Coming on Monday: The Apology

I must apologize in advance regarding the yet to be published stories for Monday.

I apologize to Queen Elizabeth II and to the Royal Family for anything I may write that might offend them next Monday. To them, please know that I have already prepared myself for the call from Buckingham Palace from the man with a firm British voice that will say, “The Queen was NOT amused.” I blame only myself for my severe lack of etiquette and manners. Again, I apologize.

Sincerely,

Paul Kiser, a distant relative of someone whom assuredly offended the Royal Family when they arrogantly skipped country and founded a new nation.

Is It Time For A Two-Tiered School System?

Tags

, , , , , , ,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Standardized Testing is Not the Solution in American Education

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Raging Employee: A Case Study For Today’s Business

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

Frank Sain's Mug Shot

Frank Sain’s Mug Shot

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Company Public Image Issues

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

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

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

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

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

SofTec Management Team webpages - Monday versus Tuesday

SofTec Management Team webpages – Monday versus Tuesday

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Pope Paul VII?

Tags

, , , ,

A Pope without white hair? Why not?

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 Grievance Collector: America’s Next Mass Murderer?

Tags

, , , , , ,

No one can predict the next mass murderer, but a grievance collector is a loaded gun

No one can predict the next mass murderer, but a grievance collector is a loaded gun

The next mass murderer will likely:

  • be male
  • be a loner or recently have become more introverted
  • have a mental health issue
  • have an interest in violence or violent acts
  • have easy access to guns and ammunition
  • experience some kind of trigger incident
  • be a grievance collector

Despite the ability to identify key traits, no one can reliably predict a mass murderer before they act. The warning signs that predict a violent tendency can be found in millions of people but very few will actually go to the extreme of harming another person.

However, the last trait, “grievance collecting,” is consistent enough among mass murderers that the public should be aware of its significance in predicting violent behavior. In case after case, the person pulling the trigger in a mass public shooting has kept a list of ‘wrongs’ against him and has difficulty in moving past the grievances he has with his employer, his co-workers, his family, his government, his life, and/or his God.

Dr. Willard Gaylin, psychiatrist, author, bioethicist

Dr. Willard Gaylin, psychiatrist, author, bioethicist

In his 2004 book, Hatred: The Psychological Descent Into Violence, Psychiatrist and Bioethicist, Dr. Willard Gaylin describes the Grievance Collector:

A grievance collector will move from the passive assumption of deprivation and low expectancy common to most paranoid personalities to a more aggressive mode. He will not endure passively his deprived state; he will occupy himself with accumulating evidence of his misfortunes and locating the sources.

Dr. Gaylin continues:

Grievance collectors are distrustful and provocative, convinced they are always taken advantage of and given less than their fair share.

Dr. Gaylin also points out that a grievance collector may have been truly wronged, which is oddly comforting because it confirms his overwhelming belief that his lot in life is to be the loser. In some cases the grievance collector has followed a process of appeal, which may be less about achieving resolution, but rather is an opportunity to confirm the list of wrongs against him culminating in the loss of the appeal. Workplace and family violence can sometimes occur soon after a legal or appeal process has reached a conclusion.

To prevent a grievance collector from becoming the next mass murderer, people should be sensitive to the friend, co-worker, or acquaintance who seems preoccupied with the unfairness of the world and how he has been made a victim. Critical warning signs could be a heightened interest in guns, and/or discussion of committing a violent act (even if it is delivered as a joke.) In some cases the person might withdraw from friends, co-workers, and family. This could be a sign that the person is contemplating violence and is in a spiral of self-justification that avoids an independent perspective on the situation.

Dr. Gaylin also suggests that the grievance collector often has a history of feeling inadequate that may have originated in family dynamics with a skewed distribution of love and attention to some children, but not others. Because the root of the issue may track back to childhood, the grievance collector may lack a basic ability to recover from a new injustice without extended psychological counselling. Ultimately, treatment may be the only option that avoids a body count.

