the great canal was built.

Panamá Under Foreign Control
When Spanish Explorer Vasco Núñez de Balboa managed to cross from the northern Caribbean/Atlantic coast to the southern Pacific coast in 1513, the fate of Panamá was sealed. The Spanish instantly knew that this was the access to the Pacific side of the Americas and Panamá was the link that would make conquest possible.

Ruins of the Spanish fortifications in Portobelo, Panama

Ruins of the Spanish fortifications in Portobelo, Panamá

Spain’s official rule of the Americas began in 1538, and lasted almost 300 years, but Spain’s hold on Panamá would not go uncontested. Pirates and English backed privateers attempted to raid Spanish held ports in Panamá in hopes of stealing the wealth of cargo passing across the land. Eventually it would be the Spanish-American wars and rebellions across Latin America that would force Spain to retreat back to Europe.

When Panamá gained independence from Spain in 1821, it became a department of Columbia, but the citizens almost immediately sought to be free of all foreign control. Columbia refused to give Panamá independence, and its strategic value to world trade was probably one of the most significant reasons.

A Spanish Import: The Catholic Church

New Outsiders
In the late 19th century a new European power was implanting itself on Panamanian soil. France had decided to take action on the Holy Grail of world trade, an ocean channel through Panamá that would end the need for unloading cargo from a ship, transporting goods across a tropical jungle, and reloading the cargo onto another ship. The French effort eventually killed over 20,000 people before the effort was finally abandon.

Soon after the French failed, the United States decided to insert itself into the effort of building a canal system in Panamá. It initially negotiated a deal with Columbia, but the Colombian Senate rejected the treaty/contract. As the citizens of Panamá had recently attempted to gain independence from Columbia in a 1,000 day war, the United States decided to bypass Columbia’s rejection and assist Panamá’s rebellion effort. The understanding was that the United States would be allowed to build, operate, and control the canal if Panamá was successful in gaining independence.

The Panamá Canal has guided Panamá’s fate for over 100 years

A day after U.S. warships created a blockade to stop Columbia from sending troops into Panamá, it declared independence from Columbia on November 3, 1903. Three days later the treaty to give the United States the right-of-way for the canal and a zone extending five miles to each side of the canal.

Though there was no bloodshed in 1903, between Panamá, the United States, and Columbia, the actions taken by the United States, and its motives for assisting Panamá created diplomatic issues with Columbia. Many citizens of Panamá were also unhappy with the cost of independence. Almost two decades later the United States reached an agreement and monetary settlement with Columbia over the events of 1903, but many Panamanians still felt that the United States occupation was only a slight revision of past foreign domination.

20th Century Political Oddity
Under the terms of the treaty of 1903, Panamá was placed in an odd position. The government of Panamá finally governed over the people of Panamá, but not the Panamá Canal. It received annual royalties from the United States, but in return Panamá could not do anything that might threaten use of the canal. The best jobs in Panamá were related to operation and maintenance of the canal, but the United States instituted a system of institutionalized racism in Panamá by selective employment and a preferential pay structure. United States citizens were offered administrative positions and were paid in gold currency (gold roll.) The Hispanic and African-American Panamanians were hired for worker positions and were paid in silver currency (silver roll.)

Housing for U.S. personnel assigned to the canal is now owned and maintained by Panamá

The Panamá government found itself as the liaison between the United States and the Panamanian people. That role led to cycles of odd leadership styles and often corrupt and/or dictator-like political control of the country. The United States military was an oppressive reminder to all Panamanians of who held the power in their country, and yet. the citizens of Panamá found that the presence of the United States military did not keep their leadership from being corrupt or cruel, and attempts by the U.S. to address the corruption and criminality of the government of Panamá failed to resolve the problems.

By the early 1970’s it was apparent that the United States was exacerbating the internal issues in Panamá and negotiations for transferring the ownership and operation of the Panamá Canal to Panamá began. That resulted in a new treaty signed by President Jimmy Carter. Based on the treaty signed in 1977, the control of the Panamá Canal was to be turned over to the Panamanian government on December 31, 1999.

Panamá: Required to Run Before It Walks
In 500 years of world attention, Panamá never had the opportunity to develop its internal government without interference or influence of a foreign power. During the last fifteen years Panamá has faced the task of trying to restructure and address its internal issues in order to map out a sustainable future for its diverse population.

The occupational governments of the Spanish, French, Columbia, and the United States, rarely offered a positive model of good government for Panamá as each foreign power had an agenda for the country that had little, if anything, to do with improving the standard of living for the citizens.

Panamá’s future rests largely on the ability of government to create an ethical environment that protects citizens and limits the potential for corruption. A significant aspect of that environment will be infrastructure that provides access to all people to opportunities currently reserved for the wealthy and powerful.

A Panamanian girl in traditional dress

Education: The Foundation of Panamá’s Future
Education will play an important role for the future of Panamanian citizens. Basic skills, (mathematics, reading, science, history, etc.,) and more advanced subjects, (multiple languages, music, art, speech, etc.) will create citizens who are better prepared for job opportunities of the 21st century. In addition, education provides a path to overcome corruption. Ethical behavior is a learned function that requires the ability to see a bigger picture of society. Uneducated people tend to gravitate to a, “what’s-in-it-for-me,” mindset that sacrifices the future for a short-term gain.