(A special note of thanks to Dr. Larry Barton, Crisis Management and Violence in the Workplace expert. While not specifically quoted, much of my awareness of  violence in the workplace issues has been thanks to countless hours on the road with him and role-playing in his seminars.)

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

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

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 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

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.

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

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

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

Public Relations Techniques That Kill Organizations

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

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

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

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

Corporate PR:  We manage the message by not listening

Corporate PR: We manage the message by not listening

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

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

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

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

(From the School’s Marketing Director)

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

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

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

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

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

Why ‘Managing the Message’ Doesn’t

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why You Hate Facebook and Can’t Stand Twitter

Tags

, , , , ,

Social Media Violates the Dual Work/Home Personality

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Perhaps.

Coming This Week

Tags

, , , ,

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

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

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

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

Thanks for reading!

Paul

2013 Historical Milestones

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

This year has many historical milestones. Here are some of the more significant ones:

100 years ago (1913)

February 3 – 16th Amendment ratified authorizing the federal government to impose and collect taxes.
March 4 – Woodrow Wilson becomes 28th President

British freighter, Alum Chine explosion

British freighter, Alum Chine

March 7 –  British freighter, Alum Chine, explodes in the Baltimore harbor.
April 8 – The 17th Amendment is ratified requiring the direct election of Senators.
May 14 – The Rockefeller Foundation is chartered with a $100 million dollar donation from John D. Rockefeller.
June 29 – 2nd Balkan War begins. 
July 10 –  Hottest temperature in the world is recorded in Death Valley, CA at 134°F.
August 13 – Stainless steel is invented.

100 year anniversary of the Lincoln Highway

100 year anniversary of the Lincoln Highway

October 31 – The first transcontinental highway, The Lincoln Highway, was dedicated
November 7-11 – The Great Lakes Storm of 1913 sinks 19 ships.
December 1 – Ford begins the 1st assembly line.
December 23 – The Federal Reserve is established.

50 years ago (1963

March 21 – Alcatraz Island federal penitentiary closes.
March 22 – The Beatles 1st album is released.

Launch of the USS Thresher

Launch of the USS Thresher

April 10 – The Thresher, a US nuclear submarine sinks east of Cape Cod.
May 1 – Tab, the 1st diet soda is introduced.
May 15 – The last mission of the Mercury program is launched (Mercury 9)
June 16 – USSR sends 1st woman into space (Valentina Tereshkova)
July 26 – NASA launches the 1st geosynchronous satellite.
August 5 – The United States, USSR, and United Kingdom sign a nuclear test ban treaty.
August 28 – Martin Luther King, Jr. gives his “I have a dream” speech at the Lincoln Memorial.
September 7 – Pro Football Hall of Fame opened.
November 22 – President John F. Kennedy is assassinated.
November 23 – 1st episode of the BBC’s Dr. Who aired.

President John F. Kennedy

President John F. Kennedy

November 24 – JFK’s assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, is shot and killed.
December 7 – 1st use of instant replay during a football game.
December 8 – Frank Sinatra, Jr. is kidnapped at Lake Tahoe, NV.

25 years ago (1988)

February 13 – Calgary Winter Olympics begin.
March 16 – Oliver North and John Poindexter are indicted for Iran-Contra Affair.
March 17 – The flight crew of Avianca Flight 410 allows their computer on their Boeing 727 to fly into a mountain while they are distracted killing 143. This is one of 22 aviation accidents in 1988 that killed 50 or more people.
April 4 – Republican Arizona Governor Evan Mecham is impeached. One of his achievements was to abolish the Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday in the State.

Aloha Flight 243

Aloha Flight 243

April 28 – A flight attendant is sucked out of Aloha Flight #243 when part of the fuselage rips open in flight.
May 4 – With the Space Shuttle on hiatus after the 1986 Challenger disaster, solid rocket fuel stored at PEPCON in Henderson , NV catches fire and explodes.
May 15 – Soviet army begins withdraw from Afghanistan.
May 27 – Microsoft releases Windows 2.1.
June 14 – A small wildfire in Montana ignites. By the time snowfalls in the Fall over 1/3 of Yellowstone National Park will be burned.
June 23 – NASA scientist testifies that global warming has begun.
August 18 – George H.W. Bush and Dan Quayle become the official GOP candidates.

The man who spent almost 18 years trapped in De Gaulle Airport in Paris

The man who spent almost 18 years trapped in De Gaulle Airport in Paris

August 26 – A man is returned to De Gaulle Airport in Paris because his passport was stolen and he lacked proof of citizenship. Mehran Karimi Nasseri would remain trapped at the airport for almost 18 years (2006) until he became ill and was hospitalized.
September 17 – Summer Olympics in Seoul, South Korea begin.
September 29 – Space Shuttle flights resume after the 1986 Challenger disaster.
October 27 – Ronald Reagan orders the new U.S. Embassy in Moscow, Russia to be destroyed because of Soviet listening devices built into walls.
November 2 – The 1st computer worm (Morris worm) is distributed via the Internet.
November 15 – Soviets launch their version of the Space Shuttle. It was unmanned and it was never relaunched.
December 21 – Pan Am Flight 103 explodes over Scotland killing 270.

10 years ago (2003)

Space Shuttle Columbia breaking up over Texas

Space Shuttle Columbia breaking up over Texas

February 4 – Space Shuttle Columbia returns from space only to disintegrate as it passed over Texas. Unknown at the time, a chunk of ice fell of the Shuttle at launch on January 16 and punched a hole in the wing, dooming the flight. All seven astronauts died almost instantly.
February 15 – Prior to the American invasion of Iraq, over 10 million people world-wide protested the planned war.
March 19 – America begins its invasion of Iraq.
April 14 – The Human Genome Project finishes mapping 99% of human DNA.
May 4 – A massive tornado outbreak during the week exceeds any other week in U.S. history.
July 14 – A CIA operative’s name is leaked to the Washington Post, allegedly by the Bush staff in retaliation for her husband’s criticism of the administration on the lack of evidence of sale of nuclear material to Iraq.

Saddam Hussein with his two sons

Saddam Hussein with his two sons

July 22 – Two of Saddam Hussein’s sons are killed by U.S. forces.
August 21 – Mars makes its closest approach to Earth in over 50,000 years beginning an email hoax that Mars would be as big as the Moon that would continue for the next decade.
October 15 – China launches its first manned space mission.
October 24 – The Concorde makes its last commercial flight.
December 13 – Saddam Hussein is captured.

Five Years Ago (2008)

January 2 – Oil hits $100 per barrel for the 1st time.
March 25 – A 160 square mile chunk of the Antarctic Ice Shelf collapses
April 28 – India set record by launching 10 satellites on one launch vehicle.
May 12 – China is rocked by a 7.9 earthquake killing over 69,000 people.
May 25 – NASA lands the Phoenix surveyor in the northern polar region of Mars.
August 8 – The Beijing Summer Olympics begin.
August 17 – Michael Phelps wins his 8th Gold Medal.
September 10 – The Large Hadron Collider in Switzerland/France circulates its 1st proton beam.
September 15 – The Lehman Brothers file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
September 29 – The Dow falls by 777 points after the House of Representatives fails to approve a Bank Bailout plan.

President Bush signs TARP into law.

President Bush signs TARP into law.

October 3 – Shaken by the stock market reaction, the House reverses itself and approves a Senate version of the Bank Bailout bill. President George W. Bush signs the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) into law.
October 29 – Delta Airlines and Northwest Airlines merge to become world’s largest commercial air service.
November 4 – Barack Obama and Joe Biden are elected as President and Vice President of the United States.
November 26 – Islamic terrorists take over a hotel in Mumbai, India for two days.
December 11 – Bernard Madoff is arrested for the largest fraud in history.