Simon Bolivar, a key figure in forcing Spain to give up the Americas

Simón Bolivar, a key figure in forcing Spain to give up the Americas

Epilogue For A Country Reborn
Panamá has never been given a chance to develop its own identity. It has three dates that could be called “Independence Days.” Independence from Spain on November 28, 1821; independence from Columbia on November 3, 1903, and independence from United States control of the canal on December 31, 1999. The irony is that while Panamá celebrates the two former days of ‘independence,” it is really the latter date that gave the country true independence of foreign meddling.

For the first time in 500 years Panamá has the opportunity to make choices about its destiny. This freedom comes with a bigger challenge. The leadership of Panamá must establish a new long-term vision for the country that will involve significant projects and programs to develop the infrastructure that the country must have to succeed. Yet, the people of Panamá will justifiably be suspicious their government based upon a long history of great plans and promises that were lies of corrupt officials who pocketed money and didn’t deliver. Winning back the trust of the citizens will be the first task of an independent Panamá.

The Panamá Canal will play a significant role in an independent Panamá. World economics affect world trade, and world trade affects the Panamá canal; however, the country has the opportunity to re-position itself as more than just a conduit of trade. If Panamá can minimize corruption, improve transportation infrastructure, and increase the education level of its citizens, it will have an environment that will continue to grow Panamá’s role as a center of commerce and industry as well as a ocean-to-ocean conduit for cargo passing through the country.

Panamá no longer is a victim of foreign interference. Panamá now has the opportunity, and the burden, of determining its own future.

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

01 Wednesday Jul 2015

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

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Gay Marriage Legitimizes Marriage

26 Friday Jun 2015

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

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

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

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

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

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

Science Versus Stupidity

31 Sunday May 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Ethics, Generational, Government, Government Regulation, Green, Health, Honor, Internet, Politics, Religion, Science, Social Interactive Media (SIM), solar, Technology

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

belief, Bible, church, Conservatives, evolution, fact, Global warming, GOP, logic, Mythology, Republican, Republicans, scientific process, stupid, Stupidity, Tea Party

Earth: Victim of Stupidity

“Science doesn’t have all the answers.”

It’s hard to know where to start when someone makes a statement like the one above. ‘Science’ isn’t an entity, so it can’t possess anything, but beyond the poor grammar is the issue of motivation and failed logic.

When a person makes this statement their motivation is often in defense of religion. The idea seems to be that if science doesn’t have all the answers, then religious and mythological beliefs are valid. Using this logic one could say that because nitrogen doesn’t make up all of the Earth’s atmosphere, (air is 78% nitrogen,) then the air we breathe is all fairy dust.

No intelligent person would say that science has all the answers. We are just scratching the surface of understanding the mechanisms by which our universe operates. Even after science has shown us how one system works, scientists may discover that there are other factors that affect that system. We are on a path of discovery and we have a long way to travel.

However, there are no shortcuts. Just because science hasn’t fully explained everything doesn’t give anyone license to invent an explanation that is based on opinion or agenda. This includes explanations that were created over a thousand years ago by people who didn’t even understand that urination and defecation are the end process of digestion.

All science begins with asking a question. Why? How? What? In the process of answering those questions, the scientific process rules some things out. By narrowing down what isn’t a cause or a factor the scientist begins to clarify the important causes or factors. Religion ignores this process and immediately jumps to an answer that lacks any support other than, “Because I say so!”

I have no problem with anyone’s mythological beliefs…until the believer wants the rest of society to abide by those beliefs. Public policies, laws, education and regulations that exist or are governed by someone’s mythological beliefs is pure stupidity, even if a majority believe in the mythology.

Those that don’t ‘believe’ in evolution, global warming, vaccinations, or any other scientifically based fact are stupid. I’m not calling anyone names, I’m saying they lack intelligence and logical thinking. They are incapable of making good decisions. They are, by definition, stupid.

Believe in God? Fine. But, giving credibility to religious beliefs over scientific fact defines one as being stupid. Making religious beliefs part of societal laws is mass stupidity.

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

09 Saturday May 2015

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

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

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

Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II

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

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

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

The Queen’s Royal Coat of Arms (UK)

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

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

Queen Elizabeth II in 1953

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

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

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

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

God Save the Queen.

Religious Liberty Laws Violate The Bible

03 Friday Apr 2015

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

Dave Granlund Cartoon: Liberty for who?

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

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

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

Romans 14: 10-13
New International Version¹

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

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

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

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

Romans 14: 19
New International Version

The Religious Liberty laws are actually anti-Christian laws.