6 Actions Needed To Protect America From Bad Gun Owners

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

12 of 26 faces lost on December 14, 2012

12 of 26 faces lost on December 14, 2012

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Strict limitations on conceal and carry permits

Conceal and Carry

Conceal and Carry: a self-inflicted wound to America

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

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

ALASTAR TDS-C, NC Gun Training Website

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

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

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

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

Secret Service Consulting and Training for Schools

Secret Service agents are experts in identifying threats

Secret Service agents are experts in identifying threats

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

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

Background checks on 100% of gun sales/exchanges

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

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

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

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

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

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

NRA Tax Exempt Status

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

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

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

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

3 Reasons Why Boehner Shouldn’t Be Speaker

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Speaker John Boehner, The Symbol of Failure

Speaker John Boehner, The Symbol of Failure

On January 3, 2013, the United States House of Representatives will re-elect Representative John Boehner as the Speaker of the House. Whether or not he merits the Speakership is debatable; however, he has been a good servant to his financial backers and those financial backers also financed the campaigns of the same group of Republicans who will decide Boehner’s fate. They cannot vote for someone else for Speaker without biting the hand of the people who gave them money.

That said, there are good reasons for Republicans to not re-elect John Boehner as Speaker of the House. Three top reasons are as follows:

Reason 1:  An Icon of Failure

Gallup Poll - Approval Rating for Congress

Gallup Poll – Approval Rating for Congress

In August of this year the approval rating for Congress dropped to 10 percent for the only the second time. The first time was in February of this year. Recently named the ‘Do Nothing Congress,’ they have been the most non-productive Congress in seventy years. Some might blame both political parties; however, two years ago Republicans announced that their strategy would be to block President Obama from passing any significant legislation. Their success at this has resulted in the failure of Congress to do the job for which they were elected.

As Speaker of the House and the leader of the Republicans in Congress, Boehner is the symbol of all that has failed in Washington. November’s election demonstrated the public’s dislike for the tactics used by Republicans to obstruct progress when President Obama won every battleground State except North Carolina, and swept 332 electoral votes when only 270 were necessary. Republicans were also turned out of the Senate and House as Democrats gained significant ground in Congress.

Despite this stinging defeat, Boehner continued to use the same tactics of obstruction by spending this month leading America to the Fiscal Cliff. The irony is that Boehner has not only lost the confidence of the American people, he has lost the confidence of his own party. 

In late December he attempted to move Republicans out of the hot seat by proposing a ‘Plan B’ that would have not passed the Senate, but would have given him the opportunity blame Democrats in the Senate for sending America over the Fiscal Cliff. It was a tactic that might have succeeded except for the betrayal of Boehner by his own party when he had to withdraw the legislation because it was not going to pass for lack of Republican support.

Boehner is a symbol of failure and he will carry the stamp of disgrace on his sleeve into the next two years. That means the Republicans will have to overcome Boehner’s public image in 2014 if they re-elect him as Speaker now.

Reason 2:  Opportunity of New Blood
If someone else were to be elected as Speaker they would start fresh without all the political baggage Boehner brings with him. Boehner is the uncle no one wants at their family event. The right-wing extremists think he’s too liberal and the rest of the Republicans in the House are just glad they aren’t Boehner. He is seen as deceptive, condescending, and the pawn of the filthy rich. Almost anyone other than Representative Eric Cantor or Representative Paul Ryan would have a better public image to start with than Boehner.

Republicans are facing multiple legislative losses in the next session. The best hope is to drop Boehner’s obstructionist style and begin rebuilding the respect that Republicans have lost in the last two years. By working with the Democrats in early 2013, a new Republican Speaker could regain negotiation strength during the remainder of the 113th Congress. That will increase Republican’s chances in 2014 and put conservatives back on more equal footing. With Boehner as Speaker, Republicans may face humiliation after humiliation as the right wing extremist wag Boehner’s tail during the next session.

Reason 3:  Shock Value
Boehner’s re-election will be seen as a business-as-usual when no one wants a repeat of the 112th Congress. A new Speaker will have a shock value that might give hope to Americans. While a majority of Americans do not support the right-wing extremist political agenda, Boehner has continued to pander to them in order to keep a majority. That majority is based on offending most of the other Representatives and a majority of American on a regular basis. A new Speaker might decide to turn the tables on the right-wing extremist by adopting a more moderate view. That would leave the extremists to either fall in line with the Republican mainstream or accept that America will be under rule by the Liberals for the near future.