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

Epilogue : The 2010’s

20 Friday Mar 2015

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

The 2010’s – End of Civility

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

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

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

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

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

U.S._Income_-_Changes_by_Income_Group_1979-2011

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This is Why (2015 vs the 2000’s)

19 Thursday Mar 2015

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

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

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

The 2000’s – The Defeat of America

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

NEXT: Epilogue

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

This is Why (2015 vs the 1990’s)

18 Wednesday Mar 2015

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

The 1990’s – A World Turned Upside Down

An Explosion of Change

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

NEXT: The 2000’s

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

This is Why (2015 vs the 1960’s)

15 Sunday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, College, Communication, Crisis Management, Education, Ethics, Generational, Government, Health, Higher Education, History, Lessons of Life, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Religion, Respect, Space, Taxes, Technology, Traditional Media, Universities, US History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

African American, Blacks, Civil Rights, Cold War, Communism, Inner City, JFK, John F. Kennedy, Richard M. Nixon, Riots, Russia, Selma, Soviet Union, space race, Suburban Life, Suburbs, USA, USSR, Vietnam, WIN

Note: This series premise is that we tend to see today’s world based upon what we experienced in the past. Different generations have different experiences, which can lead to different perceptions of what is happening in today’s world.

In this article we look at the 1960’s.

The 1960’s – The Three Americas

The Decade of the Roar

Population: 180.0 million
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita: $16,986
Median Annual Income: $5,600
Life Expectancy: 69.7
Average Age at Marriage: Men 22.8, Women 20.3
% of pop. w/high school degree or higher: 41.1%
% of pop. w/college degree or higher: 7.7%

AMERICA AS THE TECH AND COMMERCE GORILLA
The space race continued technological advancement for both the Soviet Union and the United States; however, USSR kept even the most simple advancements secret from everyone, including their own citizens. The space-related advancements for the United States were often generated by private contractors. The advancements that were not ‘Top Secret’ could be applied in open commerce and available to the private citizen. USSR didn’t lose the Space Race when an American stepped on the Moon, they lost it when millions of Americans were able to buy consumer goods that incorporated technology generated by sending a human to the Moon.

This thrust America into the center of technological advancement in commerce. In addition to space technology, new super highways, power grids, and phone lines increased commerce. The capitalist system of “build only what we know will sell” was replaced with a new space age economy of “solve problems that no one ever thought of before.”

The downside of a growing economy is that when people have more money to spend, then greed steps up to take their money. It’s one thing for a business to raise their prices to cover additional costs, or to pay for improvements to their products or services, but when prices increased for the sake of greed, then worker wages must increase to help them pay for a higher cost of living. That was the root cause for the upward spiral of inflation in the 1960’s.

AMERICA AS THE WORLD’s POLICE
Communist aggression and American pride clashed as China and Russia sought to halt the threat of bottom up government (self determinism) to their model of top down (power to the few.) The space race was fueled by Russian moves to claim the ultimate higher ground. Russia, China, and the United States began winning over developing countries in a blatant attempt to win control of strategic regions around the world. Military might became a primary resource in diplomacy. Those who stood to make money through weapon development and sales were strong proponents of meeting aggression with aggression. Governments found that the concept of small wars as a means to prevent larger wars were more palatable to the public.

With the onset of smaller wars came the utilization of forcing young men into fighting wars, while those who made the decisions to fight went home to their families every night. The gap between those who sacrifice and those who benefit from war became crystal clear. Civil unrest across the nation against the Vietnam war created a split that was widely visible through national television news. America was no longer in a post-war honeymoon.

AMERICA FACING ITS OWN FAILINGS
The Civil War purchased an end to institutionalized slavery, but it didn’t end white domination of African-Americans. Societal tools to humiliate and dominate black people created a divided America based on skin color.

Determined to no longer be oppressed, African-Americans began to challenge white society. This caught many white Americans living in communities outside of the South by surprise. Meanwhile in the South, some white groups committed heinous crimes in an effort to derail any African-American challenge to the dual-class society that protected white supremacy.

Few people fully understood how the United States of America could become so divided in the two decades following the World War II. Small town people sought simplistic solutions to issues for which they had very little understanding. The complexities leading to the chaos of the 1960’s were two much for a ‘Mayberry RFD’ mind.

With the boom in suburban living, the segregation of the races led to a flash point in many major cities. Whites choose to run away from inner city issues to live a sanitized life that sucked taxpayer money out of the neighborhoods that needed it the most. From the comfort of their new recliner in their new subdivision, white people embraced small-town thinking. Nuke Russia, nuke Vietnam, nuke Cuba, war protesters were just drugged out hippies, Blacks were responsible for their own failings, etc. were typical of positions of the 1960’s Caucasian.

NEXT: The 1970’s

THE SERIES: The 1950’s The 1980’s The 1990’s The 2000’s Epilogue

“Chicken Little” Netanyahu Again Foretells Doom, Betrays Israel

05 Thursday Mar 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Government, Politics, Public Relations, Religion

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Adolf Hitler, Benjamin Netanyahu, Congress, fear, fear mongering, Iran, Iraq, Israel, John Boehner, nuclear weapons, Sheldon Adelson

John Boehner and Benjamin Netanyahu in 2011

Fear is the tool of aggressors to overcome common sense. Fear enabled Adolf Hitler to rally his country into a war that cost millions of lives. Ironically, in World War II, allied countries did not go to war in fear, but in reaction to real events and real threats.