Few Options Leave A Bleak Future
Sadly, Republicans are bound by fate and money to re-elect John Boehner as Speaker of the House of Representatives. This is like watching a train wreck in slow motion with the forces in play too strong to stop, but the results of disaster obvious to all who witness it. The outcome will be a deepening dislike for Republicans and their tactics and that will result in the 2014 elections continuing the down slide of conservative participation in American politics.

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

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

David Brook, New York Times columnist

David Brook, New York Times columnist

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

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

Brooks, defender of the innocent rural gun owner

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2012: The Year That Didn’t

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Game over, man, game over...oh, wait, uhm, false alarm.

Game over, man, game over…oh, wait, false alarm.

A lot of things were supposed to happen in 2012, but they didn’t. Here are a selected few of the ‘didn’ts from this past year:

  • The Apocalypse didn’t happen on December 21, or any other day this year, nor the cataclysmic asteroid, the massive solar flares from the Sun, nor the shift of the magnetic poles. All part of the end of the world scenarios planned for this year that didn’t materialize.
  • 2012 will also be known for what Congress didn’t accomplish. It was labeled the ‘Do Nothing’ Congress for the obstructionist attitude of conservatives who sought to keep President Obama and Democrats from governing the country. 
  • Facebook was going to be the stock to own and once on the market the sky would be the limit on its per share price. Somebody forgot to tell the grumpy old white investors that the thing they love to hate was supposed to go big.

    The face that didn't.

    The face that didn’t.

  • President Barack Obama was supposed to be humiliated in a landslide loss to Mitt Romney. He wasn’t humiliated and he didn’t lose.
  • Romney also predicted that London’s security wasn’t ready for the Summer Olympic Games. They were and Romney publicly embarrassed himself and the United States.
  • Greece was supposed to have a major economic disaster and bring down the rest of Europe. It didn’t, but many still have high hopes it will collapse in 2013.
  • The Arab Spring of 2011 was supposed to lead to more democratic countries without dictators. Somebody forgot to tell Egypt.
  • Outlawing gay marriage was supposed to be part of many States final solution in destroying gays and lesbians. It turns out America isn’t that hateful, nor that stupid.
  • The Supreme Court was going to rule the Affordable Care Act as unconstitutional. They didn’t.
  • Climate change skeptics were financing studies to prove that Global Warming is a hoax. They didn’t and it isn’t.
  • The landing of the NASA/JPL’s mission to Mars was going to be too complex to succeed and result in a spectacular U.S. failure. The MSL (Mars Science Lab) rover team delivered on all their promises and Curiosity is going places no other country can hope to match for years.
  • Massive protests by the Occupy movement were going to lead to riots and a general societal breakdown. It didn’t happen, but the Occupy movement was heard at the ballot box in November.
  • America’s economy and unemployment were going to reverse and fall back into a recession in 2012. Our economy and unemployment continue to defy the skeptics.

Gloom and doom was the expectation by many during this past year. As bad as 2012 was supposed to be, let’s hope that 2013 will restore a more positive attitude in our nation….right after we fall off the fiscal cliff.

Conservative Credibility Account is Bankrupt

Tags

, , , ,

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

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

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

  • George W. Bush was going to force government to be smaller by taking revenue away via massive tax cuts. Then he made government even bigger and spent our country into debt.
  • Mitt Romney changed his position on issues on a weekly basis resulting in a trust deficit that he couldn’t overcome.
  • Oil companies and wealthy business men paid millions of dollars to finance conservative candidate’s political campaigns filled with deception and lies that were exposed within hours through Social Media.
  • Republicans vowed to obstruct President Obama efforts at all costs and blocked any legislation or appointments for two years, then tried to blame Democrats for not being able to ‘reach across the aisle.’
  • Republicans concept of smaller government and less regulation resulted in higher unemployment and unethical business practices that destroyed our economy.

    Conservative Investigation: Celebrate males testify about women's contraception

    Conservative Investigation: Celibate males testify about women’s contraception

  • Elected conservatives males demonstrate the absurdity of their positions on abortion and contraceptives exposing an underlying misogynistic attitude.
  • Conservative white state legislators in the South pass laws targeted at Latinos and minorities to discourage them from voting revealing a racist attitude.
  • Conservatives ironically insult minorities and Liberals as lazy, ‘takers’ who only seek handouts from the federal government while they seek to live in the United States of America without paying taxes for the privilege of living and working in this country.

    Boehner Math: 7.5% = 50%

    Boehner Math: 7.5% = 50%

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

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

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

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

Getting Serious About Composting

Tags

, , , , ,

Image by Paul Kiser

The rising Moon through one of our two 60′ trees

Fall at our house means dealing with a lot of leaves. Our house was built in the late 1940’s and it has two 60′ trees in the front yard. In addition, we have five different fruit trees on our small lot. Our usual Autumn ritual has been to rake the leaves up, bag them and send them off with the trash. Watching the trash truck pick up 20 to 30 bags of leaves gives a feeling of accomplishment and regret.

After years of sending all that carbon-rich material off to a landfill, it is time to make a change. We have toyed with the idea of composting, but our best effort involved a plastic kitty litter bucket that we occasionally remembered to add food scraps.

The basic ‘on-the-fly Compost Box design using an old pallet and old wood scraps

A Place to Compost
This year I have finally decided to get serious about composting. I have built a three bin composting box out of old scrap wood based on a design I saw using wood pallets. My design was done on the fly (and it shows,) but it does the job.

The Composting Box Complete

Building the Box
I only had one old wood pallet available so I made it the back wall of the middle bin. I built two other bins on either side of the main bin. These outside bins will be used for storage (leaves in the Fall/Winter/Spring and grass cuttings in the Summer.) The dimensions of the boxes are not significant to the process, but my composting box is roughly three feet deep and eight feet wide with the middle bin twice the size of the either outside bin.

I’m waiting for more green material, but this is how my compost box looks now

Because the compost pile needs mixed on a regular basis, the bins are open in the front. I used more scrap wood as temporary front panels on all three bins, but each one can be quickly removed for easy access.

Do’s and Don’t of Composting
I have spent some time researching the topic and below are some of the rules about composting:

  • Greens and browns – Most suggest a one green to two brown ratio. (Greens and browns are defined below.) Greens provide nitrogen, browns provide carbon.
  • Water and Oxygen – One website suggests that the compost pile be as wet as a sponge. Another suggests that a pile that is too wet will smother the bacteria. Regardless, a dry pile is not going to compost, so adding water once or twice a week may be necessary depending on the climate and recent weather conditions. Oxygen is needed to help the bacteria in the compost to breakdown so turning the pile to add in air three to four times per month is needed.
  • Browns – Dead leaves are considered brown. Our house has an overabundance of browns right now. Twigs, hay, and shredded paper are also brown, so if you don’t have the tree bounty we have consider shredding your paper rather than tossing it in the trash.
  • Greens – Grass cuttings are one major green source during the summer and non-meat, non-dairy food scraps are also green. Coffee grounds are green, so if you’re in my situation where I need a lot of green now, a chat with your favorite Starbucks store manager will probably get you into as much green source as you can handle. NPR had an interesting story on Morning Edition this week about food waste at restaurants. It may be worth checking your favorite eatery about compost greens.
  • Don’t Compost…well, maybe or maybe not– Most composting websites say no dairy and no meat, but one says that he has done both with no problems. The issue with meat is the attraction of animals (dogs, raccoon, rats, mice, etc.) that might feed off the meat. The lone voice for adding meat suggests only cooked, boneless meat that is buried in the pile. As for dairy, I’ve read that it is 1) a smell issue, 2) a pest issue, or 3) a bacteria-killing issue. The same lone voice for adding meat says he has never had a problem with adding dairy to his compost. You can decide what makes sense or not.

    For less than $8 I bought this pH meter at Home Depot

  • No ashes? – Adding wood ash from a fireplace or outside fire pit is not advised unless you have acidic soil. Ash is a major alkaline source and can make your compost dangerous to plants. I did read that ash can be spread in a thin layer on the lawn, but I’m going to research it further before I try that on my lawn.
  • Oils? – Petroleum products are never recommended; however, small amount of vegetable oil is generally believed to be safe. The issue is that the bacteria does not grow well in an oily environment, so soaking the pile in oil is considered bad.
  • Animal waste – waste from animals that eat meat products are considered a health risk to a compost pile. Most websites do not recommend adding dog or cat feces to the compost; however, chicken, horse, cow, and other manure animals are considered ‘green’ nitrogen material and can be added.

Our Motivation
This year we had unusual success with our garden and next year I plan to expand our garden with additional raised beds. As much as possible, the material I will use in those beds will be the new compost from our compost box. I don’t know how much we can make in six months, but at least we will know that we are putting our leaves back into our soil and not in some landfill.

A Liberal Response to Conservative Secessionists

Tags

, ,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Petraeus Lesson: Use Your REAL Name

Tags

, , , ,

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

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

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

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

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

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

America Held Hostage: DAY 716

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

John McCain still bitter about 2008?

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

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

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

Senator Mitch McConnell: “Election, what election?”

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

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

What America Must Do: Step 6 – Reinvent Higher Education

Tags

, , , , , ,

Sans Students: Is this what university classrooms will look like in 2020?

Higher Education is an unmovable object with an unstoppable force heading straight for it and universities are at ground zero. Classrooms as we know them may be doomed and the question is whether our country will lead the world in adapting to a new model, or whether we will be the last ones to accept reality.

The Value of the College Degree
The unmovable object in Higher Education is importance of the college degree in American commerce. Business lives or dies on information. The person who can access, filter, analyze, organize, and explain information tends to be valuable in a company.

High schools are tasked to help students graduate with basic competencies, but they are dealing with children who are still maturing into adulthood and that process needs to be complete before they are morphed into business men and women.

Those who believe high schools should be vocational schools are assuming that all children will become a construction laborer or office drone, so why bother with college prep? The concept of education as a training ground for corporate zombies is too simple-minded to apply in a country that encourages all citizens to reach their maximum potential.

College is where young adults are given the tools to become valued business leaders. College classes require a student to learn how to access and report information, which is central in business competitiveness. The business that can out think its competition always wins, which may be why many top businesses are more concerned about the degree, not the major. A college degree is more than a piece of paper, it is a badge of achievement that says this person is ready for the business world.

The Relentless Rise in the Cost of College
The unstoppable force is the rising cost of a college education. With cuts in federal and state budgets a greater share of the burden is being heaped on those who are least able to avoid it. In Mitt Romney’s failed bid to be President he suggested that students should borrow from their parents to pay for college. That was one telling sign that Romney is out of touch with the real world the rest of us live in.

March 2012 protest in Sacramento over tuition hikes

In 1991 the annual average cost for a university education was at $7,602 or over $30,000 for four years of college. In 2001, that annual cost had risen to $12,922 or over $50,000 in four years. In 2011, the annual cost had risen to $22,092, which meant it cost over $88,000 for the average college four-year degree. That is the equivalent of buying a new car every year a student attends college. If the trend continues it will cost a student an average of over $41,000/year for college by 2021, which means a four-year college degree in 2021 may cost over $167,000.

Students and their parents are already outraged by the rising costs, but it is universities who control the expenses, and therefore control the costs.

Based on current trends, the average annual cost for college may exceed $40,000 by 2021

Students want to be competitive for careers that will lead them to higher paying jobs, but they have no means to afford college and the list of parents who CAN pay over $22,000 a year for four years are on a first name basis with Mitt Romney.

The Other Unmovable Object – Faculty
Teachers at the college level have traditionally been considered the most important asset to a university and for centuries they were treated with dignity and respect by administrators, but financial pressures have made them a target for saving money. While students face escalating tuition and fees, university faculty are also a target of the unstoppable force. Professors have been constantly asked to accept budget cuts and teach more students for the same, or lower pay. 

Some universities have replaced expensive tenured professors with temporary faculty employed by contract on a semester by semester basis. Temporary faculty make a fraction of a full, tenured professor. Not surprisingly, a teacher that may not be offered a contract the next semester tends to be more accepting of increased class sizes, or other cost-cutting measures.

What may be surprising is that a college teacher is likely not receiving a significant portion of the tuition paid by the students in his or her classes. A temporary professor may bring in $100,000 or more in revenue each year for the university, but a temporary professor is often paid less than $4,000 per class with no benefits. Low pay and increased pressure to do more for no additional money makes the teaching environment unpleasant for the student and professor.

A Revolution Caused by the Internet
Ironically, the Internet was originally intended to allow one university to have quick access to the knowledge database at other universities and research laboratories. As it expanded and became commercially available in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s the public began to have access to a vast storage of on and off-campus knowledge without a student ID. Within a decade homes across the world were linked into a mass of dynamic information via business and personal websites, blogs, chat rooms, and other social media sites.

Suddenly anyone could access information and share ideas and they didn’t have to pay tuition to have easy access to it. Certainly some of the information was in error, but often people found information that outpaced the knowledge produced in books. Universities no longer held the monopoly on information.

Government Must Change
State governments and Higher Education face these problems:

  1. A college degree is still a valuable achievement and desired by the public and business.
  2. Tuition and fees are too high and the public can no longer afford them.
  3. Professors have been devalued in a system where more and more of the revenue is channeled away from the them.
  4. University administrators and government legislators have created a paradigm for Higher Education that is unsustainable.

Social media has changed the expectations of the public. People expect to be able to have ready access to anyone to whom they are paying for a service.

Controlling advanced knowledge within ivy covered walls is no longer possible in a world where anyone can do a Google search and know as much or more about the most current knowledge on any topic. However, just doing a Google search does not teach a person how to filter, analyze, organize, and report that information.

State-run universities have a unique opportunity to reinvent Higher Education. The challenge is that they are the most unlikely to do it. Administrators have Accreditation organizations that are established to dictate what Higher Education is and will be today and tomorrow based on the best practices of yesterday. That doesn’t work in a world where today is already history that was recorded by over 340 million tweets a day (March 2012 data.)

When the unstoppable force hits the unmovable objects (value of a degree and the need for faculty) few things about Higher Education will remain unchanged. Now is the time for State-run universities to dodge the upcoming annihilation and take the lead in reinventing Higher Education. They can start considering the following guidelines:

  • Tuition must stabilize and regress. Fees should be eliminated. Universities can assume that there will be no money available to siphon off for student activities, the football program, or any other money-absorbing entity. 
  • Support materials (textbooks, etc.) will be digital only and the cost will be pennies on the dollar of what students have been paying. Goodbye, McGraw-Hill. Hello, Faculty Publishing.
  • Classrooms will be more like Boardrooms with fewer students where the Professor is the CEO of knowledge and students must bring their best or beg for a second chance with someone else. Much of the lecture and information gathering will be done via webcasts and/or outside of class time. ‘Class’ will be where the work outside the classroom is brought in for discussion and idea sharing.
  • Class schedules will not follow a semester system and will be on a schedule that is more like a project team.
  • Faculty will lead students while at the same time work toward advancing knowledge on the subject matter.
  • The most important person to the student will be the educational coordinator (i.e. Counselor or Adviser in the old paradigm) who will create an individualized degree that is based on achieving a level of mastery information handling, not a number of credit hours.

The framework in which this happens must be within a government structure. Private enterprise has proven that when they try to create a system of higher learning they fail. It solves nothing to make Higher Education a profit-based program that is a poor imitation of the old, outdated model. If government can successfully create a new model it will make the United States of America the leader of advanced knowledge. If not, we can expect to be exporters of our future.

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 5 – Restart a Federally Run Space Program

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

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

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