In 2001, America was devastated by the acts of terrorism on September 11th, but we were not ready to leap into a war. For that, conservatives sought to generate fear. We were told that “weapons of mass destruction” were in Iraq and that another attack was imminent. At least that is what Benjamin Netanyahu told us in 2002.

Now, in 2015, we find that same Israel voice standing before Congress, with the same prediction of doom about Iran. Why?

He was not speaking to Congress as a slap in the face to President Obama, although Speaker John Boehner was hoping to insult the President. Nor was Netanyahu before Congress to have a substantive discussion of Iran and nuclear weapons. This was all about making Netanyahu look like an important world leader just before the Israeli elections. Boehner, who actually invited Netanyahu to come in February, was told the invitation needed to be closer to the March Israeli elections. The only reason for “Chicken Little” to come to Congress was for a plumage display for the voters in Israel.

As for Speaker Boehner, if ever a politician looked like he was on his knees servicing his master it was when Boehner set up the Netanyahu visit in order to please Sheldon Adelson, the money behind conservative and anti-Arab causes.

However, the political favor may have a significant cost for both Israel and conservatives. For decades the antagonist in the Arab world has been Benjamin Netanyahu. He has been the architect of inhumane acts that were designed to provoke Arab reaction. His appearance before Congress using the same fear tactics he used in 2002, defined him as the problem, not the victim. Conservatives greeted Netanyahu as if he was the Rush Limbaugh, which made it clear to a reasonable person that this was not a speech of fact, but of a charlatan looking to play to conservative fear mongering, which is the heart and soul of wacko, right-wing conservatives.

The result of this has been to further isolate conservatives, and it has offered evidence that Israel has been playing all of us for far too long. If Netanyahu is successful in his re-election, it may finally wake up people of common sense that the way to bring peace to the world is to stop letting Israel to call the shots.

Boehner Commits Near Act-of-War

24 Saturday Jan 2015

Posted by Paul Kiser in Ethics, Government, Opinion, Politics, Religion, Respect

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Benjamin Netanyahu, Congress, House of Representatives, Israel, John Boehner, Nevada, Sheldon Adelson

Shledon Adelson: Speaker John Boehner’s Puppet Master

John Boehner (R-Ohio) was elected with less than 127,000 votes last November. On Wednesday, the Speaker of the House decided that was enough to make him President and commit a foreign policy mistake that will be construed by many Arabs as an act of war.

Speaker Boehner is desperate and he is not very capable. He also hates President Barack Obama, (the guy who won his election with almost 66 million votes and who is in charge of our foreign policy.) He would do almost anything to attack the leader of our country, even if it put American lives at risk.

Speaker Boehner is also owned by big money contributors and in this case, Sheldon Adelson, Nevada’s Queen of the Desert, owns John Boehner. Adelson is the CEO of the Las Vegas Sands Corporation. He is the master of The Venetian Resort Hotel Casino, Palazzo hotel, and the Sands Expo and Convention Center in Las Vegas, Nevada, United States of America. He also is the lord of the Marina Bay Sands in Singapore. Adelson makes a lot of money off people who come to his properties under belief that they are going to win money.

Sheldon Adelson doesn’t pay income taxes in Nevada. He, nor his con-businesses pays corporate taxes in Nevada, nor do they pay capital gains taxes. In fact, the main source of taxes from his casinos are the ‘winners’ who must pay a share of their take to the state, so Adelson contributes almost nothing for the privilege of emptying people’s wallets in Nevada.

So what does Adelson do with his money? He buys political power, mostly for Israeli and Jewish interests. Adelson’s money is banked in conservative measures all over the world. If it is anti-Arab and good for conservatives, Adelson’s money will be close by.

Considering the power that Sheldon Adelson has over Speaker John Boehner, it is easy to understand why the Congressman from Ohio invited Benjamin Netanyahu, possibly the most hated man in the Arab world, to speak to Congress. Speaker Boehner’s invitation would be similar to inviting the leader of the Klu Klux Klan to Congress in order to spite African-Americans.

Boehner’s insult to the Arab world is under the guise of learning about the ‘threat’ of Iran’s nuclear program. This is a lie. There are many true experts that could address the reality of an Iran threat, but those experts are not going to say what conservatives want to hear.

The March 3rd invitation (moved back from February 11) for Netanyahu is also timed to put the leader of Jewish military oppression against Arabs in the spotlight prior to the Israeli elections. A direct link between Adelson and Netanyahu’s invitation would be difficult to prove, but you can smell Adelson’s money all over Boehner’s act.

No one can know if Boehner’s insult to Arabs will result in an American body count, but the Speaker of the House has certainly put Americans in danger in order to make a payment on his debt to Adelson.

It would be an appropriate response to Boehner’s stupidity if all the Democrats held a conference on the same day regarding the reality of Iran’s threat with real experts who don’t have a political election in the balance.

Corporate Religion Decision Will Determine Supreme Court’s Corruption

27 Thursday Mar 2014

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

Healthcare decision to force Supreme Court to judge themselves

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

Contraception: Individual choice or employer usurpation of individual right?

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

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

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

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

Employer mythology trumps Freedom of Religion?

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

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

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

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

Management Study for God

19 Wednesday Mar 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Consulting, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Employee Retention, Ethics, Fiction, Generational, Government, History, Human Resources, Management Practices, Opinion, Politics, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Religion, Sports, Tom Peters, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

analysis, females, Gender, God, humans, implementation, males, management study, men, recommendations, review, Women

WORLD MANAGEMENT STUDY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

On March 1, 2014, Kiser and Co. was retained by God to perform a study of the world management. After a thorough review of the processes and effectiveness of the current management practices on Earth we submit the following analysis and make the following recommendations.

ANALYSIS

FINDING ONE: Ineffective World Leadership
Our researchers found the world leadership to be largely ineffective, self-promoting, and in some cases cruel and corrupt. In most advanced civilizations we would expect to see leadership to evolve into higher quality leaders as lessons learned from poor leadership would be applied to avoid repeating past failures. In fact, we have seen the reverse is true in many situations.

Key examples are Russia and North Korea. In both cases, the eventual failures of past leaders who used military force, prisons, politically controlled media, covert police enforcement, and corrupt practices have not deterred the current leadership of these countries to return to, or continue those practices. In addition, religious-based organizations seem to be among the worst offenders in promoting policies and practices that marginalize people and encourage hate and violence.

Immediate changes in world leadership will be required if management of the planet is to move forward.

FINDING TWO: Lack of Vision
There seems to be a lack of concern for the future of the world. Consistently we saw an attitude that can best be described as “What’s in it for me?” Companies focus on next quarter’s profit, not long-term viability. Governments tend to lack any sensitivity toward the underprivileged, tending to blame them for their problems while passing laws that benefit the privileged at the expense of those who cannot afford the basic necessities to survive and prosper.

Again, immediate changes in world leadership will be required if management of the planet is to move forward.

FINDING THREE: Obstruction of Progress
Many in leadership positions use propaganda and destructive techniques to prevent effective management. By focusing on meaningless, but highly controversial issues, some leaders have been able to keep discussions away from relevant issues and waste time through generating anger on topics among key population groups. The result is wild, pointless discussions on issues that cannot be resolved unless everyone works together. The key element in the obstructive leadership’s tactics is to announce that any compromise is a failure. In this way they create an “all or nothing” situation that effectively stops progress.

Again, immediate changes in world leadership will be required if management of the planet is to move forward.

FINDING FOUR: Inequality
We were shocked to discover the issues of inequality. The gap between the “haves” and “have-nots” is vast and continues to grow. People are grouped and identified with certain expectations that determine their treatment by the world’s leadership. Slavery has become replaced with subtle tactics of discrimination that tend to become more bold over time. In many cases, the discriminatory practices have become accepted as normal.

Again, immediate changes in world leadership will be required if management of the planet is to move forward.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Despite the scope of the problem, the solution is surprisingly simple.

PROPOSAL 1: Downsize the Male Gender
Among the four major findings, men were found to be the principal source of the problem. The current ineffective leadership group (Finding One) is overwhelmingly male dominated and they tend to be the people who demonstrate a lack of vision (Finding Two,) an inability to compromise (Finding Three,) and promote inequality (Finding Four.) Without men almost every current issue disappears without any further action.

Eliminating all males will also result in many benefits. The world population will be dramatically reduced, sexual harassment will virtually end, most, if not all, wars will end, and most pay equality issues will cease. Issue after issue becomes smaller, or disappears completely without men on the planet.

COUNTER FINDINGS
It is difficult to find negatives to this solution; however, here are some of the areas that may feel the impact of downsizing the male gender:

Reproduction — A lack of males would seem to create an issue in the propagation of the human species; however, there is believed to be enough frozen sperm available to continue reproduction on a smaller scale and the new males will be raised in a female-dominated environment, which may weed out the personality and behavior issues of the current male gender.

Male-dominated jobs — There are few jobs that truly require a male worker. Just because females have been excluded from many jobs doesn’t mean they can’t be trained to perform the work effectively.

Sports — Without males, most competitive sports will end. We cannot find a downside to this issue.

IMPLEMENTATION

It is believed that a 100% downsizing of the male gender may not be necessary for an effective change in world management. It might be more advisable to put all males on a 30-day Improvement Required Action. At the end of the 30-days those who have not demonstrated a clear reversal of the findings of this study should be downsized. The remaining males could then be re-evaluated at 60 and 90 days to determine if the initial downsize resolved the problem or not. It is suggested that the changes required should be permanent as a condition of continued existence.

We do have recommendations about downsizing certain females; however, those may be handled on a case by case basis in a closed meeting with Human Resources.

Arizona ‘Religious Freedom’ Law Not About Religion

26 Wednesday Feb 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Business, Ethics, Generational, Government, Honor, Opinion, Politics, Religion

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Arizona, Caucasian, gay, Governor Jan Brewer, House of Representatives, lesbian, LGBT, racism, racist, religion, religious freedom, SB 1062, Senate, Senators, white

Discussion about Arizona’s “Religious Freedom” law that passed the Senate and the House last week continues as speculation grows on whether or not Governor Jan Brewer will veto it, sign it, or fall asleep. Apparently Governor Brewer seems to be having difficulty understanding the two-page document and isn’t capable of reading it on the Internet.

The law (Arizona Senate Bill 1062) encourages businesses to discriminate against anyone who doesn’t meet their personal definition of ‘moral.’ The bill allows businesses to target at people who are in a single-sex relationship and refuse them service; however, the law is so badly written that a business could discriminate against anyone who doesn’t sign a petition against abortion.

Still, Senate Bill 1062 is not about religion. It is about race, namely white people.

Arizona is 57% Caucasian, 30% Hispanic, and 13% other races (2012 data.) Senate Bill 1062 was passed by a 57% margin (17-13) in the Senate and a 55% margin (33-27) in the House. In the Senate the vote was strictly on party lines. In the House, three Republicans voted against the bill.

What is interesting are the faces of those who voted for the legislation that encourages businesses to discriminate:

SENATE

Arizona Senators voting for SB 1062

HOUSE

Arizona House members voting for SB 1062

If there seems to be a lack of color in those who voted for Senate Bill 1062, there is, and there is also a lack of Spanish surnames voting for the law. This pageant is almost exclusively brought to you by white conservatives who are screaming, “ATTENTION MUST BE PAID!”

Most people agree that Arizona doesn’t need this law. Business can already discriminate against single-sex couples and lesbians and gays have no legal recourse. This law is a childish gesture by white conservatives as a show of power. Governor Brewer ridiculous excuses of why she hasn’t made a decision on whether to sign the bill or not is her bottomless desire to take the spotlight. When she vetoes the bill, the old, white woman wants to wag her bony finger at everyone and proclaim, “You just watch out or we’ll do something even more stupid than this!”

And they probably will.

(UPDATE: Approximately three hours after this article was published and publicized on Twitter under the hashtag #JanBrewer, Governor Brewer held a press conference and vetoed SB 1062.)

The Problem with Mythology and Politics

19 Wednesday Feb 2014

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Ethics, Government, Honor, Politics, Religion

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Christians, church, Gallup Poll, moral behavior, Morality, Mythology, Republican

Religion and Politics make all of us fools

A 2012 Gallup poll reveals the absurd nature of politics in America and it’s passion for attaching significance to mythology.

Only fifty-four percent of the people asked said they would vote for an atheist as President. Considering the deep-seated fear by conservatives of Muslims, it’s not surprising that only fifty-eight percent of Americans would be willing to vote for a Muslim President, but that’s four points better than someone who doesn’t believe in a god.

Less than half (48%) of Republicans, those champions of the Old Testament, were willing to vote for a President who doesn’t believe in a mythological god, but they prefer an atheist over a Muslim by one point.

Support for a non-religious President by Age Group

Age is a factor. Younger adults are willing to vote for a President without a mythological attachment, but the older the person, the more important mythology becomes in political leadership. Those in the 50 and 64 age group matched the Republican willingness to support a non-religious President (48%,) but only forty percent of the people in the 65+ age group are willing to consider an atheist President.

I know some people believe that a person who believes in a god is more moral, but the facts don’t support this concept. As of 2011, less than ten percent of Americans believed in a god. It’s not plausible that such a small percentage of Americans are responsible for all the immoral behavior in the United States. In addition, the number of immoral incidents by people who closely associate themselves with a religion occur constantly, and politicians of religious convictions are hardly poster children for moral behavior.

The problem with favoring politicians who claim a link to a god is that religious beliefs have no standards. The Bible or any other authoritative text is used to justify any point of view. People of religion have abused the ‘written’ word of their beliefs to the point that there is no credibility to believe they are guided by any better principles than those who do not use mythology as a basis for moral behavior.

Doomsday Now 2014, Not 2012

01 Monday Apr 2013

Posted by Paul Kiser in April Fools Day, Fiction, Religion, Space

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

2014, Apocalypse, Doomsday, end of the world, Family Radio, Family Stations, Harold Camping, planetary alignment

Oakland, California – April 1, 2013

Family Radio (a.k.a; Family Stations, Inc.) headquartered in Oakland, California has announced that the end of the world has been rescheduled for February 21, 2014. They base their prediction on scripture and on an alignment of planets that will occur on that date. Family Radio and its former CEO, Harold Camping, have previously predicted the end of the world to occur on September 1994, March 1995, May 21, 2011, and October 21, 2011.

Planet orbits for February 21, 2014

According to Family Radio, the Earth will be pulled apart because Mercury, Venus, and Mars will all be in a line and Jupiter and Saturn will be on opposite side of Earth. A spokesperson for Family Radio said:

“We knew the end of the world would not be in 2012. This is what happens when you listen to amateurs and godless heathens.”

When asked about how they determined this date to be the end of the world, the spokesperson said:

“The Mayans essentially were correct, but they made an error when they converted to the metric system.”

It was explained that the prediction of December 21, 2012 placed a one in the place of a zero (12 becomes 02) for the month, and that led to the year being off by two, so instead of 12.21.2012 it should have been 02.21.2014. When asked how the metric system applied to the date, the spokesperson replied:

“It’s too complicated for the lay person to understand. Trust us, we’ve been doing this for a long time.”

Pope Paul VII?

15 Friday Feb 2013

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Catholic, Christian, Church Christianity, Pope, Roman Church

A Pope without white hair? Why not?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bible, New King James Version

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

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

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

Bible, King James Version

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

11 Monday Feb 2013

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

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

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

Managing the Message is the alpha and omega of the NRA

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

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

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

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

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

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

BP public image destroyed once video revealed the PR deception

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

05 Monday Nov 2012

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Space X Falcon 9 Engine Array – Redefining space technology

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

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

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

Links to:

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

And This Was the Best Conservatives Could Offer?

31 Wednesday Oct 2012

Posted by Paul Kiser in Business, Ethics, Government, Opinion, Politics, Public Relations, Religion, Respect, Taxes, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Conservatives, Dean Heller, Election, GOP, Karl Rove, Republicans, Richard Mourdock, Todd Akin, Willard Mitt Romney

Mr. Insincere

For President – Eddie Haskell?
Willard Mitt Romney is a poor choice for President by any standard. Sure he’s better that Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Herman Cain, or almost any of the other right-wing wackos that ran for President this time, but Romney is an embarrassment to America. He will say anything to get a vote, but we all know that is just a rich man who is trying to fool enough of the people enough of the time to get elected. In a party that has great people like Colin Powell, they serve up a smarmy equivalent of Leave It To Beaver’s Eddie Haskell for President. Epic fail.

Paul Ryan is not an alien from another world…as far as we know.

For Vice President – Paul Ryan?
Really? Ryan is a person who is a deceiver. If Satan had Apostles, Paul Ryan would be his Number 1. He, like so many conservatives, is owned and operated by America’s major corporations and his interest is in exploiting our country, not serving.

Charles P. Pierce wrote and interesting piece on Ryan’s family history on the Esquire Politics Blog. He definitely not worthy of the second highest office in the land…or any other office.

Senator Dean Heller making sure he’s seen at Reno Air Races crash news conference (2011)

For Senate from Nevada – Dean Heller?
When Governor Brian Sandoval appointed Dean Heller to replace the adulterous Senator John Ensign, his seat in the House of Representatives forced the cash-strapped state to hold a special election, which cost over $1 million. Nevada certainly hasn’t got its money’s worth. One of Heller’s first official acts was to propose legislation that would prevent millionaires from receiving food stamps. He must have done it as a joke, but nobody laughed.

Heller is a former Bank of America consultant and stock broker, but now he works for people with even more money. If politicians had to wear suits that identified all their sponsors like race car drivers, then he would have a suit covered in oil, mining, and gaming corporations. He is bought and paid for and the lowly citizens of Nevada are not even on his radar.

Heller is the guy who always shows up at major news events like the Reno Air Races crash last year to stand near the Governor as if to say, “see me, I’m here, aren’t I great!”

Richard Mourdock says the pregnancy from rape is what “…God intended..”

For Senate from Indiana – Richard Mourdock and for the House of Representatives from Missouri – Todd Akin?
Indiana and Missouri have many highly qualified conservatives that could be representing the Republican party as candidates for federal office; however, it would be difficult to find two less deserving to fill the job than Richard Mourdock and Todd Akin. Both seem to be weeds in the flower patch and yet both still may win despite their bumbling, non-factual statements about rape and pregnancy. If either or both win then the stupid people of the world can rejoice that they are well represented in the United States Congress.

2012 Idiots on Parade by Karl Rove
The lack of quality conservative candidates doesn’t stop at federal political office. Many Republican state candidates are embarrassments to the country in their own right, but why is the GOP field so bad? That brings us to one name, Karl Rove.

Rove’s laughing now.

Karl Rove is the God of Conservative Candidates. He decides who will gain millions of dollars in advertising support and who won’t. With that money comes the strings. Independent minded, critical thinking people is not what Karl Rove seeks. If you are going to be supported by the Republican party this year, you have to be Karl Rove’s political Boy Toy. Rove’s money comes from Big Oil and mega corporations and they expect payback.

That has led to a slate of corporate Yes Men who are supposed to stay within a script. Like a gang of henchmen, Rove’s army of zombies march across the nation with a brain eating agenda of kill the government, put women down, and give our money to the rich. Rove arms his candidates with some of the most distasteful tactics in politics today.

One of Rove’s typical tactics of taking the conservative candidate’s weaknesses and then running ads accusing the rival candidate of the conservative candidates weakness. If his candidate is a partisan obstructionist, then Rove’s team creates an ad that the Democratic candidate is partisan and only votes with their party. Blaming the faults of his candidate on the other confuses the issue and makes a response to the accusation almost impossible.

How long can Rove keep this up? It depends on the results of this election. If Rove’s candidates win then America can expect to see the same strategy in future elections. If his candidates lose then perhaps true conservatives can take their party back from Karl Rove and his corporate sponsors and re-build it into something more than a group of Tea Party zombies.

Romney’s Concession Speech

20 Thursday Sep 2012

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

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

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

November 6, 2012 4:34 PM EDT

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

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

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

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

GOP Success: Stopping America’s Recovery

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

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

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

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

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

Netanyahu Pushes America To Another War, Romney Eager To Oblige

14 Friday Sep 2012

Posted by Paul Kiser in Communication, Ethics, Government, History, Internet, Opinion, Politics, Public Relations, Religion, Respect

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

Benjamin Netanyahu, Cairo, Conservatives, Israel, Middle East, Palestine, Palestinians, President Barack Obama, red line, Violence, War, Willard Mitt Romney

Netanyahu to US: “Isn’t it time for another Middle East war?”

On Tuesday Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu goaded the United States into a war with Iran. Demanding that the United States set conditions for war by establishing a ‘red line’ for which the United States would begin another war in the Middle East if Iran crossed it. Conservative Presidential candidate Willard Mitt Romney seems eager to appease Netanyahu by whining about President Obama’s work to end the existing wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and assuring voters that if he is elected he will move quickly to send America’s young adults back into war.

Netanyahu used unilateral actions at Jewish/Christian/Muslim holy sites in 1996 and 2010 to insult and spark riots by Muslims

Netanyahu is no stranger to goading people into violence. In 1996, while throwing roadblocks into the peace process with Palestine, he authorized work in the Muslim Quarter of Jerusalem that was guaranteed to anger the Palestinians. His ‘in-your-face’ act caused three days of riots and took 80 lives. Like the brother who knows how to get his sibling into trouble, Netanyahu modus operandi is to push others into violent acts by doing something that seems innocent, but is actually extremely insulting.

By stimulating violence, Netanyahu was able to justify moving Israeli forces in to Palestinian-occupied Hebron in January of 1997. Eventually he was able to stop the peace process by refusing to compromise on any significant issue. Netanyahu has a consistent history of being the naysayer to any peace effort between Israel and Palestine since 1996. He also has pushed for issues that are designed to irritate Arabs, such as continue settlement of Israelis in Arab-controlled lands. Netanyahu’s provocation of Palestinians and other Arab countries has left the Middle East in turmoil and set the stage for violent groups in the Arab world to fester and grow.

The interesting coincidence is that just as Netanyahu is pushing America to go to war with Iran, Arabs are once again goaded with a mysterious film¹ on YouTube that mocks Mohammad. Riots in Muslim countries have resulted in attacks on American consulates in Libya and Yemen, killing J. Christopher Stevens, America’s Ambassador in Libya, and three other U.S. diplomats. The cast and crew of the film were misled as to the purpose of the film and the producer’s name has turned out to be fictitious. No one seems to be able to determine who actually produced the film, but it is clear it was intended to incite violence.

In addition, Romney’s reaction to the attack on America’s consulate was so rapid that one has to question if Romney’s campaign was anticipating a significant foreign anti-American event and pulled the trigger on condemning President Obama’s even before there was a reaction from the administration. Romney’s campaign misfired by citing a statement from the U.S. Embassy in Cairo from Tuesday morning that condemned to provocation of the mysterious film prior to the attacks on the American consulate in Libya.

Romney’s campaign is citing America’s “freedom of speech” as the excuse for provoking Muslims with this film; however, conservatives are the first to react with rage over burning the American flag or defacing a Bible. American conservative anti-Muslim groups have now been connected to the latest efforts to promote the film on YouTube, and these groups are known to be rabid anti-President Obama groups.

The timing of this film, Netanyahu’s provocation, conservative promotion of the film, and Romney’s quick, albeit inappropriate, response to the violence seem to indicate that a connection is possible as part of an effort to motivate conservatives to support Romney’s sputtering campaign and his inept foreign policy efforts with allies and foes.

(¹The name of the film and a link to the film are intentionally absent in this article.)

NOTE: The acts of violence toward United States Embassies and personnel cannot be excused regardless of the provocation. This article is not overlooking the shameful thugs who are taking an opportunity to injure and kill innocent people. They should be identified and punished for what they have done. However, just like the person who enters into a theater and yells fire just to create a panic, the person(s) behind this inexcusable film that incited the outrage should be held responsible for lighting the fuse that caused the social bomb to explode.

3rd From Sol

~ Learn from before. Live now. Look ahead.

Category Archives: Religion

The Trump Card

Republicans Deal With The Devil

Panama’s Historical Struggle For Self-Determinism

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

Gay Marriage Legitimizes Marriage

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

Religious Liberty Laws Violate The Bible

This is Why (2015 vs the 1990’s)

The 1990’s – A World Turned Upside Down

This is Why (2015 vs the 1960’s)

The 1960’s – The Three Americas

“Chicken Little” Netanyahu Again Foretells Doom, Betrays Israel

Boehner Commits Near Act-of-War

Corporate Religion Decision Will Determine Supreme Court’s Corruption

Management Study for God

WORLD MANAGEMENT STUDY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Arizona ‘Religious Freedom’ Law Not About Religion

The Problem with Mythology and Politics

Doomsday Now 2014, Not 2012

Pope Paul VII?

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

And This Was the Best Conservatives Could Offer?

Romney’s Concession Speech

Netanyahu Pushes America To Another War, Romney Eager To Oblige

The 2010’s – End of Civility

The 2000’s – The Defeat of America

The 1990’s – A World Turned Upside Down

The 1960’s – The Three Americas

WORLD MANAGEMENT STUDY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

WORLD MANAGEMENT STUDY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY