Reflective Wanderings

Religion and Politics

2012-01-25T08:31:00.000-05:00

The founders of the United States were wise in creating the separation of church and state. They were far from being anti-religion for nearly all attended church services from time to time. Church attendance and religious discussions in public were common practices. This did not mean that like today people of different faith backgrounds readily accepted one another as friends, co-workers and married across denomination backgrounds, and spoke well of denominations that were outside their own stream.

The culture in the 1770s and 1780s was vastly different than our cultural of broad acceptance of people of other Christian denominations. Marrying outside one’s denomination was far from being widely accepted. A Baptist marrying a Roman Catholic created a family scandal. Baptists viewed Methodists with suspicion. People tended to live, work and socialize within their faith tradition.

It was from this cultural milieu that those who signed the Declaration of Independence and shaped the American Constitution came. Coming from a diverse array of faiths, and some non-practicing any faith, they cautioned against the mixing of politics and religion. While they recognized that value faith played in the daily lives of themselves, family, friends and neighbors, they were also well aware of the problems that are created when one’s personal faith is a highly dominating factor in determining public policies. They were unlike the French revolutionaries who, in reacting against the abuses of the dominant religion of their culture, were anti-religion and created national policy that was strikingly anti-religion.

In shaping the national documents and in setting forth public policy the founders set aside their own religion’s doctrinal positions. Admittedly their religious believes shaped their thinking and moved their hearts to be more passionate on some issues than another, but they did not seek to entrench specific and narrow religious dogma or statements into public policy. For example, while all were of the Christian faith in background, and most in practice, they did not enshrine into the founding documents or in early documents that Sunday was to be a non-work day or speak in any manner to compel people to attend church, or that Christian values should be taught by the state to its citizens. They knew from oberservation and experience that when religion battles to be a dominate voice in shaping public policy in general that the consequences for the community, nation and citizenry as a whole has detrimental consequences.

Instead, these Christian men, many with strong religious convictions, established a religious neutral nation, a nation where people of different faiths can and should participate in public discussion and the shaping of public policy without any one faith stream dominating another. In an era when there is much pandering by various politicians to those of a particular religious persuasion, it is worth recalling the significance of the United States being founded as to be a nation that is religiously neutral and tolerant.

Common and Secular Time, Common and Secular Space for Salvationists

2012-01-09T10:05:00.000-05:00

The following is offered as food to thought.

Grounded in it Wesleyan roots Salvation Army’s mission and purpose is to minister with passion and compassion to all humanity, to provide hope to and assistance to all without discrimination. We do not see anyone, regardless of what they may have done or how long they may be entrapped in a destructive lifestyle, as being beyond hope or transformation.

Life and the world are divine creations. All activity is an expression of worship and an expression of love for God. As such Salvationists make no distinction between common space and worship space, between worship time and ordinary time. The street, the office, the home are part of the worship space as the whole world is a sanctuary, a place for worship and ministry activities. Hence, for Salvationists all daily activities from office paperwork to scrubbing the floors at home, from providing a meal to the hungry to competing on the sports field, and from listening to a neighbor to driving a car to the store are as much an act of worship as praying and singing hymn in the sanctuary.

Virginia Primary and Newt Gingrich

2012-01-05T21:23:00.001-05:00

For the Republican Virginia primaries there will be only two candidates on the ballet, Mitt Romney and Ron Paul. Santorum, Bachmann, Perry and Gingrich did not qualify by the mid December deadline. The rules are that each candidate must have 10,000 signatures of registered voters, with a minimum of 400 from each county in the Commonwealth.

Gingrich has called the qualification standards as archaic and inappropriate. Rick Perry and his team have suggested the same. Their key supporters also blame the holiday season that the cause for their failure to garner the necessary support. Yes the deadline was during the holiday season, but that means that there are more people out in the malls in greater mass than during any other time of the year. Further, the candidates do not have a narrow window to gather the signatures, they had nearly 6 months to gather then necessary signatures.

The candidates, who are running to be the chief executive of the US government, fell short because they give attention to organizing a simple team to focus on gathering the necessary number. The failure points to the candidate’s lack of attention to detail, planning and organization. For a person who is claiming to have the skills to be President, how hard is it to have a few people assigned to gather at least 500 signatures from each County?

I suspect that another factor is at play for some of those who fell short. They simply did not believe that they would be in the race that long. If this was part of Santorum’s thinking, he no doubt is regretting that decision.

Gingrich entered the race he knew he would not win the nomination as he has too much baggage. Is it possible that he entered the race as a way to market his books, movies and himself as a “consultant”, commentator and conference speaker? Over the years Gingrich has made millions of dollars from these activities but if his profile in the wider community was starting to wane, which may well have been doing, what better way than to raise your profile than to run a token campaign for ten to twelve months.

Is it also possible that he entered the race to position himself to be the ambassador to the Court of St. James or Rome? There are some who have known him well for years who see his candidacy in this light.

Kettle Record

2011-12-22T10:02:00.001-05:00

Stretching back well over forty years manning a kettle every season has been a Sears family tradition. I have not missed a year since starting in 1967. In past years Jonathan, Josh and I would take a kettle for a whole day, which given our schedules has not been possible for the last two years. Tomorrow I will out again, but it will not be near the 60 hour record that was recently set. My respect and hat is off to the various people who stood for so long.

http://blog.salvationarmyusa.org/?p=9720

A Christmas Message and Greeting to Family and Friends

2011-12-20T14:30:00.000-05:00

Earlier today I sent a Christmas greeting and message to my staff. Upon reflection I realize that the message and greeting is equally applicable to both my family and friends. I am posting the message as sent to the team and allow family and friends to allow their own filters to make the necessary slight adjustments.

During our family’s first Christmas in Iowa people were taking issue with the City hanging only white lights in the Ped Mall, along downtown streets and for calling the seasonal decorations “holiday decorations”. While the City had been using religious neutral language for years, the decision to switch to all white lights crystallized concerns about the change in lights further destroying Christmas.

Our little congregation was not immune from the debates. With several members asking for my view I elected to address the matter the first Sunday of Advent. Interestingly, on the Friday afternoon as I was refining my thoughts the local newspaper asked my opinion as they were polling various religious leaders for an article that Sunday. Fifteen years later the essence of my response to address to a wider matter still shapes my thinking.

While the birth of Christ is at the heart of the season we recognize that the church adopted the Roman solstice festival to tell the birth of Christ story. Since other cultural, pagan and Christian rooted, traditions became attached as Christmas progressed to its current state in the USA and Canada. In those countries Christmas is more of a cultural holiday than a religious holiday that calls the faithful to reflect upon their faith, examine their own lives and relationship with their neighbors. It is such a cultural event that people of non-Christian faiths are readily engaging in its activities and affirming elements of message.

There is little doubt that Christmas as we celebrated it today has become so overlaid with cultural characteristics ranging from gift buying and exchanging to parties, from Santa to a day off work, from family gatherings and travels to festive decorations in the home and at work, from bargain shopping to days jammed full of special activities. The season is so full and filled with trappings that pausing to reflect upon the message of Christ…redemption, inner and interpersonal peace, and no one is beyond the hope change, and taking joy in life…is lost.

We must also affirm that while Christians celebrate the birth of Jesus, the Christian faith is an Easter faith, not a Christmas faith. The Christian message and hope is grounded in the death of Jesus Christ on the cross and upon the resurrection morning. While the angels called us to celebrate the coming of hope and salvation, they were pointing to the work of the cross and the resurrection.

While Christmas is a wonderful cultural and religious holiday that I greatly enjoy, I noted my concern that both the congregation and I could so readily be caught up in the hustle and bustle of the season, be so distracted by the ancillary cultural aspects that we would not take time to pause, reflect upon the meaning of the Christmas message and to reach out generously to others in peace. Hence I was far more concerned about the spirituality of our congregation than about cultural controversies such as the color of the lights or greeting phrases.

That Sunday afternoon as I read the paper I realized they quoted me far more than I expected and more extensively that any other person, clergy, civic and non-clergy. Seeking to detach myself from the controversy I feared that I made myself and the Army a target. Fortunately, to my surprise, not only did receive no negative calls or letters, we received only positive comments. At the January ministerial many of the clergy thanked me for altering the focus.

Each holiday season since, I continue to remember the response. I value each member of our development team. I appreciate your dedication to helping others, for your grace and passion. My desire is in keeping with my 1996 reflection, that you will take time to reflect upon Christ’s message of hope. I pray that the reflection will be more than just a short moment or two to read the Christmas story. Though this is our busiest time of the year, as we arrive at Christmas Eve and Day, I encourage you … no, I implore you to set aside your job. Forget all that you have to still do, any and all work issues. Focus upon the essence of the season, enjoy time with your spouse and family.

I hope you will affirm your love for your faith and values. Affirm to your spouse and family that you love them and hold them dear. I hope you will dedicate afresh your heart and mind to be generous towards all, to seek to be a builder of others, to be a vehicle of hope and grace.

May the joy and peace of the Christ child fill your life and heart. May His presence be with you and all whom you love. May you have a wonderful and joyous Christmas.

The Babe Homeless?

2011-12-19T20:23:00.002-05:00

If you had a home and job in town A and while traveling to point B your car broke down, and as it could not be repaired for a few days, would staying in the Greyhound bus station for a night or two (hotels all full) mean that you are now homeless? Why or why not?

Would you consider yourself homeless if you were stranded at an airport due to a storm closing down flights for the night? Why or why not?

If you traveled from home to visit another town, arrived to discover when you arrive late at night that the hotel you had booked was over-sold, and so are all other hotels, if you stayed the night in your car, would that mean you are homeless? If you were given a tent to pitch in the local campground, what would that say about your status? Are you homeless or not? Why or why not?

In neither case, would I consider myself “homeless”. Nor would I consider you “homeless” as you have a home. I doubt that most of my friends or family would see themselves or their friends in such situations as homeless. You may be without traditional shelter but your state is temporary, and you do have a home whereas those who are truly homeless lack the means or ability to secure their own permanent shelter. To count amongst the homeless those have a home but are temporarily not at home and are sleeping in alternate locations would do an injustice to understanding homelessness and addressing those who are truly homeless.

Joseph and Mary had a home in Nazareth. Joseph had a profession. Since they were looking for hotel accommodation in Bethlehem does not that suggest that they had the means to pay for room. While they could pay for a room, all rooms were full. They were not destitute per se. If none of us would see ourselves as homeless, why then do some preachers and Christian say that Joseph and Mary were homeless? Should we not allow our dramatics to push us to go beyond what the text states, that though they had the money, by the time they arrived the hotels were full that night (they may well have had a hotel room a day or two nights later)?

Further, if we twist/embellish well beyond the text, are we doing it justice and in doing so are we being faithful to it? If we are embellishing and adding over the text other teachings that are beyond the text and add incorrect elements, are we being truthful and thereby not keeping the faith with the text that we turn to teach us eternal truths?

Value Voter Conundrum

2011-12-17T12:20:00.000-05:00

The Republican primary race has been most interesting to observe as candidate after candidate postures themselves to court and please evangelical and tea-party voters. Given Mitt Romney is a Mormon and Mormonism is considered a cult and heresy, the evangelical Christians, and many tea-party members are facing a challenge as to which Republican candidate to support. I wish it were otherwise, but a canadate's religion still impacts a canadate's acceptability.

A series of non-Romney candidates have risen and then fallen. No doubt many statements are pandering in nature rather than firmly held core values. While the challenge is to keep from being fooled by shallow emotional appeals or false statements of piety, when “value voters” stress and emphasis religious piety, the typical chameleon politician will put on that mask.

Early flag bearers have been found lacking the necessary skills and balance to be President. Some have uttered views that sound right but lack an ability to argue their way out of a paper bag. Two who have balance and thoughtful positions are not considered as they lack the dynamism of an evangelical preacher that value voters prefer.

The latest non-Romney hope, Newt Gingrich and thrice married serial adulterer, is presenting a conundrum for the value voters who hold the sanctity of marriage so high, and living out those values tend to see it as one of the bedrock elements. Twelve years ago value voters and evangelical Christians lambasted Clinton, then called for his impeachment over the matter of being an adulterer. Clinton the example of what many evangelical preachers encourage from their congregants in such situations, the Clintons worked through matters and remained married, and Bill Clinton changed his life.

Gingrich is not only twice divorced but the manner in which he announced the end of his marriage to his two wives is highly troubling. Further troubling is that Gingrich’s first wife and children had to turn to their church for financial support for a period when he did not provide child support. Value voters are troubled further in that not providing child support goes to essential character and fathers not fulfilling financial obligation to their children is another major issue with value voters.

There is little doubt about Gingrich’s golden tongue. As one of the fathers of the current political climate of winning at all costs he put that tongue and his disarming smile to use in spinning things that sound thoughtful and intellectual. Gingrich is skilled in positioning himself to be highly appealing to Value Voters. But Value Voters are left wondering if what they are hearing is well contrived spin designed to seduce them.

Hence, these same voters find themselves in a box, they want to support Geingrich but doing so goes contrary to what they have argued in the past as being bedrock values.

For a host of reasons Jefferson, Madison, Franklin and Adams were wise in noting that we must be take care not to align our faith with our religion.

At the end of the day, I hope that the Republicans will give the nation a viable choice. Unfortunately, I do not see much of the current slate of current or former front runners as a solid candidate worthy of my consideration.

Family Pictures

2011-12-11T17:16:00.005-05:00

After church today was the taking of the annual family pictures. I had the designated photographer use my camera for our family picture. Then I took a picture of Jonathan and Maggie. After the family photo was taken, we headed off to Prime Time, a local sports bar, for brunch where there is good food and a host of NFL games at a time that are on the various large televisions lining the walls. Hmmm...I wonder if we could go for brunch on New Years and watch three bowl games at a time? Or dinner?

Here is the 2011 family picture.

Jonathan and Maggie's first Christams picture.

Lastly, Saturday evening Evie retired while I was looking through marketing ssignments from the George Mason University marekting class in which I have been involved this past semester. After about a half hour Hypatia and Darwin disappeared. Below is a picture of what I found about twenty minutes later. By the way Hypatia is experiencing her first heat, and it will be her last.

Evangelical Church and Racism

2011-12-06T20:31:00.002-05:00

Ever so slowly I'm working my way through Robert Putnam’s "American Grace", in which he examines the nature of religious life and its interaction with politics throughout the last one hundred years. Putnam’s work is filled with survey data, demographic trends and basic observations which gives one much food for thought. The work articulates in a coherent manner volumes of data confirms various of my observations and conclusions...one of which is that the evangelical church entering a period of significant decline. Also the book is making numerous new connections such as the correlation between religious attendence declines in young adults and the level of politically activity the evangelical church.

Putnam demonstrates that following WWII religious life in North America across all denominations underwent a dramatic increase. Soldiers returning from the horrors of war attended all churches at a much higher rate than prior generations. The mainline churches plateaued and then started to decline in the late 1960s, a decline that has only slowed in the last decade.

As mainline churches went into decline the evangelical and fundamentalist church grew (the two groups though similar are not identical). Interestingly the Canadian churches saw some of the same patterns as their American brother and sisters, but not to the same degree. The Canadian fundamentalist churches did not increase as much as the evangelical churches and the Canadians growth came in three surge waves versus the four and larger surges experienced by their American counterparts.

As the mainline church suffered dramatic declines that corresponded with each growth surge experienced by the evangelical church, the evangelical surge was primarily transfer growth. Hence, the evangelical surges were for the most part movement of existing church attenders than the “conversions” of unchurched “heathens.”

Putnam demonstrates that the surges in the American evangelical and fundamental churches corresponded with four sociological-political events; the birth control pill and sexual liberation, ERA/feminist movement of the mid to late 70s, civil rights movement, and the Roe v. Wade ruling. As mainline churches being less judgmental about the use of the pill and sexual liberation, they suffered lost of people and the more dogmatic evangelical and fundamentalist churches gained. Roe v. Wade and mainline churches talking about empowering women to become business and church leaders (an female ordination), drove another group of conservative leaning families out of the mainline churches to evangelical and fundamentalist churches that provided clear directives and kept the issues simple.

If one looked at it from a marketing perspective, a perspective evangelicals would reject, evangelical churches captured these families by shaping their message to appeal to those who need less equivication and more rigid frameworks. The evangelicals distinguished themselves by speaking against each of issues (ie: contraception is contrary to divine law, a woman’s place was in the home raising the family, women in the military on the front lines blurs the distinction between men and women, sex must be saved for one’s marital partner, etc.). Though the language and postions on various issues has changed, the evangelical buzz from that age continues to be part of its core language is that they stand for “traditional family” values and preach only the Bible.

Putnam’s data clearly indicates civil rights with the integration of schools and the office was also a major cause for the shift. While mainline churches marched with Dr. King and other civil rights activists, encouraged their members to support integration, evangelical leaders for the most part took a contrary postion. They not only shied away from advocated for civil rights but it was not uncommon to hear pastors and evangelical leaders speaking openly against civil rights or quietly despairingly of integration and reinforcing stereotypes. For the Canadian reader, this is the one element which was for the most part missing from the Canadian scene.

Evangelicals would argue that their different message was not a marketing decision but as being faithful to the preaching of the Word. I concur that it was not a marketing choice. Yet as on all but abortion the evangelical church has changed its message significantly on each of the three areas, faithful preaching of the Word rests on shaky ground. Even on abortion the mainline church membership and pastors have as diverse positions just like the evangelical members and pastors. Rather than marketing and faithfulness to the Word as being the cause, the root is that evangelicals (and fundamentalists) are naturally disposed to being more politically conservative and that in the two decades of significant social shifting, the more conservative elements in the mainline churches found greater identification with their more conservative evangelical friends. Hence, in turbulant times the strength of bent of one's politics tended to determine where one worshipped.

As noted, the Canadian scene was different regarding civil rights. Not only did I not experience despairing comments about race relations in my evangelical congregation, its leadership spoke that equality between races was a biblical principal. Our congregation was not alone as high school friends in other evangelical churches were hearing the same message. Hence subtle despairing comments I heard in my Kentucky dorm and heard at the college from my peers, and some faculty, was perplexing. Though the college leadership acknowledged that integration must happen, its steps were measured least they offend their more conservative alumni and funders.

Today I understand the issues more fully than I did then, that racism was part of the American evangelical and fundamentist scene throughout the 60s, 70s and early 80s. It was more blatant in the 60s and more subtle later, and though rarely as blatant or as widespread, thirty years later it still exists in a subtle manner. Though the majority of the criticism and caricatures of President Obama does not involve racism, one has to be void of sight and intelligence not to understand that some caricatures and criticism are racist in nature and motivation, and that too many of those individuals fill leadership positions in a fundamentalist or evangelical church on Sunday.

As remanents of racism continues to linger as a part of the evangelical church I was not surprised by this story about an evangelical church voting to ban an interracial couple from membership and participating in a worship service… http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2011-12-03/church-interracial-ban/51607194/1

Keystone and the Decision to Depend On Mideast Oil

2011-11-27T09:53:00.001-05:00

Though America has said it wants to rely less on imported oil from the troubled Middle East, it is a shame that America in the Keystone decision has elected not to buy oil from its economically and politically stable neighbor.

Nearly two weeks ago the Obama administration announced that it was delaying approval of the Keystone pipeline as yet another study needed to be conducted (reminds me of governments pushing a topic into an endless series Royal Commission as a means to delay something unduly or even kill it without saying so). The Obama administration has made a misstep on this matter. Studies have been done which have addressed various environmental concerns.

True no pipeline is risk free of spills occurring. No off-shore or even on-shore, oil rig is risk free of spills, nor are tankers that come along our shores and to our ports. The hundreds of thousands of gasoline trucks that travel contain higher risks of that a modern pipeline using the state of the art technologies. Do we stop trucks from traveling the road, tankers bringing crude to our shores, or do we stop drilling? No. Instead we manage risk in a thoughtful manner by learning from past miscalculations and utilize the best technology that is reasonable.

Will the Obama’s administration stall the development of the Alberta oil sands? Anyone who is an opponent of the Keystone is badly mistaken if they think it will end or even slow down the development of the oil sands project. Let’s make no mistake the oil in the tar sands will be coming out of the ground! It is a matter of to whom will the oil be sold, to the USA or to Pacific Rim countries which have robust economies that rely heavily upon imported oil such as Japan, China and Australia.

The question Canada should be asking of the American administration is simple, is the United States prepared to take delivery of the oil within five years? If the answer is not yes, but maybe eventually after we study the matter further for a few more years, then the Canadian response should be straight forward…announce that Canada will sell elsewhere and to that end will be adding to its pipeline infrastructure to the west coast as Canada has made a commitment to sell its oil to Japan, China and other Pacific Rim countries. Of course the American reaction to loosing such a quantity of oil so close at hand will be negative. The Canadians can readily reply that America was the preferred buyer but when America was not willing to commit, Canada elected to allow the free market determine that the oil would be going to other countries.

For Canada there are two economic advantages for selling tar sands oil to China and Japan. Both countries are willing to pay a significantly higher price than the Americans. Hence, Canada would have more net income, some of which could be used to decrease the crude it sells for internal consumption. Lower internal crude prices would enable Canada to have lower gas prices than the US and thereby giving Canadian firms another competitive advantage as a result of lower energy costs. Also, the pipeline would travel further across Canadian soil and the tanker port would be on Canadian shores all of which mean more jobs for Canadians than would be an pipeline running to the USA.

Penn State Football and Joe Paterno

2011-11-20T08:53:00.001-05:00

Yesterday, Penn State won its first game in almost 46 years without Joe Paterno as its coach. People in the know saw signs that this day would come either at the beginning of next season or the next. That it came mid-season after being fired is the shocker and the reason is heart-breaking.

The press has been all over the Sandusky sex story and Paterno’s illustrious career is forever tarnished. Questions regarding when he knew, what he did, why he did not do more will continue to be analyzed and debated. Those who are strong Paterno fans will continue minimize his culpability. On the other side, there will be those on the opposite size who will forever consider Paterno guilty of a tremendous crime and held just short of being the actual perpetrator of the sex acts. The truth likely lies somewhere in the middle.

One thing that concerns me somewhat is that Paterno’s actions are being judged by 2011 expectations and standards, not by the American understanding and standards of the mid 1990s. While most of the existing laws regarding reporting of suspicions were already in place when Paterno was informed about Sundusky showering with young boys, what had not been fleshed out in the public’s mind was what is “reasonable” suspicion and how aggressive one should be on reporting that suspicion. In the intervening years “reasonable” has become defined more broadly and clearly so as to include that which was reported to Paterno. Only in the last five to ten years have background checks, working with children and reporting processes come into place at the street level.

Today, any suspicion or concerns must be reported and when reported it is expected that authorities will conduct a complete investigation. Today, it is expected that reporting something generally to one’s superior and walking away is not acceptable conduct. If one’s superior does not contact the authorities, then the reporter is responsible for taking such a step. Clearly Paterno did not meet these standards and he should have done more. Back then, such action were being done, but the expectation to do so was not at today’s level.

Throughout his career Paterno has preached doing the right thing in all aspects of one’s life even when it is most difficult and could cost you dearly. Paterno has noted he should have done more, and that statement may be his lasting epitaph. Child abuse is very significant, and must be taken seriously. We must not dismiss accusations lightly and when work related they must be reported not only to our supervisors but also to the authorities. Regardless of the laws and the understanding of the laws a decade or more ago, aggressive reporting has always been the right thing to do. In that regard Paterno did not measure up to what he drilled into his teams. With the score tied in the dying seconds of the game, Paterno fumbled the ball on the 1 yrd line with a poor handoff.

It would have been nice if Paterno had recognized the significance of his inaction and announced his immediate retirement, but he did not do so possibly because he thought he could ride out the storm or that not doing more to protect the children was not a major misstep. I commend Penn State’s Board of Trustees for dismissing Paterno. It needed to happen.

Paterno’s firing also sends a strong message, that no person regardless of his/her accomplishments, reputation or accumulated power is immune from being dismissed for a single egregious action. This is a good signal to send and reinforces a good message, that one egregious action outweighs all one’s accomplishments and can bring forth one’s dismissal.

Paterno no longer at the head of the Penn State football program also signals the end of an era, the coach for life. Very few coaches at the top tier schools in the NCAA have been in their positions for more than twenty years. I may need to be corrected on this but I think the new Dean of top tier coaches are basketball’s Jim Boeheim at Syracuse with 36 years and in football Frank Beamer at Virginia Tech with 25 years…neither of whom has anyone close to that number of years as coaches. Today the pressure to win each year is powerful. Alumni and fans will accept one or two bad years if you have been consistently at the top, but having three, people will start to call for your dismissal. Hence, head coaches with twenty or more years at the same school which is the past was not that uncommon will become increasingly rare.

Are shorter tenures a good thing? I’m not sure as it signals that the almighty dollar and winning are king principals that stand well above graduation rates, character building and players not running afoul of laws and NCAA regulations. I fear that we will all be poorer in the end with the win at all cost measure.

Right To Privacy

2011-11-13T22:47:00.000-05:00

Strict Constitutionalism, interpreting the United States Constitution strictly within its initial understanding and context, is a judicial philosophy has increasingly held sway in the United States and is reflected in the judges appointed by both Presidents Bush. This week the United States Supreme Court heard arguments in a case which not only demonstrates that the shortcomings of that philosophical position but the outcome will have major significance to the nature and future of a person’s right of privacy.

The police secretly installed a GPS tracking device to the car of Jones, a man they suspected to be a major drug dealer. For a month from afar and well out of sight the police tracked Jones’ movement. His vehicle became a 24/7 surveillance tool of the police. The police did not need to task teams to watch and follow Jones. After a month the tracking led the police to a large cache of cocaine.

In United States v. Jones, Jones is arguing that the government improperly and without a court issued warrant invaded his privacy. The government argues that they did not need to have a warrant as that provision only pertained to tapping telephone calls, and besides Jones was moving along public roads and functioning various other tasks in other public space.

On the surface the government’s argument seems logical. Using such devices frees up resources and saves the tax payers money. The government no longer needs to task a dozen or more officers to follow suspects in cars and wait outside buildings watching for a suspect to leave. Now the police can place a device on a car, allow a computer to track movements and have one officer review in minutes a day’s worth of movements. One officer could monitor hundreds of people’s movements, instead of it taking many to monitor one.

Forty something years ago when the Supreme Court ruled that wiretaps were required, similar arguments to those of today’s government were used. Today’s Court is facing the ramifications of modern technology and processes that were never dreamed as possible by the original authors of the Constitution. Holding to a strict reading and holding to original context would do a disservice to the Constitution and common sense. The Court was established for the purpose of not as a bulwark against change but as a vehicle to make rulings in light of fundamental principles within an evolving social, political and technological context.

Privacy is a fundamental principle. At issue is whether technology like cell phones, GPS devices, computers, online monitoring, can be used to negate a person’s privacy within a free society. The Court has long held that it is a reasonable expectation for a person to hold that their telephone conversation is private. In its telephone wiretap ruling the Court ruled that as a check against widespread and unwarranted listening to our private conversations. Once again the Court is dealing with these issues. If the Court accepts the government’s position, there is nothing to prevent the government from using our cell phones, OnStar, car engine monitoring devices, GPS devices and other current and future technologies to track our movements second by second. If the government wins, employers and others could then do the same. In short, the Fourth Amendment’s right of privacy will become minimal.

SunTrust and Distrust

2011-11-04T19:30:00.001-04:00

A few weeks ago Bank of America announced that they were going to charge a debit card fee of $5/mo. The BoA got into financial difficulty started when subprime loans it got stuck with as markets for buying up such mortgages froze as default rates climbed. BoA’s difficulties increased as derivatives and other risky overly leveraged investments (many leveraged as much as 40 to 1) decreased in value. High flying profits turned into mega losses. To avoid the collapse of the American financial industry BoA, along with other major national and regional banks, were bailed out by the federal government.

With the downturn on the economy, many banks have had a downturn in their profits. Decreased retail sales means fewer transaction fees they collect from retailers on credit card and debit card transactions. Decreased bank deposits mean lower deposit value for the bank to use for investments. Decreased car sales and home sales create decreased income from loans. On top of that add increased loan and mortgage defaults.

Using changes in credit card regulations BoA decided to institute a $5 debit card fee by collecting from account holders a fee, thereby collecting on both sides of the transaction. The transaction fees are being instituted to help return the profit margins of the bank back to its pre 2008 levels. Let’s be clear BoA, who along with several other national and regional banks, is a major factor behind the current economic difficulties being experienced in the economy. Seeing an opportunity to increase their profits, several of banks followed BoA’s lead and quietly instituted their own debit card fees.

SunTrust was one such bank to follow BoA’s example. After SunTrust started to receive a high volume of customer complaints and account lost (many smaller banks were not following BoA’s lead), SunTrust announced Wednesday that it was refunding debit card fees already charged and have no debit card fees. The bank quietly engaged in a slight of hand…it modified its fee structure significantly, a modification that will yield it even more money. SunTrust increased is account maintenance fee to $17, from $15 (up from $10 in the pre-2008 period).

The account maintenance fee at SunTrust was waived if you had payroll direct deposit (that is only if the accountholder asked as some accountholders were still charged the fee when they had payroll direct deposit). Maintenance fee can still be waived if you maintain $5,000 in the account throughout the month (the account pays no interest).

Hence, through elimination of the payroll direct deposit waiver and the increase in the monthly maintenance fee, the bank will start to make even more money than just from the $5 fee. The changes hit the blue collar, entry level white collar worker and students. The changes keep goal of upper management at the bank intact, to keep their own mega bonuses as strong as possible.

Like the debit card fees, the new fee structure was not announced in any email to customers, posted on any signs at the bank or in any press releases. Instead, like the debit card fee, the new fees were quietly listed on the fee structure and customers will only discover the change in mid December, when they receive their November account statements are released.

Evie and I have been SunTrust customers since moving to DC from Iowa. On balance we were happy. In watching what has happened with debit card fees and the new account fee structure, we find ourselves unable to do what is central to SunTrust’s name, trust. If we cannot trust a firm with how it handles its fees then we cannot trust it to hold our accounts. Therefore we are moving all out banking to TD Bank, which is the American branch of Toronto Dominion.

Rose Colored Glasses and History

2011-08-15T05:28:00.000-04:00

It is a truism that those who forget history and its lessons are bound to repeat it. Repeating the errors of the past repeatedly occurs and supports the value of a well rounded balanced history program in our school systems. While forgetting history can be an issue, a more common problem is the tendency is an unbalanced ahistorical view of history.

This unbalanced view is found in glorifying past events and/or people well beyond reality, and to dismiss or worse overlook the negatives that would dampen the glorification. Such a process is known as hagiography, which is currently taking place within some political spheres in the United States with regard to Ronald Reagan whereby his words and views are being held so high that they are considered and used as if he and his words are as infallible as Holy Writ. Further, a host of his actions, speaches and statements are taken not only out of context but are being reinterpreted to mean something beyond what he meant while disregarding his words and actions that are contrary to "what Reagan said."

It is not just Reagan that is misused, but it happens with all sorts of historical figures and events across nations and the centuries.

Equally or even more dangerous tendency is our interpretion of the past through rose colored glasses. Much of it is innocent, but it too ultimately opens us up to being mislead. The greatest danger of rose colored glasses is when its purveyors masterfully cherry pick through past events, statements, etc. to justify present actions and views even though that which is selected may actually speak contrary to what one is advocating. When in the hands of golden tongued craftspeople playing upon people’s emotions and fears use rose colored cherry picking for insidious ends. The cure against such modern day snake oil pitch people, whether they be businesspeople, politicians, or churchmen is to constantly read, study a broad array of solid thoughtful historical items.

The United Nations and the United States Being a Christian Nation

2011-07-20T23:05:00.000-04:00

Within the American evangelical church for more than two decades there has circulated the claim that the United Nations no longer considers the United States to be a Christian nation. This claim is used to bolster the sermonic statements that the United States is in a period of moral decline, so much so as goes the argument that even the United Nations, a secular group, cannot recognize the United States as being Christian.

Any preacher or Christian leader who makes such regarding the United States is either showing that they are uninformed and are uncritically repeating false statements they have “heard” and accepted as being true. In other words, they are engaged in the same activity, spreading rumors and fear mongering, that they proclaim from the pulpit as being wrong. If the preacher/Christian leader is not uniformed and accepting uncritically the statements, and truly know what they are talking about, then they are willfully misleading their listeners. I prefer the former than the latter.

While it is true that the United Nations does not list the United States as a Christian nation, the same body does not list Iran or Saudi Arabia as Islamic nations or India as a Hindu nation. The United Nations has never changed the religious classification of any nation as it does not make such judgments. When the United Nations was being established in 1944 the founders recognized that the body should not evaluate the nature or quality of the nation’s religious activity, or make any such judgments in any form.

As to the changing religious life of the United States, it has evolved over the decades and will continue to evolve in the coming years as it does in every nation. The degree to which the general citizenry is more or less “Christian” is a highly subjective value judgment. That said, surveys over the decades by Pew Research and Faith Matters clearly indicates that the number of people claiming faith in keeping with traditional evangelical definitions is in decline.

In a few subsequent posts I will note some trends in religious life. Is there a decline in religiosity and spiritual faith? Maybe there is a decline, or it may be a shifting way of defining faith, just as the older generations in the 50s and 60s were concerned about lack of religious respect and spirituality from the teens to 30 yr olds of that era due to the manner in which they were dressing, being willing to go to movies, going out to eat at a restaurant on Sunday after church, going for a swim on Sunday or even put gas in their car…all of which the older generation felt were violations of keeping the Sabbath holy and contrary to holy living.

Why Three Businesses Lost My Business

2011-07-19T23:24:00.000-04:00

A wise businessperson keeps at the forefront of his/her mind is a fundamental fact, consumers have a host of options and a bad experience can cause the businessperson’s customer to take their business elsewhere. A manager/owner her forgets this fact will lose significant business, and possibly so much so as to put their business at risk.

Most people accept that mistakes are made, but when they are, consumers expect adequate redress. Inadequate redress is nothing short of poor customer care. While it is true that I will accept poor customer care if the results are clearly superior (quality of product and price), on a whole such superiority is rare. Hence, when all things are equal I rarely patronize a business from which I receive poor customer care.

Following are three recent negative experiences with for profit businesses that my friends in the nonprofit sector can readily apply to their work too.

In May I had to select a place for two upcoming business dinners. Hence, our family wen to an Italian restaurant, Da Domenico, in Tyson’s Corner. Evie and I go there from time to time, and I thought I would look at it as an option for one or both dinners. Shortly after we were seated, the waiter asked if we were interested in appetizers. We declined noting that none of us were interested. After getting our orders he returned to the subject of appetizers and said that they were lovely, and he would put together two samplers that were not listed on the menu. He suggested that there would not be too much of any single item and the price was reasonable. I made a big mistake by not asking for a specific price, which the waiter clearly took advantage. What came to our table of five were two good sized platters, more of a party size, from which we ate no more than a third.

When we received the bill, the platters turned out to be about 35% of the total bill. Further, when I asked for the doggy bag from the platters I was informed that they were tossed out. That was in May…I selected two other restaurants, albeit more pricey, for the business meetings. This particular restaurant in Tysons received that night the last dollar I will ever spend there.

The second poor customer service experience occurred three weeks later in early June when I went to American Lube for an oil change. For the most part I have used this shop four to five times a year for the last eight years. In the last seven months or so the establishment has undergone management change. During the most recent visit they mistakenly put in the more costly synthetic oil. When I noted I had not asked for that oil and would only pay for what I requested, the manager explained the synthetic oil was ordered by the customer ahead of my car was put into mine too by mistake. What would you do?

A mea culpa, leave the oil in the vehicle and charge for the regular oil would be good customer care. Instead, the manager did everything wrong. I was given two options, pay for the synthetic oil or wait for the correct oil to be added. I refused to pay the extra. As the drained synthetic oil would be sent out for recycling you would think they would leaving the synthetic oil in the car? At the end of the day, they not only increased their costs of the extra oil, but cost themselves a regular long-term customer.

Lastly, over the last week Evie have been in the process of changing our place of residence. Driven by value and customer service factors, it is a move that was settled this past fall.

The complex in which we reside has undergone four ownership/management changes. The first management firm was warm, helpful and customer focused. If you needed something, they listened and sought to do something to help. When they needed something from you their call or note was respectful while still accomplishing their business.

While the current management is better than the prior one, their customer care is far from being the best. Retaining good customers/tenants is a key to ongoing business success. Long-term tenants are even more prized, or so you would think. Over the years we have had various repairs done. A bathroom drain leak damaged a spot on the ceiling and wall in the dining room. While the leak was fixed, they did not return to repair the plaster. Last fall another request yielded the repair but the paint did not match. We suggested that we could move the furniture from the wall so that the whole wall could be repainted to which we received a flat and cold “no”. Management explained that painting happens only when an apartment or townhome is being prepared for a new tenant.

In the same conversation I noted that we had been there for ten years and as long term tenants it would be nice to have the ten year old carpet in the living room, hallway and stairway replaced. We received the same answer as with the painting even though we were willing to move the furniture out of the space in question. It stands to reason that the longer you remain the more the quality of the carpet wears and the walls fade, and after eight or in years it would be prudent to start replacing some carpet and painting the walls too.

With the same message we made our decision. So we are moving and with Jonathan getting married, we are taking the opportunity to downsize, move a little further out and save some money too.

Those who have attended the Disney Institute would have heard again and again the importance Disney puts upon creating a positive experience for its guests. When something does not measure up, they do not overreact but they will do what is reasonable to leave the guest feeling positive. They have solid customer care.

Donors too can have a bad experience…slow receipts, misspelled names, wrong donation amount, doing a mea culpa, etc. In those moments care must be taken to listen to the donor as well as those being served, accept responsibility, weigh their observations and see what where we can do a better job going forward. Care must be given to not dismantle what is working, but refining is always possible.

While at the Disney Institute I was struck afresh by how Disney values listening not only to their guests but their cast/employees too. They are willing to listen, evaluate and incorporate ideas from all levels of their cast and from guests. They work hard to create an a good guest experience by trying to look at everything they do from the customer’s common experience. There some things Disney cannot change, such as long lines for certain rides and crowds, but they have gleaned ideas from cast and visitors alike as to how they can make the overall experience positive for their guests. Teamwork is valued throughout the organization and outstanding ideas can come from the insight of the newest employee in the most minor position.

Whether it be a nonprofit or a local business, customer service is critical, for without it, the organization’s or business’ health is at risk as donors and supporters can take their money elsewhere. Clients can look elsewhere for meaningful help and thereby cause the rationale for the service and agency to decline. Listening and creating a positive environment for all is a noble yet demanding goal that can be readily be achieved, IF we are willing to listen and change too.

Customer Care and Nonprofits

2011-07-04T17:27:00.001-04:00

In the market place, the quality of customer service can make or break a business’ success. In most cases if customer service is neglected, there is significant harm to the company’s bottom line. Rare is the business that so dominate their market that it can afford to give little attention to customer service. People have various options which means when they are dissatisfied they will take their business elsewhere. This truism has struck home in recent months.

On June 18 I posted a blog about a failed donor call from the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation. On so many levels I was disappointed with the caller and the experience. I am not against receiving calls from nonprofits, but the issue is how the call is conducted. The caller should be respectful and be careful to listen to the donor. Above all, never be pushy. A pushy approach may yield more donations in the present, but it will leave several donors like me feeling more negative about the organization. Negative experiences significantly increase the likelihood that the donor will soon be giving their donations elsewhere.

Not listening and a pushy sell works against the Foundation in my case in that they received a lower gift now at the cost of a larger later. At the end of the call my impression about the Foundation was not broken but significantly shaken. When I emailed the Foundation’s Director of Development I received a short apologetic email saying that the type of call I described should not have happened, and that she was looking into it. The email sounded fine, but the actions after the email would tell if I will continue to give or not to the Foundation. Clearly the much larger gift that would have gone their direction in October is going elsewhere. Also, sound fundraising fundamentals would call for a follow-up engagement email, or better still a phone call, from a development staff member asking if I had any questions or wanted to have some more information about a project or program of the Foundation. The follow-up which should take place two to four weeks later tends to help smooth the trouble waters and draw the person closer to the mission of the organization. A follow-up on a complaint email is the perfect opportunity...to not follow-up leaves the relationship at risk and can send the message that they organization is not concerned whether they want the donor's friendship. If I hear back, they are not only likely to retain me as a donor, but would likely move me to give two to three times higher than my largest gift.

Businesses have long learned that it is seven to eleven times more costly to attract a new customer than retain an existing customer who has had a bad experience. The same holds true in the nonprofit world. Unfortunately all too often the truism is not fully appreciated by nonprofit administrators and development staff.

When a donor expresses disappointment it is an opportunity not only to address the issue but also the opportunity to draw the donor closer to the heart of the organization. It is the opportunity to have follow-up calls and/or emails to not only report on what has been done but also to learn more about the donor and tell them more about the organization’s work. I suspect such follow-up will not be forthcoming from the Foundation for if the first was to be coming, it would have come already.

Being involved in the nonprofit world I fully appreciate the diverse demands, the ebbs and flows that exist in the field. That said, we who are in the development field must take such complaints as opportunities to cultivate a relationship, and if done correctly the effort normally will deepen the relationship and commitment to the organization. That said, great care must be taken to not overpromise.

My experience with the Williamsburg Foundation stands in contrast to recent communication received from another organization, the Civil War Trust whose work I have only recently come to know. Evie, Josh and I recently gave several gifts to the Trust, for two of which we were to receive premiums. Normally I’m not interested in premiums but I was interested in these twos, and as for professional interest was tracking to see a) how quickly the premiums would arrive, and b) how quickly the thank you letters would arrive. At least twice a year I conduct acknowledgment tests within my organization to keep vendors and local staff on their toes, and compare how we are doing against other groups (for the most part, since using lockbox processes we have started to do well against other organizations).

The one premium arrived about two weeks after the gift was given, which is very good for a premium. Evidently the Trust had issues with the second premium as it still had not arrived weeks later. Needless to say I was really starting to wonder until I received an email explaining that the Trust had a supplier issue. The email was excellent customer care and speaks well of their attention to such matters as some organizations may have waited and waited.

As mentioned above, customer care within the nonprofit industry is inconsistent, and arguably generally lacking, particularly when it comes to small donors…of course most organizations fall all over themselves to give attention to the five and six figure donors, and sometimes four figure ones too, a subject which I may write about in a future blog.

Since many of my friends who read this blog from time to time work for nonprofits I would encourage you to give attention to customer care. Take a look at how the phones are answered and messages taken. Are callers passed from one office to another? How are donor’s acknowledged? How are complaints handled and resolved. Are we expecting donors and clients to conform to our processes rather than listening to them? We need to ask ourselves, if I was an outsider, what impression would I have of my office and organization?

In the next few day I will post about my experience with three local businesses and how they lost business due to poor customer care. There are lessons in what they did wrong that can be learned whether we work in the for-profit world, government services or nonprofit sector.

Burial, Cremation, Heritics and Limits on Divinity

2011-06-30T09:57:00.000-04:00

The other day while reading James Michener’s Chesapeake there is a passage about the bodies of “heritics” being burned. The passage remined me of how archaic misbegotten religious notions are passed down uncritically from generation to generation shape today our lives and thinking. While it is diminishing in our society, there has been a strong reluctance against cremation due to an ancient religious teaching.

Burial is rooted in the belief in the resurrection of the dead. If there is no body to be resurrected, then the person cannot be resurrected to have eternal life or so goes the reasoning. Hence, for more than millennia, religious and civil leaders burned the bodies of “heretics” and major political opponents. The pronouncement that someone was to be burned served as a strong control over the middle age masses and burning protected the leaders from seeing their opponent in the afterlife if an injustice was carried out on them in this life…after all they assured that there would be no body for God to resurrect and correct the injustice. Today, the effects of such thinking linger effect in the number of people who see cremation as abhorrent.

For me, the ancient rationale for burial contradicts the Christian teachings about God being all-powerful, just and wise. It suggests that God is limited in his power by suggesting that the God who created the universe is powerless to resurrect someone if there was no physical body. Further, burning the bodies of heretics also suggests that God’s justice and power are limited in that the human activity makes it impossible for God to correct an injustice.

Over twelve years ago Evie and I have told our sons that we are to be cremated.

Why I Could Never Support a Politician Like Sarah Palin

2011-06-29T08:20:00.000-04:00

In yesterday’s post I noted that the politics attracts some people of questionable character but not all are of unsavory as there are a good number of honest brokers who have not been seduced. I noted that we, the voter, must give due diligence to weed out the former and seek the latter.

Regardless of my political leanings, I was the recipient of a mailing a year ago from one politician that very quickly disqualified her from ever being considered as the recipient of my vote. The letter contained a survey with five questions that recipients are encouraged to return.

One of my ongoing concerns is the way politicians of various parties and levels twist and intentionally obfuscate information to manipulate the public to support them or the issue they are pushing, and pushing not always for reasons that are apparent to the voter. One issue that greatly concerns me, and which I believe the public does not appreciate, is how push polling is being used to convince (manipulate?) the person being surveyed into coming to one and only one conclusion, and then to use the results to make claims on political talk shows and on the campaign trail that a large number of my and your neighbors feel about something, and if I think differently I am in a small minority and better rethink my views.

Most telephone push polling last three to five minutes and contains twelve to fifteen questions. The organization sounds innocuous enough or patriotic, but they are often fronts for an organization or party with an agenda. The first three or so questions are normally demographically related and are followed by two or three qualifier questions. If the person answering the survey answers the two or three qualifier questions in a particularly manner, the survey may well end quickly and before the primary questions are asked. If they are answered in another way that survey often moves quickly through two or three set-up questions before getting to the two or three primary questions.

The set-up questions are carefully crafted to draw the person to respond and think in a particular direction and thereby answer the primary questions in the way the survey designer is seeking. If the person being surveyed sends mixed signals with the qualifier questions two or three more set-up questions may be added.

One of the signs of push polling is not only how the wording moves you in a certain direction but also in that they require only a simple yes or no answer. No somewhat or gradient scales are used as are done with neutral and academic polling. Being forced to give only a yes or no answer is a telling sign of a push poll.

The survey in the letter not only has all the signs of push polling but also includes hot button words and demonizing language, another sign of push polling and driving people to think and feel along a particular line. The letter says that the author is interested in their views and will use them to help shape the Republican party.

What turned me off was the second paragraph in the letter inviting the recipient to join millions of other Americans in expressing their views and frustrations. The second paragraph reads, “If you think Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid are doing a good job running America, the put this down. This Victory 2010 Survey isn’t for you.”

I already viewed Sarah Palin with a high degree of askance for stepping down as Alaska's governor in her first term to respond to "the higher national need" (code for...I'm a hot item and I will make as much money as I can). Any small vestige of a chance of supporting her vanished in the second paragraph.

In light of the second paragraph for Palin to on to say in the letter that she is not only interested but needs the public’s views is disingenuous. The second paragraph and the nature of the survey disqualified her from ever being considered for my vote. She does not want my honest views or yours. She only wants to have her own views reinforced by a choir of loyal supporters who do not think independantly. Regardless of the person's party a politician like her will not have my support.

We already have too many politicians seeking to manipulate how I and the public think and feel. The country does not need another, particularly one who does so with such unashamably bold craseness. We need honest brokers who wrestle with weighty issues, who are willing to listen, to change their mind and work for the overall interest of the whole country.

Scoundrels, Ballots and Power Trips

2011-06-28T21:06:00.000-04:00

Politics has always been a cutthroat endeavor. For millennium men, and in more recent decades women too, have manipulated the public through misrepresentation, obfuscation of facts, inflaming people by playing to their more base fears and with carefully crafted public relations machines that help to project one persona while in private another and a contrary persona exists. They have manipulated the power system for their own personal gain, those of their friends and those who give them the most money to get elected.

We only need to look at the recent scandals to see this…and I am not just talking about those who are caught but the reaction of the opposition and their own party to their unsavory actions. I find it appalling and hypocritical that those who defended and kept a “family values” Senator in power after it was discovered that the Senator was visiting high priced prostitutes regularly, and maybe paying for them out of campaign contributions, were the first voices to attack a man of the other party for sending a nude picture of himself to several women. I was gravely disappointed that a Senator who covered up sexual harassment and an offer another Senator had with a woman who worked for him and delivered money to hush her received to calls for resignation from his own party. It happens with all parties…defend my party member, explain away his actions, and if the actions were wrong then minimize their significance while aggressively attacking the other party on the same, overplaying it, keeping the story going with the press by adding to the feeding frenzy.

Politics by its nature draws scoundrels and vipers. By its nature, it seductively boosts egos and inflames libidos. Power and the money are corrupting. Hence some cynics state that the only honest politician is the one who was not elected. I am not quite so cynical as there are politicians of every stripe across the globe who provide honorable service to their constituents and country. It is incumbent upon us, the voters, to cut through the clutter, to cease holding the view that my guy is always right, and that we seek people to be in office who consistently put the needs of the country ahead of the needs of their party, their friends or those who are filling their campaign coffers. We need to be diligent to not be unduly influenced by the politics of fear, image projection, the sound bite and the misleading obfuscations.

We do not need angry demanding movements who shout and press an agenda that more often than not is too narrow and unbalanced. An angry demanding movement is easily inflamed, co-opted and reactionary. Instead, we need thoughtful reflected voters who research issues, speak cogently to their elected officials and weight a host of issues when casting their ballots. We need voters not only hold our election officials accountable but who push beyond the superficial campaign image to give due diligence before casting their ballots.

Crossman Broke Camp On Saturday

2011-06-19T13:22:00.001-04:00

Yesterday the Crossmen broke camp and hit the road. At the end of this video you will catch of glimpse of the bedroom. Could I live like this day after day from Memorial weekend to mid-August? No way, but Josh doesn’t mind. Their first competition is in Indianapolis on Tuesday June 21, Fairfield Ohio on Wednesday, Pittsburgh PA before coming to Washington DC on Friday for a show in Arlington on Saturday night…and then on to Old Bridge NJ. Evie and I will be helping on the food truck on Friday evening and Saturday. Josh will meet Hypatia at that time.

On All Levels, A Failed Donor Call

2011-06-18T22:41:00.003-04:00

Shortly after I arrived home on Friday I received a call from Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, a Virginia non-profit which we have supported in the past. After thanking me for my past support the caller did not interact with me, or tell me anything about the organization. Instead he immediately asked if I would pledge to increase my level of support. As a fundraiser I found the call to be most interesting. The caller made several mistakes which ultimately resulted in him settling for a gift that is about 20% of the size of last year’s gift and well below what I would have likely given later.

When the caller asked if I would give at a particular level, about 33% above last year’s gift, I noted that it would be a reach this year. I also noted that I would definitely give but it was too early to say the size since I normally make decisions about gift at that level in October/November. I implied that the gift would likely in the range of last year’s, but would not make a decision in June. Yet the caller asked if he could put me down that day for pledge, send me a pledge card for an amount just above what was given last year and if I could immediately return the pledge. Again, I noted that I only make that size of gift only in the fall.

By this point in the call the fundraiser had made some fundamental errors. First, he was not listening to the donor. I said, a) I would not give at the asked level, and b) that I gave the assurance that there would be a gift in October around the level of the last year. The caller not only did not acknowledge either statements but worse seemed have not heard them which lead to the next error, not engaging the donor as to the donor's desires and plans.

Hence, the second error the caller made by not picking up on the statements when a gift decision is made and not asking if he could call back in early to mid October. Such a request is normally received positively from committed donors as it works from the their timeframe. It also received well by the donor as the caller is acknowledging what the donor's statement and the donor's intentions. This was a perfect moment to engage the donor, to draw the donor closer to the heart of the organization. A less bonded donor could be driven away.

A judicious and donor centered fundraiser would have turned the conversation into a victory by talking about teh organization and why I like supporting it. The fundraiser could have but did not ask if I had any questions or if he could send me any information about the Foundation's work and upcoming projects. Instead, the caller made his third mistake, settling for a far lower gift.

His third mistake was being focused upon the sale rather than the donor. Hence, to make a sale (gaining a pledge that day to be paid in two weeks) the fundraiser settled for a far smaller gift. The fundraiser was in a transactional frame of mind…make a sale, secure a pledge at any level so that he could send a pledge card and add another tally. To this end the fundraiser went on to mention that a gift at $35 would allow me to receive Colonial Williamsburg's magazine for another full year. He then asked if I would commit to give a $35 pledge and pay within two weeks.

There had been numerous stop lights along the way but the fundraising speed through them on. I decided to see what would happen if I replied that if he wanted me to right then to pledge $35 to be paid immediately that I would do so, but that the gift would be the only gift for the year. In other words, I warned him that the ask was premature, and that he was about to get a little now rather than more later. He thanked me for the $35 pledge rather than giving in the fall. He thanked me and said the pledge card would arrive in the coming week.

As noted, the fundraiser was in a transactional frame of mind...make a sale and secure a commitment to give today at any level.

Since Colonial Williamsburg Foundation is a classy organization, I have observed the Foundation and some of its work for several years. I have even used the Foundation in three studies as positive external comparison points for units within my own organization. I have felt it was the type of first class organization to which a fundraiser would be honored to be attached. I was greatly disappointed with the call and the fundraiser.

The message left me wondering if the unproductive call was a training issue or if my positve impression of the Foundation's development program is unfounded. There is another question that lingers in my mind…that Colonial Williamsburg Foundation and Colonial Williamsburg is in such dyer straights that they need cash now so badly that they are willing to sacrifice future larger gifts for smaller gifts today. Dyer finanical straights is definitely not a message or question you want to leave in a donor’s mind.

Am I turned off by Colonial Williamsburg Foundation? Dissappointed, yes. Turned off, not really. Colonial Williamsburg is a cause worthy of support, and I suspect that it is either a training issue or that the Foundation farmed out the calls to an outbound call center...and the wrong call center at that.

Whether it was an internal staff person/volunteer or a call center, the fundraiser did not serve the Foundation well. The fundraiser was out to make a sale, conduct a transaction, gain his short-term goal, and not build a relationship with the donor. Thanking me for my past support was not at the heart of the call but only the jumping off point. I am sure that the fundraiser was happy with the result as he made a sale even though it cost the organization more money in the long-run. A donor centered fundraiser would have focused on the donor and secured the larger donation 100 to 120 days later.

For those friends who read this blog, many of whom are within my organization or are fundraisers other nonprofits, I would note that using outbound call centers can be effective if they are selected well for organizational fit and with proper success metrics in place.

If the Foundation used a call center they have not been well served by the center they selected...it is a firm that I would never use. There are call centers that work well for nonprofits and are sensitive to the differences between the profit and poltical sectors and traditional nonprofit sector. One must be mindful of the call center appraches as some make hard sells. Even when you think you have the right center continue to monitor their texts and randomly listen in calls (a common feature that can be done remotely) as they are being conducted.

By its nature fundraising has a transactional nature to it, particularly direct mail. Direct mail by its mass processes is highly transactional but can be less so when correct analytics is coupled with donor cultivation processes. Whenever one is talking live with a donor, even an annual donor who gives at a low level, it is the perfect opportunity to move beyond the transactional nature of fundraiser. Whether it is a call such as this, or a donor visit, conversations with a donor is an opportunity to build and enhance the relationship between the donor and organization. It is the the opportunity to learn learn a little more about the donor, to record what you have learned on their file, to educate donor and be educated on the donor, and to project your organization’s ethos and mission. Every conversation, even a call to say thank you can be the opportunity to draw the donor into the heart of your organization. The fundraiser failed to do any of these things and as the expression at that moment of the organization, the Foundation too failed to measure up to being a donor centered quality organization that I believe it to be.

General Family News

2011-06-12T09:31:00.000-04:00

Posting some general family news is overdue.

· We enjoyed our Memorial Day Weekend trip in our RV. Though I stayed in it for two nights at camp in late April, this was the first weekend away and a full test of all systems. One the way home we dropped it off at the Ford dealer for the annual state inspection. Other than oil changing (vehicle and generator) and only replacing a side light was the only work that needed to be completed.

· Josh left for San Antonio TX the Friday of Memorial Weekend. Another summer with the Crossmen is underway. This year their first competition is on June 21^st in Indianapolis. The next night they in Fairfield OH, followed by a show in Pittsburg on the 23^rd before coming to the Washington area.

· We spent Mother’s Day weekend and last weekend in Leola with Evie’s mother who turned 83 last weekend.

· We, along with Hypatia, will see Josh on the evening of 24^th and around meals on the 25^th as we will volunteering on the Crossmen food truck that evening and Saturday. The Crossmen are staying at the Suitland HS in MD ahead of Saturday’s completion at Wakefield HS in Arlington VA. Rather than sleeping on the school floor or driving across town for home will be staying in our little rig for the night.

· After the Crossmen show on Saturday night, as Josh heads to northern NJ for a show we will head to Annapolis for a week’s vacation and camping. We have yet to go in that direction and we thought it was about time. With the cost of gas, the wedding and moving we are not taking any long trips this summer.

· Last night Jonathan and Maggie brought Ally over to spend the night with Hypatia. Once the initial introductions were over and ten minutes or so of watching each other they started to do to things together… see Evie’s report entitled “Gal Pals” on her blog http://stray-thoughts--ruminations.blogspot.com/

· After some whimpering Hypatia settled down Saturday night in her small carry crate. Around 2:40 she started to whimper…time to take her out to illuminate, which she did and was rewarded with a treat. The next whimper wake-up call was just before six. Duty fell to me both times to take her out to the grassy areas. We were pleased by how the night progressed…of course teaching her to signal that she needs to relieve herself and to do it outside is only started.

· Today will be our first visit to the pool for the season. For about two hours as we try to deepen what remains of our tans, Hypatia will experience her first time alone.

· In mid July we take possession of a new apartment. With Jonathan getting married we are downsizing as well as saving money. The new place has much more grace, less dense and very dog friendly. Movers will be moving our major items on July 22^nd. As the movers get paid by the hour, over the prior week we will be transporting boxes and miscellaneous small items to the new place. As we started packing a month ago much of the non-last minute item work has been completed.

· With moving we will not be taking a week in July as we do normally. This year will go out the second week of August…where has yet to be determined…as well as the second week of September.

· Jonathan and Maggie continue to refine their plans their October 8^th wedding. The wedding will be at 10 AM with a luncheon reception. Invitations should be going out at the end of June. They have already been talking with the priest about involving various members of the family in the ceremony. They are looking at going to Jamaica for their honeymoon.

Hypatia

2011-06-11T15:55:00.000-04:00

Hypatia, the newest member of our family is named in honor of Hypatia of Alexandria, a fourth century mathematician, philosopher and astronomer. Her philosopher and mathematician father was the librarian of the great library of Alexandria.

In an age when women were rarely educated, Hypatia was one of the leading intellectuals of her age. Herself a teacher, Hypatia taught students at what we would consider today the university level, several of her students went on to be civil, scientific, education and church leaders. Several of her students helped define the church’s evolving theology. Hypatia taught Synesius of Cyrene, and continued to correspond with him after he became a bishop. Synesius was one of the prime shapers of what we know today as the doctrine of the trinity.

She was not only known for her work on conic sections, much of which not only advanced the concepts of hyperbolas, parabolas and ellipses, but her teachings continue to be taught today in high schools and colleges around the globe. Further, in any age Hypatia would be considered to be an outstanding mathematician. She invented the plane astrolabe, the graduated brass hydrometer and the hydroscope. Over thirteen-hundred years later Descartes and Newton extended her teachings further. On the sociological level this independent woman also did the most unlady-like thing, driving her own chariot.

Her violent death in 415 in Roman Egypt at the hands of a Christian mob must be understood in the context of the age. Christianity only became accepted in 311, in other words open acceptance of Christianity only occurred just before she was born. By 385 Christianity was starting to grow not only in great numbers but also in political influence. While the producers of the 2009 movie Agora took liberties with the timeline and sequence of events, the movie does nicely catch the political dynamics and societal tensions of the age between Christians and non-Christians, and the violent encounters in the 390s between the two populations.

The Church was beginning to dominate the public square. Pagan beliefs and teachings even those held by individuals like Hypatia, who was more of an agnostic or atheist than anything, were not only being challenged but were being persecuted…interesting development that those who were persecuted did some of the same things to others that were done to them.

Hypatia found herself at the center of a religious as well as a political struggle. If the influence of Cyrus, who became bishop of Alexandria in 412 and who would later be canonized as a saint, was to increase the pagan Hypatia’s influence upon students and society in general needed to be neutralized or better, ended completely. The church was already settling into being male dominant and a strong female who had great influence upon the minds of her students was a challenge to the church leadership.

All the dynamics behind her violent public murder is unclear as various accounts and fragments of accounts are not consistent in their details. What is clear is that she was murdered by Christian monks, monks who were encouraged (possibly ordered by Cyrus and remains a question and stain upon him until today) and protected by local church leaders and that the church celebrated her death. What is most interesting is that though demonized by the Church as an ungodly influence, she was instrumental via Synesius to helping the Church to define its understanding of the trinity (yes, like today politics were hardball and vicious back then too…and strongly practiced by church leaders.)

Due to her influence as a teacher in an age where strong intellectual women were viewed with askance, the Church also vilified Hypatia as being a demonic libertarian seductress…for how else could she have gained such an impact upon men. Yet, most interestingly centuries later is that some Christian leaders held up Hypatia as an example of intellectual womanhood and virtue.

It is after this extraordinary woman that our beagle pup is named. Below are some pctures taken on the drive home.

Is Democracy At Risk? Can We Learn From Rome?

2011-06-11T09:14:00.000-04:00

Last year’s trip to Italy rekindled an interest in refreshing my knowledge of the Roman Empire, a glorious empire that dominated the Meditation and much of “civilized” Europe. All empires go through a life cycle of rise and decline. Though causes for both the rise and decline of any empire are numerous and can be debated, with Rome the decline highly involves three primary factors:

a. Corrupt leaders who used their positions to advance their own wealth and power as well as those of their family and friends

b. Centralization of power in the hands of Caesar and the leaving the Senate marginalized as a paper tiger

c. A military industrial complex that increasingly dominated the society and the budget of the empire to the point where the military, and a handful of public works which more often than not were either military driven or designed to placate the poor with entertainment.

Threats from outside were real, but Rome declined due to internal reasons and when it moved away from what had given rise to the empire.

News reporters and commentators, and political leaders at all levels and of all persuasions in modern democracies need to be heedful of what happened in Rome. The citizenry likewise needs to be heedful of the lessons.

To remain vibrant and strong, modern democracies ensure that all branches of government civil discourse, freedom of information and the exchange of the same, and each branch in the checks and balance process are vibrant and well. Consolidating power in the hands of one or two leaders is unhealthy and moves any country down the Roman pathway.

When Congressmen, Senators (or MPs in Canada, England) are expected/required to fall in line behind their leadership (President, PM, House or Senate Leadership) on all but minor matters a democracy is under threat. Thinking that what is good for the party is good for the country is dangerous thinking…it is dangerous is like a driver driving at a high rate of speed and thinking that they are too skilled to have an accident. Party winning at all costs stifles independent thinking, civil discourse and undermines a democracy.

When a party membership is reluctant to call out its leadership for potentially immoral or criminal conduct, or when it gives them passes for what they would consider most unacceptable if done by those of the other party, democracy is under attack. When leaders say that their number one priority is to defeat the opposition in the next election and to obstruct as much of their other party’s agenda as possible, democracy is eroded and slipping away. The good of the country should never come above the good of the country. When an is attack, even ones the attacker had proposed in the past, primarily because it is put forward by the opposition, democracy is starting to become a shell.

When people are appointed to the judiciary, particularly to the highest court in the land, mainly because of narrow political beliefs on a handful of issues ranging from the highly questionable unitary executive doctrine to abortion, the checks and balances within that democracy is being lost. The court system, including the highest court, should not be used as an extension of a political position for if it were, not only is democracy threatened but so is justice itself.

Any country which does not give attention to lessons from the past is at risk of repeating the same mistakes. Are our democracies vibrant and on a sound footing? While for the most part they are solid, I fear that they may not be on as firm as we believe.

Lapsarian Debate Continues to Speak to Today's Church

2011-06-10T21:14:00.000-04:00

A few statements earlier today drew my mind back to the lapsarian debates of the 3rd and 4th centuries when the church wrestled with what to do with those who under the threat of civil persecution, torture and/or threat of death renounced their faith. Following Constantine’s Edict of Toleration most of those who renounced their faith quickly returned…some privately continued to believe contrary to the public statements they gave publically. Could they truly be restored or once they denied their faith were they forever condemned to hell?

Though most tended to argue for restoration, the most challenging element of the debate related to priests who renounced their faith. Could these former spiritual leaders be restored? Was it possible that they were still saved regardless what they said under physical and emotional threat? Some questioned whether they were saved to begin with for if they were how in the world could they deny their faith in Jesus Christ? If they were not saved, or if their salvation was deficient, then what does that say about those who were saved/baptized by such priests? If they were not saved, then how could anyone who was “saved” under their ministry be a Christian?

At the end of the day the church decided that salvation/baptism were effective independent of the priest. Salvation/baptism’s efficiency depended upon the faith of the individual and the power of God, not the purity or non-purity of the priest. Hence the church concluded that God can and does work in and through non-believer leaders whether those leaders are in secular positions in the world at large or in holy orders within the church. Since then this conclusion has been the orthodox position of the church.

There is a tendency today for Christians to forget the orthodox position and imply in its language that the church’s ministry can only be fulfilled and fully effective if it retains only dedicated Christians. Besides being rooted in mystical and holiness teachings, this fallacy is also grounded in the human bent to shape simplistic thinking.

Clearly those who have made a personal commitment are in the best position to be faith teachers such as preachers, and congregational and denominational instructors. That said, if whose in those positions are later to be found lacking, the impact they may have had upon the spiritual life of others is still in effect and valid. In a host of positions ranging from social workers and counselors to finance and fundraising staff is still effective even if they are filled by non-believers. The central issue is their willingness to understand, respect and support the mission. Another key is leadership who are mature in the faith as well as committed and spiritually attuned to the mission as such leaders are critical to helping the church remain focused upon its spiritual ministry..

Secrecy, The Antithesis to Memorial Day

2011-05-26T21:14:00.000-04:00

The National Riffle Association strongly implies that freedom and democracy are only guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms, not the ballet box. They rightly note that there are countries that have ballet boxes but they lack true democracy as voting by the citizenry is a shame. The NRA is correct as holding elections does mean that democracy and personal freedom will be the result. That said, there are countries where guns are in the hands of many of the citizens, and at a much higher rate than the United States, yet there is chaos and a lack of personal freedom. So the gun is not the guarantor of freedom democracy.

Personal freedom is rooted in an open democratic process with vigorous civil discourse wherein ideas are debated, argued, clarity sought, common ground recognized, consensus is found via compromise and where differences are respected. Such a democracy is threatened when demonization of one’s political opponents and winning at all costs replaces respectful civil discourse and nation building.

Another threat to democracy is undue secrecy. When government business is discussed and decided in secret, the democratic process is eroded. I am not talking about military secrecy, or private dialogue between peers, or the leaders with their primary counselors. Democracy is under attack when meetings with special interest lobbyists and high power supporters take place in secret to author legislation. Legislation is best when it is put through the rigor of open debate, where differing viewpoints are aired for public observation and enquiry. Democracy is undermined when elected officials are unable to learn who has participated in the private meetings. Leadership should not ignore freedom of information requests or feel that such legislation should not exist.

Democracy by virtue of its nature is defined by public participation in the shaping of public policy. Hence, lack of government openness and civil discourse are the antithesis to democracy. Secret meetings are also the antithesis to who we honor and why we honor their sacrifice every Memorial Day.

Hubris

2011-05-17T20:52:00.002-04:00

Once again we have those in prominent positions in the news for various immoral acts and which are costing them dearly. I’m not mentioning them by name, not because the attention is not deserved but because those individuals are not the purpose of this blog. When such immoral and/or illegal actions come to light there is a tendency in the media and our social circles to point to human hubris.

There is a bent in all of us to fall victim of hubris. It can subtly touch any of us, sometimes only for a few hours or days, or sometimes for months or years. Living in a town where significant hubris is on display, I am reminded of its subtle allure and that hubris transcends all professions. We see hubris at play in every field, including politics, entertainment, sports, education, research, and nonprofit. While we would wish not to admit it, let us not forget that it the church too has leaders who have become its victims too.

To simply dismiss hubris by simply saying that it effects the wealthy and the powerful, may be unwise. It is not something that infects only the wealthy and powerful. Certainly wealth and power is a factor, not only because wealth and power is relative, but so is our self importance. One of my favorite British comedies is “Keeping Up Appearances”. It is a favorite not because of the witty humor but also because it deals with in a playful way with the hubris run amuck.

Hubris can creep in and take hold when we frequently shift blame to others, when we horde praise due to others, and when we define our importance/place by who we know on a first name basis, what prestigious events we have attended, the power held to accomplish what we desire, and how often we are in a dominant position. Hubris starts to take hold when one loses touch with his/her own place and limitations…in other words, when s/he become self-centered, forgetting that they are merely a bit player upon a grand eternal stage.

Everyone can readily fall victims to hubris. Most I dare say could fall victims easily…it is just we have not had the opportunity to have significant influence, power or wealth. Can hubris be prevented? Yes, and we have had many powerful and influential men and women who have kept hubris in check. We can learn from their example. Most recognized that they were just fortunate to be in the right place at the right time…even those who had significant wealth inherited have viewed that they were fortunate to by being born into the family to which they were born. Others have recognized that they did nothing extraordinary, that they rose only due to a series of fortunate breaks and judgments at the right time.

Another commonality is that they knew their core values, that those values were sound, and they held to those values. Religious faith and teachings are often at the heart of their values, but not always. Many powerful and influential people over the course of human life had sound values, that though held in common with religious teachings of their age, had been arrived at independently of faith.

Having a good friend or spouse to act as a foil is another means to limit hubris from taking hold. The foil often stands off stage whispering quietly, and through their reminders, critiques and drawing them back to the core values helps to keep a person grounded in reality.

High Energy Costs and Politics

2011-05-14T17:28:00.001-04:00

This weekend Republican Representative Martha Roby in the weekly Republican radio address, in speaking about energy production rightly stated, “The greatest threat to our economy, job creation, and the future of our children is to do nothing.” She went on to state, “We have to act. It is what we were sent to Washington to do.”

Amen, Ms Roby, amen. A good part of the problem is that too many of her peers spend more energy about posturing, pointing fingers, putting forward great sounding ideas but in the end are empty or unbalanced. Things need to get done.

No one or two magic bullets exist. Due to various logistics, nothing Congress or the White House does today to increase production or supply will make any significant difference for the consumer today or even the next year.

When only one out of four gallons that you and I pump into our cars is produced in the US or Canada, tells us that there is a supply problem. While we would like to blame the Obama administration for the problem, we cannot. The problem has existed for at least five presidential administrations but Congress and the White House year after year has not moved in any serious way.

We need more electricity from wind and solar. These are not primary solution but they do play a part just as more efficient vehicles are making a difference. We need more hybrid vehicles. One out of three cars powered by natural gas and propane, that calls a refueling infrastructure becomes much broader and spans the nation. Free enterprise market forces will eventually build out such refueling infrastructures but it will not take place rapidly enough without national and state short-term incentives.

Our public transportation system is poorly underdeveloped. Too much energy is wasted idling. In the majority of our major cities traffic lights are not computerized to adjust for efficient inflow of traffic during the morning commute and outflow in the evening.

We need to push for greater conservation and more efficient electronic devices. The citizenry as a whole needs to become more energy conscious as to how little things done each day, such as setting the AC two or three degrees higher, and the heat two or three degrees lower, and set-back thermostats can make a big difference.

Clearly oil production needs to be increased. Opening new areas for exploration needs to happen today whether the areas area in Alaska, the Gulf of Mexico, along the western or eastern coasts. Environmental issues should be duly noted and high care must be taken to manage risks. The assessments must be quicker and approval given even if the risks are not nearly negligible. That said, regardless of the simplistic pontificating and posturing of politicians and lobbyists, we must be realistic. For every well that comes into production there are twelve to fourteen dry wells.

It takes four to five years for new oil wells to come into production which means that lack of current activity rests solely upon the inactivity of the prior administration, not the current. Let’s hope the current administration and Congress will take bold actions rather than be more like the prior administrations in this area...much talk and posturing with no meaningful action. If there is action, it also means that a subsequent administration and Congress will reap the adulation.

Let’s hope that the current Congress and White House will work together to formulate a plan with a broad array of elements that in total will make a difference. A mark of national leadership is the ability to find common ground by setting aside political dogma, and finding a solid solution for the good of the whole regardless of who may claim or receive the credit. In the White House and Congress, do we have statesmen and outstanding national leaders or do we have a collection of bickering politicians who are playing games?

In A Way, Is the United States Becoming Like the Country It Rebelled Against?

2011-05-07T09:37:00.001-04:00

In a time of peace, when a country has a large diverse military paired with it is a drive to use it in various non-defense reasons, from threatening other countries to bow to your intent and to directly interfere in the affairs of other countries. This is particularly true for superpowers such as the United States.

I am not opposed to a nation having a solid military system to protect itself from undue aggression. As evidenced in times of disasters the military with its command and rapid response infrastructure to rapidly move and deploy aid as well as provide a framework of civil order.

What concerns me is when a peacetime military is unduly large. As evidenced by Somalia, Panama, Lebanon, Granada and the current Iraq war, politicians have a way of using the military in unjustified ways. We have too many who have not served in the military (or worse who during the Vietnam era used connections to have deferments or homeland service) being too quick to spill the blood of our youth.

I am also concerned with its size not only is a major expense in the national budget but it dominates the budget, and that education, roads, care of seniors, etc suffer significantly in order to pour more money into arms. I am concerned when it is so large that the defense industry is a major factor in the political process.

Since Gorbachev brought a unilateral conclusion to the Cold War, the United States military budget as a percent of the national budget and GDP has continued to grow. And if a large number on Capitol Hill have their way, even more of the national GDP will go into defense.

Draconian cuts are being proposed by Congressmen Paul Ryan and his colleagues across the board except for the military. This is an atrocity. The military needs to be cut even more so than civilian expenses. The current justifications for a strong military, for all other expenses to be slashed to the bone to keep the military strong while the industrial military complex that Eisenhower warned us about (and we have conveniently forgotten) become wealthy is not new. The current arguments and dynamics at play in the United States are the same rationale, arrogance and dynamics that existed in England in the mid 1700s against which this country rebelled. It is unfortunate that in so many ways that as a nation the United States is coming full circle and doing what its founding fathers rebelled against.

Disney Institute

2011-05-03T20:17:00.000-04:00

Two days were spent last week attending the Disney Institute. In five two hour classes attendees gain a handful of the Disney Corporation’s business practices. As expected, no secrets or closely held proprietary information was revealed. The information is well known about the company by management and business observers.

I enjoyed the Institute. The carefully crafted well rehearsed scripts were well presented (other than for a few personal illustrations you would hear the same script regardless of the presenter). Though a good number of practices are common sense, others could readily be deemed as basic business teachings. It is good to be reminded of them.

I found the difference between corporate cultures in the room to be interesting. Most of the participants work and live within an authoritarian hierarchical command system whereas Disney’s culture is a collaborative consensus model which readily utilizes interdisciplinary teams to address issues and seek improvement.

Was it an unproductive experience? Far be it. Even for those who labor in a command structure there are numerous takeaways that can readily be utilized without radical changes in structure. Empowering employees, feedback loops for clients, stakeholders and employees to effect change, engagement processes, consensus building, using interdisciplinary teams to solve problems, freedom of lower levels to bring forth solutions and participate in problem can readily be utilized by any structure when leadership creates a culture that fosters such elements.

I can attest that an authoritarian command system can implement many of the Disney elements as over my professional life I have been fortunate to work in such an environment three times.

Democracy Is Not the Best Form of Government

2011-05-02T23:46:00.000-04:00

Michigan is a state that is in a grave fiscal condition. For decades decaying infrastructure of its cities, particularly the inner cities, has needed attention. In Detroit, Flint and other cities and towns, neighborhoods that in the 40s and 50s were vibrant had fallen into such repair that in the early 90s vacant buildings outnumbered occupied buildings. Rusting, aged and deserted industrial plants added to the blight. Today, there are areas of Detroit that have blocks upon blocks of vacant lots.

The result is not only vacant buildings, but dramatically decreased property values. With decreased property values and the weight of deserted industrial, apartment and housing properties have left local governments and school boards with less resources to provide services while costs for police, fire, schools, road repair and other services grew year after year.

In the last two months Michigan’s governor and state legislature passed a bill that allows the governor to appoint an administrative trustee of the governor’s choosing to oversee any school board and local government which is in debt. Accountable only to the governor the trustee has full authority to do whatever he or she desires, including the ability to end unilaterally labor contracts, cut services and close schools. The trustee has the ability to dismiss elected and unelected officials, and sell any local assets he/she deams of value, from local parks to schools to civic buildings. Further, the trustee who has no term limit, and he/she could be an individual or even a company.

The trustee can override zoning laws and business processes. As mentioned the trustee has freedom to sell off municipal parks to a company who wishes to build condos, resorts or golf-courses. That which was held for the common good could be sold an transformed into a private menber's club.

What I find most interesting is that the governor has created a system that functionally admits that democracy is an ineffective government system, particularly when it comes to tackling major problems. While he has not stated it that bluntly, the governor and the Michigan legislature have declared that what is taught in junior high and high school civics classes regarding the value and importance of democracy, and that it is the best form of government, is false. The governor and those who have agreed with him have indicated that when it comes to solving problems or expiditing matters, dictatorships is the best and most effective form of governing. It puts the governor and legislature in disagreement with the citizens of several Middle Eastern peoples who have risen up to cast out their dictators.

Iraq War Costs Coming Due

2011-05-01T19:20:00.001-04:00

Two or three years ago I blogged Iraq War and why the US should withdraw. While the invasion of Afghanistan was justified Iraq was not. To put forward their argument to the UN the Bush/Chaney administration sent Colin Powell, the person in the administration with the greatest credibility. Within weeks of the invasion it became clear that the Bush/Chaney administration intentionally misled America. To cover their folly and distract the nation from the crumbling rationale, in dramatic fashion Bush announced “mission accomplished”. Powell’s credibility and character were mere tools to be spent by people who lacked Powell’s depth of character and principles.

Over the subsequent months and years new rationale was put forward post invasion as pre-invasion rationale. Bush led a great nation into a war that is problematic on several levels. Besides being unjustified, the strategy and follow-up plans were highly questionable, and the war was not paid.

For any country to prosecute a war successfully, the entire nation must be involved in the sacrifice. War making must be a national activity, not only a military activity, that requires the nation to sacrifice not only its blood, but also its treasures. It is a folly not to demand the latter from the outset. It is the latter that helps hold the civil armchair political generals in check. What happened? Rather than paying for the war by demanding the sacrifice of the general public through increased taxes and the closing corporate loopholes, Bush/Chaney amplified the folly by cutting taxes and allowing American daily life to be lived as if there was no costs and thereby leaving the nation with a growing time bomb debt.

Costs do come due, costs that Bush/Chaney pushed the problem off to the next administration. Further compounding the problem their deregulatory actions enhanced the depth of the crisis by contributing to the housing bubble and the mortgage meltdown. Still further, contrary to his pontificating of being a “Uniter” and his campaign trail claims to work in a bi-partisans consensus building manner, the imperial Bush/Chaney administration worked in a highly dogmatic partisan manner which created today’s political environment that makes it problematic for the White House and Congress to achieve any bipartisan solution not only on the budget but most matters.

As more and more is revealed about the Bush/Chaney administration the more disgusted with their administration…and for acquiescing to his imperialism and imperial presidency, the Republican Congress, and the Republicans party. Some scholars are speculating that the Bush/Chaney administration may well go down as one of the worse two or three administrations in the last century, and be amongst the worst seven in American history. I am coming the conclusion that the administration not only bumbled its opportunities for greatness, to build a better nation and world, it also sowed the seeds for the problems that would will take the United States, and to a degree the world, a generation or two to overcome.

Religious People Are More Generous and Voluteer More

2011-04-22T19:20:00.000-04:00

Are religious people more involved in their communities and more generous than their non-religious neighbors? Every year when I read philanthropy reports I have asked myself that question. By using IRS data there have been reports for decades indicating that religious people have higher charitable deductions (about three times higher) than those who do not attend a house of worship There have been similar surveys regarding volunteer activity. For years I have wondered if giving and volunteer activity directly related to the person’s house of worship was subtracted if religious people are more engaged in philanthropic giving and volunteering?

Faith Matters has helped to us to understand the nature of difference. Their work shows that when direct religious activity is taken into account, religious people are more generous and more engaged in volunteer activities than their secular counterparts. Except for arts and cultural groups, religious people give at a higher rate and volunteer more hours even to secular organizations than their non-religious neighbors. What is clear that the difference is evidenced most clearly with services to the poor and elderly.

Eighty percent of Americans claim that they have contributed to a nonprofit in the prior year. When religion is take into account 94% of those who claim to be religious make such contributions compared to 70% of secular citizens.

What is not defined in the studies is whether faith itself creates the difference or if it is in some way tied to a collective cultural expectation and a vehicle for providing information and linking members with opportunities. While data indicates that those who attend a service almost every week are more generous than the occasional attendee, care must be given to view it as evidence that belief in Jesus Christ is what creates the difference. Care must be taken as those who attend a church service only two or three times a year, those who are not normally viewed as being committed believers, are more philanthropic and engaged in volunteering than their secular neighbors and are not that far behind their highly religious friends. Additionally those who are part of non-Christian faith communities also show a higher level of generosity and volunteering. Hence, one may tentatively conclude that there is a sociological dynamic within faith-based communities, not faith itself, are helping to create the differences.

While data from similar indicates that religious people are more generous and volunteer at a greater rate than non-religious people, the same data also indicates that non-religious people are significantly more tolerant on a host of civic issues from religious diversity to social issues to education than their religious neighbors. For the most part, the difference in this area is not surprising.

2011-04-12T21:17:00.000-04:00

On this day 150 years ago, Fort Sumter was fired upon by the South Carolina militia and the Confederate military. The first shot was the opening of the American Civil War and the exclamation point that the American genius for civil discourse and compromise was shattered.

While Americans with strong views point to the founding of their nation in rebellion as an indication that compromise is not being part of the heart of the national character, all that lead up to the Revolutionary War, during it and in the immediate years following it indicates that compromise and civil discourse rests at the heart of the national fabric. The founding of the nation was not simply a gathering of angry men in a town hall as some suggest and bumper stickers proclaim. The First Continental Congress was made of three representatives from each of the Thirteen Colonies, to press their complaints, to come up with a common plan and argument against the king and if possible achieve an equitable settlement, a compromise, with the crown.

For both the first and second Continental Congress, representatives were selected not for being passionate yet rational men. Some colonies selected representatives with the specific mandate not to force rebellion. The dialogue was passionate, at times heated and frustrating, but it was civil and above all it was designed to work towards common ground between them. Seeking common ground involved compromise. Even when war with the crown started, twice congressional representatives meet with representatives of the crown dispatched to help resolve the crisis. In each case the congressional representatives were empowered to dialogue and to seek compromise with the crown but in both cases quickly discovered that the other party was not empowered to compromise but to persuade the Americans to capitulate to the will of the crown.

When the government system was established, they designed a system to facilitate civil discourse and compromise. Three branches of government (Executive, Court and Legislative) were to be co-equal, not just as part of a check and balance process but as a compromise process. Congress was intentionally designed so that the Senate would have two representatives from each state regardless of the state’s population and the House seats would be allocated by population. The House was designed to allow states with the greatest populations to have stronger voices in the shaping of bills than those with smaller populations. The Senate was designed to allow the state with smallest populations to have equal voice and say as the state with the largest population. The House and the Senate process was designed to facilitate compromise, so that the powerful do not overwhelm the weakest.

The President is not to be an imperial presidency. It is to be provide global leadership, advocating for the national good of the citizenry, not advocating for one party over another, regionalism or corporate causes. Again, civil discourse and compromise for the national good is part of the design.

In the years following the Revolutionary War, the first amendments are results of compromising, balancing the needs and issues in one section of the country with those in another. Since the process of amending the Constitution is a compromise process while seeking a stronger collective good.

The Civil War is a prime example of what happens when civil discourse and compromise break down and are taken over by strongly held opinions, and those opinions are held with winner take all attitudes. None of us are poorer when we do not compromise and neglect to be engaged in civil discourse. Today, compromise and civil discourse, as well as national statesmen, are in short supply, and that is a national shame.

Pump Prices and Taxes

2011-04-10T20:49:00.000-04:00

Most of us are aware that Europeans paid three to four times more for gasoline than Americans or Canadians. Last year seeing the difference during last year’s visit to Italy reinforced that impression afresh. Like most I have assumed that the primary difference was that these countries relied exclusively, or almost exclusively upon costly imported oil whereas Americans and Canadians have a greater amount of their own national oil that was cheaper to recover and transport. Hence, the cheaper oil helps to bring down the overall price at the pump. I have also been aware that there may well be differences in taxes too.

Whenever we drive north of the boarder we are immediately cognizant of the difference in gasoline prices at the pump between the United States and Canada. The difference is remarkable given that both countries consume about the same amount of oil produced from national resources. As with the US, every region within the Canada has different prices that are influenced by competition, volume of sales and the costs of transporting gasoline from the refinery. Differences in state/provincial taxes are also a factor, and in the US so are local taxes also, a factor that further accentuates differences.

While the level of imported oil is a factor, taxation differences account for the differences between the US and Canada. According to the Tax Policy Center, if one eliminates tax differences, there is only a 5% price per gallon between the US and Canada, much of which can be accounted for by transportation and volume factors. On the federal level taxes, excise taxes are 110% higher in Canada than in the US (only Mexico has lower excise taxes than the US). Federal sales taxes are also 110% higher in Canada than in the US which has the lowest the lowest sales in the world (Canada, the second lowest).

Using August 2005 as a defining point, an American Petroleum Institute study indicates that US excise and federal sales taxes increased the gas coming out of the refinery by 29% (state and local would be on top) whereas in Canada the same taxes increased the gas by 58%. The same report indicates that the UK and Germany actually had a lower cost per gallon coming out the refinery but the pump costs were greater due to taxes. In the UK the two federal taxes increased the costs of a gallon coming out of the refinery by 179%, and in Germany, by 162%. In Australia the taxes increased the costs by 88.5% and in Japan, by 99%.

While Canada has about 10% of the population of the US and Canada, it has 20% of the miles of the number of miles of its larger neighbor. This means on a per capital basis, Canada’s highway system is about twice that of the US. This is not surprising given the number of small rural and remote communities scattered across such a vast country. In Canada gasoline taxes are higher due to the ratio between highway miles and population. Also in Canada there is an expectation that gas taxes cover a greater share of construction and maintenance costs and with less funding coming from general revenue. In the US, a higher level of general revenue goes into the highway system than occurs in Canada.

In the US, gasoline taxes do not come even close to covering road construction and maintenance costs. Over the last three decades general revenue has covered a growing share of such costs. For the most part taxes of have remained fixed, so much per gallon, even as construction and maintenance costs have increased. While the simple solution would be to increase taxes and modify the tax structure, pump prices are a politically sensitive issue. Any politician who advocates such changes puts his election prospects at risk. Even before the current anti-tax/cut taxes to the bone environment, changes were not likely to occur. Politicians have felt it was easier to draw the funds from general revenue and delay maintenance if it put the road system at risk.

Given a more extensive system on a per capita basis, snow removal factors, the harsher environment and standards to meet that harsher environment, and less general revenue allocated to roads, it is not surprising that gasoline taxes are higher in Canada.

If gasoline taxes in Canada and went to pay fully for the highway systems, the price at the pump would likely increase by 50 to 100%, and come within 25% of Europe pump prices where gasoline taxes cover the full cost of highway building and maintenance. It will be interesting to watch over the next five to eight years as to what will happen to the quality of the road system in the US and Canada in an age of slashing general revenue and budgets.

As a little footnote, for the Canadian reader….the 401 between Guelph and Oshawa is the busiest highway in the world.

Congress Has Different Rules. A Threat To Federal Funding of Faith-based Organizations

2011-04-08T20:21:00.003-04:00

The shutdown of the US federal government is just hours away. Posturing and finger pointing abound. What has come out is that while the government would shut down, and as essential workers and the military remain on duty without being paid, Congress will remain fully staffed and paid. What gives?

Not very congressional aid is an “essential worker” who is necessary to remain on the job. The congressional aids, the researchers, the secretaries and handlers are not essential to the protection of the public safety and national security as are the military, air traffic controllers, customs and border patrol, FBI agents, etc.

Why are congressional aids being furloughed without pay like the rest of the federal workforce? I believe that there is clue to the answer in what is happening with congressional payroll during a shutdown. While soldiers fight in battle without pay, while boarder guards and FBI will continue on duty buy not paid, Congress and their staff will continue to be paid. Congress likes to beat their chests that they are ordinary average Americans but how they rule tells a different story. Congress sees themselves as living by a different set of rules than average Americans. Their offices will remain fully staffed. Members of the Senate, the House and their staff will not have their paychecks interrupted.

I have also followed with interest the fight over the funding of Planned Parenthood. Republicans argue that taxpayers should not be funding abortions and therefore no federal funding of Planned Parenthood should occur. Democrats on the other hand that the Hyde Amendment prohibits taxpayer funding to fund abortions and requires that federal funds must be used for other services such as birth control and cancer screenings. Republicans counter that the funds get comingled, that by allocating funds to be used for those other services frees up general funds from other sources to be allocated abortion and thereby in a sense, regardless of the Hyde Amendment, taxpayers are paying for abortions. A large number of evangelical Christians and conservatives say amen to the Republican reasoning.

My purpose here is not to argue for or against federal funding of Planned Parenthood but rather to deal with the heart of the comingling argument. The old adage, be careful about what you wish for, is applicable here. Many of those who are using the above argument to not fund Planned Parenthood are supporters of taxpayer funds going to faith-based organizations to run feeding programs, shelters, after-school programs, at risk youth recreation programs, daycares, drug treatment programs, etc. Through various programs taxpayer funds flows to such faith-based programs. The organization is not allowed to use the funds to pay for religious activities, for furniture and utilities used in worship space. Accounting processes are well established to establish that taxpayer funds are not used for religious purposes. The Planned Parenthood comingling argument is equally applicable to taxpayer funding going to valued social programs run by faith-based organizations and churches.

Hence, those who are using the current rationale to argue against federal funding of Planned Parenthood by using the comingling and indestinguishing argument are using an argument for government funding in all forms, whether those funds be federal, state or local, going to social programs provided by faith-based organizations. The religious activity, space and salaries of religious officials are in the same budget, thereby comingled with taxpayer funds, and federal funds therefore only result in freeing up funds to be use for religious activities and salaries. The conservatives may win the Planned Parent battle but in the years to come government officials and courts will apply the same rationale to prohibit funding going to faith-based organizations.

A Shortcoming With the American Political Process

2011-04-04T21:30:00.003-04:00

With “exploratory committees” being formed by various Republicans, the next presidential political cycle has been underway for at least six months. Today President Obama official announced that he will be running for re-election.

While Obama is governing for the most part from the political center, over the coming year various Republicans will describe him, and thereby the center, as extreme. For the most part Obama is progressive/liberal, but he is not a progressive/liberal wingnut. Unlike he predecessor who was a dogmatic ideologue, Obama is as a pragmatist who is leading from the center to just left of center and is working to coalitions. Unlike his predecessor who was more of an imperialist president than the arrogant power flaunting imperialist Nixon, Obama’s presidency is in keeping with the traditional presidents who hold a traditional view of the Constitution and the Constitution’s definition of congressional powers.

While Obama is governing from the center it will be proclaimed by the Republican presidential candidates and leadership that he is an extremist liberal. Though he is no such thing, he will appear to be that way because the Republican party has moved so far to the right and are arguing against views that were held by Republican presidents Eisenhower and Regan. When there are two parties, and only two parties, one or both can move over time to the extreme. One of the greatest shortcomings of the American political system is that it lacks a good national third party. When there is a viable third party the other two parties have to remain towards the center.

Arguments Not to Use

2011-03-29T18:45:00.000-04:00

Yesterday I was looking at a Christian channel on the hotel’s cable selection. I cannot recall the name of the show but two men were talking about evangelizing the lost and drawing into the church those who do not believe in God with sound and compelling arguments. Both men were engaged in some disconcerting Christian apologetics.

The first line of reasoning runs this way…there is a God because the Bible tells us there is a God. The rationale is that in Scriptures God self validates His very existence. Furthermore, as the Bible is God’s Word, we can trust it, and because we can trust it and it tells us of God’s existence, God therefore exists. They claimed that all argument is over as A validates B and B validates A. While very common within the church, it is nothing less than circular reasoning….”A” exists because “B” tells us so, and “B” is reliable and true because “A” exists. In a court of law, one criminal of a crime can claim to be somewhere else and have the alibi validated by a second criminal when that second criminal is using the first to validate his alibi. What the two men fail to realize is that to the outsider this logical is shallow and makes little sense for if B is not reliable than A is not proved, and if A does not exist than regardless of what B says, it is not a reliable testimony.

Another argument that they encouraged their viewers to use when they encounter agnostics or atheists was the “play it safe argument”. Not only is this a laughable argument it is one that Scriptures invalidates. The argument is to encourage those being evangelized to live and believe as Christians just in case they are wrong. In other words, just in case, con God and others into thinking you are truly a Christian. While there are other flaws, the two primary ones are the nature of belief and the basis of divine judgment as per Scripture. Belief is a deeply held conviction that is evidenced in how one lives, not in a collection of behaviors. This approach positions faith as a collection of behaviors, not a heartfelt firm belief. Lastly is troublingly flaw found within Scriptures, God judges the heart, not the actions. In other words, one can go through the right motions and behaviors and be judged harshly, unworthy and cast out. God by moving beyond the superficial to examine the motives, the heart if you will, cannot be conned. Furthermore, living the life without the correct heart orientation not only has little value but may expose one to a harsher judgment. Yet these two evangelists, these ministers of the Gospel were encouraging people to come to church as a means to con God…a means to fill the church with people thinking that they have an eternal “just in case” insurance that at the end turns out to be worthless. Ah but in the meantime there will be more people in the pews and adding to the church coffers which is nothing less than a modern version of the middle ages indulgence system that led to the Reformation.

Nuclear Energy

2011-03-22T21:19:00.000-04:00

Following Three Mile Island in 1979 no new nuclear power station has started anywhere in North America. Chernobyl 1986 killed public interest in much of Europe for more than a decade. New plants have come on line and are being built in many European countries. In the last decade there has been a growing move to building more nuclear plants in the United States and in Canada, but the nuclear crisis in Japan is adding more doubts. The German ordered all nuclear plants closed, a typical overreaction that will result the in the plants being quietly restarted over the coming months after a “review”.

We need a diverse array of energy production plants ranging from hydro to coal to wind to solar to thermal. Nuclear also needs to be in the mix too, but it must be done smartly with lessons taken from the failures of the first generation plants. No form of power generation is free of issues. Solar and wind supplement but due to their nature, they are not reliable to provide 24/7 power. Coal, while abundant, adds pollutants to the air and water system. Oil and natural gas while cleaner than coal are sources that are running out and for which we must drill in more risky and sensitive environments. Transportation is also an issue with oil, and somewhat with natural gas too. As for hydro, there are few rivers left where dams can be built and even then the result is the flooding an horrendous swaths of land for form the necessary reservoir lakes behind the dams. Thermal, we just do not have enough sites to construct sufficient plants.

Nuclear has its significant issues too, but it must be in the mix. Our vehicles, trains, aircrafts, buildings, roads, bridges, etc. are far superior and safer than they were four to seven decades ago. As with any mechanism, we learn from past failures and correct them.

Any new plants built today would be third generation plants. Safety of a plant is directly related to its capacity to cool the rods under any circumstances, and for having redundant systems in case the first, second or even the third system fails. The third generation plants, with a greater array of redundant back-up cooling systems, are far safer than the first generation plants. These new generation plants have also designed into them more natural cooling systems and features not available 30 and 40 years ago when the first plants were designed.

No doubt the lessons learned from Japan will be incorporated into the fourth generation plants that are currently on the drawing boards. These new systems must be prepared to handle not one major event, but to make events at the same time.

Also, consideration should be given to having smaller reactors, reactors that are more readily cooled via the natural environment rather than larger units with their large bundles that require constant flow of water to cool them adequately.

We must not just look to the third and fourth generation systems, but existing systems must also be upgraded. There are other redundant systems that can be added, and must be added as quickly as is possible, and if not, close down the outdated plants.

No matter how we may feel about one energy form or the other, our society requires huge volumes of energy that can only be met by a diverse cadre of systems, including nuclear.

NRA Distorts History

2011-03-19T16:43:00.000-04:00

In the United States, 4 out of 5 support background checks to be conducted in order to purchase a gun. The same number support limiting the sale of assault weapons. About 4 out of 5 Americans agree that gun registration is a reasonable law…and more surprisingly 3 out of 5 NRA members also agree. Amazingly, 7 out of 10 gun owners who are also NRA members agree with a) background checks should be required, and b) there should be at least a two day wait period between purchase and receiving the gun. Yet, politicians are not only slow to support such laws, but most are against such laws.

Watch this video Wayne LaPierre, the Executive Vice-Present of the NRA to understand one of the root causes why the United States lacks sensible gun control laws ranging from background checks to wait periods, from the size of clips to the type of guns, from secure storage to carrying guns.

Mr. LaPierre’s claim that he who has the gun has the power is a fundamental principle that existed from the beginning of the country is blatantly false. Over the last year, I have been reading works by the founding fathers and the Continental Congress that brought forth the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. The Revolutionary War was not what the founding fathers sought. Their letters to each other speak passionately against king, taxation and English abuses, but they sought a positive non-violent founding. Even after the war started they were looking for a non-violent separation. The war became inevitable. They were willing to fight for the freedom and progressively increased the size of the Continental Army only because the King kept increasing the size of his military.

If he who has the gun has the power was such driving concept, they why was it not included in the original constitution and found as a significant thread in the writings of the founding fathers. It is lacking as the founding fathers did not believe that he who has the gun should have control of either national, state or local governments. Their reluctance to maintain an army of any size was that exact fear, that he who will have the gun will have the control.

Instead the founders had the confidence the power of ideas, not the gun. They modeled and wrote at length about civil discourse. They worked for and wrote at length about the value of listening and compromising for the corporate good. Recognizing that the frontier and an agrarian society expanding into wilderness were fraught with various dangers, the second amendment was added. The amendment affirms the formation of local militias to protect their communities and counties, and affirms that militia (today’s National Guard) could keep their own guns at home. The militia was the means by which the country could maintain a limited sized military.

As long as men like LaPierre in their well practiced righteous anger misrepresent the nation’s history, distort gun control proposals and violent crime statistics, civil discourse with the NRA will be an uphill battle. In modern American politics, control does not rest with he who has the gun but with he who has the deepest pockets and is willing to directly and indirectly contribute to friendly politicians and use attack ads (including funding front groups) to insensately malign unfriendly politicians. The gun lobby and its NRA face are powerful because they have deep pockets and while sounding righteous, are happy to distort history and facts to misinform and defeat efforts at any controls, even laws that help prevent violence and keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

The Crisis in Japan

2011-03-19T11:50:00.000-04:00

It has been a week since the Japanese were hit by a triple disaster, a powerful earthquake, an earthquake triggered tsunami that destroyed large swaths of the northeastern coast and a tsunami triggered nuclear crisis.

There is some frustration and anger, but the level of social and civil disintegration that we saw with Katrina, particularly in New Orleans, is lacking. I understand that both at home and at school the importance of putting the community and one’s neighbor above self is instilled. As a result in these disasters the underlying national character of the Japanese is clearly evident, enduring the unimaginable with grace and dignity, quietly working together to assist both friends and strangers, and in moments of crisis being mindful to follow instructions in an orderly manner.

We can learn from their example.

Failure of Maryland's Same-sex Marriage Legislation

2011-03-15T21:15:00.000-04:00

For the three weeks a same-sex marriage bill moved the Maryland legislative process. When it passed the more conservative Maryland Senate many observers expected it to pass by at least eight votes in the House of Delegates. A week ago the bill faltered and last Friday it was functionally killed when it was deferred back to a House of Delegate committee where it will die in a matter of weeks when the current session expires. It was a significant defeat for advocates who hoped Maryland would become the sixth state plus the District of Columbia to approve of same-sex marriage.

Generational replacement, the passing away of the older generation and being replaced by the younger, has brought about a shift in support of same-sex marriage. In the late 90s years ago over 62% of Americans were opposed to same-sex marriage, but with the passing away of the WWII and post WWII generation being replaced by the Gen Ys a shift is occurring. Only a small minority of Gen Ys are opposed to same-sex marriage and even fewer are against laws that protect sexual orientation as a discrimination class. Even baby-boomers have shifted their views in the last fifteen years, going from 70% against to 55% against. Hence, today, a slight majority of adult Americans, and an even greater majority of citizens of Maryland, support same-sex marriage legislation. Generation replacement will rapidly broaden that gap over the next two presidential election cycles.

The failure of the same-sex legislation is a sign that a highly visible and powerful unconvinced minority retain the upper hand in Maryland. Evidence indicates that claims by evangelical Christians that Christians have little political power is a false claim. Though the number of those who regularly attend church services is in the minority, it is easily argued that the church wields far greater political power today than ever. And most of that political power rests in the hands of the overwhelmingly fundamentalist and evangelic church who were joined in this fight by the overwhelmingly African American Church and the Catholic Church, all of whom hold that any marriage not between a man and woman is an anathema.

This well organized religious coalition targeted a dozen or so Delegates saying that if they voted for this legislation, that regardless of their record on other issues, their churches would work to defeat their reelection bids. The coalition was so persuasive that one of the sponsors of the legislation who has long argued that same-sex marriage is about civil rights, and that gay couples do not devalue hers or any other heterosexual marriage announced that she would be voting against her own bill.

We should not fool ourselves in thinking that legislators are highly principled people who take noble stands on issues, stick to them, even if it puts their reelection at risk. Before we fault them for being willing to posture themselves for the next election, it has always been and will remain thus in a democracy because that is what we ask the electorate expect.

Partly due to generation replacement and partly due to the younger baby-boomers rethinking their views and becoming increasingly turned off by the evangelical church, the trend is for a growing number of voters supporting same-sex marriage. While the majority of the electorate will support such legislation, the power of the church as evidenced in these last weeks in Maryland will make it problematic for such legislation to be successful in other states.

While such power may provide comfort for evangelicals, it may be a false comfort in the longer term. Religious surveys by the Pew Research Center and Faith Matters indicate that demographic change, changes in religious activity as well as generational disenfranchisement from the church and the reason why they are disenfranchised, indicate that the evangelical church is on the verge of a significant decline.

A Dearth of Modest Housing Stock

2011-03-12T20:05:00.002-05:00

This evening as Evie and I returned from Tyson’s Corner we drove through an older neighborhood with modest homes (pre-1980 era). Here and there were large tracts with more recently built homes (built in the last 15 or so years). These more recent homes are either large homes equal to or larger than the Beverly Hillbilly mansion, or are luxury townhomes. It struck me that few, if any, modest 2,200 to 3,300 square foot homes are being built in our area, and that is a shame.

It is a shame as the modest and starter home housing stock is limited. These are the homes that should make up the core of the housing stock. These are the homes young families use to establish themselves. These should be the affordable homes for the blue-collar workers, the retail clerks, the secretaries, the bus drivers, etc. Unfortunately, due to a short supply even these modest homes are not moderately priced. Hence, those with moderate household incomes either have to buy homes further out on the city’s edge, and thereby increase commute volume and as such increase stress upon road infrastructure, or pay for higher prices and thereby put their household finances at risk, or remain renters.

Affordable housing is an issue. The lack of modest housing stock lays the foundation for the supper heated housing market many of our major markets experienced between 1998 and 2008, and which was a significant contributing factor behind the bank failures. A growing stock of modest housing stock throughout the area will allow those with modest incomes to live closer to their place of employment which in turn would help decrease the volume stress we experience during the morning and afternoon commutes.

While I could blame the developers, I cannot unduly fault them and shoulder them with most of the blame. Developers are like other business owners; They are out to make as much money as possible in as short a time as possible. There is greater profit in high end housing. I fault the local, state and even federal politicians for not designing in tax incentives and enticements to encourage developers to build modest homes. One is to have larger lot expectations and possibly a higher sales taxes on new homes greater than so many square feet and/or a certain percent above the median value in the area. On the other end, lower sales and lot taxes on modest homes could provide incentives to build such homes. In other words, design in elements to increase the profit margin for building modest homes while decreasing the drive to build the larger homes.

We need far more new modest homes that have basic fictures, lack the high end bells and whistles and have unfinished basements that owners can finish later. Such homes should be on lots that allows from the owner to expand the footprint some but not large enough of a lot that would allow the home to evolve to double its initial footprint. Modest housing stock forms the bedrock of a community’s stability and as attested by the Northern Virginia area, when the building of such housing in sufficient volume is neglected the stress upon the overall infrastructure only grows…and that is a shame.

What say you about your area?

Religion and Racism

2011-03-09T18:58:00.002-05:00

In 1973 when the Supreme Court outlawed laws against interracial marriages, the General Social Survey of white Americans showed that 26% of Catholics and 26% of “nones” (those who had no religious affiliation) supported such laws. According to the Survey 39% of Mainline Protestants supported laws against interracial marriages whereas 48% of Evangelicals took such a position. In other words, in 1973 the religious tradition in which I was raised and educated, to my shame, had a strong racist edge to it. Given the underlying values and what was taught within Evangelical churches, that religious stream should have been the least racist instead of having the highest level.

Fortunately since 1973 there has been a change and a convergence. In 2004, only 5% Evangelical Protestants hold such laws are appropriate which is similar to the views of Mainline Protestants (3%), Catholics (2%) and “nones” (2%). No longer does the nature and level of one’s religiosity seem to impact the level of racism.

Though this is a positive change, tinges of more subtle racism occurs. In 1973 only 34% of whites reported favoring outlawing discrimination in home sales (i.e. whites refusing to sell to non-whites or home associations prohibiting to allow non-whites to buy a home in their association). In 2008 while that had risen to 69%, it means that 31% of whites feel that it is legitimate to prohibit non-whites into their neighborhood.

In 1977, 25% of white Americans stated that the reason African Americans had worse jobs, lower income and poorer homes what because they have “less in-born ability to learn.” Today that 25% has dwindled to 9%...which means that nearly 1 out of 10 American whites believe African Americans are inferior.

While racism is diminishing, unfortunately it is not a thing of the past. It remains but with a more subtle face.

Is A Tipping Point At Hand?

2011-03-07T07:16:00.001-05:00

In these past weeks the State of Maryland has been moving closer to passing a bill to permit gay marriage. While some Democrats are opposed, the majority of the opposition is coming from Republicans and the right wing of the Christian church. The Republicans are stanchly set against gay marriage with three out of four Republicans against gay marriage and gay rights in general. This is not surprising given that the heart of their base is made up of fundamentalist and evangelical Christians. Hence, the party has pushed for the establishment of and passed the “Defense of Marriage Act.” Only a token few Republicans on Capitol Hill supported the repeal of the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Being against gay marriage was also a "winning issue" for Republicans. In 1996 27% of American voters were supportive of same-sex marriage and it seemed that gay marriage would not occur for more than fifty years. But any observer looking at demographics trending could readily foresee that gay marriage would be supported by the majority of Americans sometime around 2019-2023. Back then over 85% of those over 60 years of age opposed gay marriage whereas 75% of those under of 25 years of age were supportive of same-sex marriage. Those who were in their 40s and 50s were against it, but only by about ten points. What was evident was that as the oldest cohort of voters passed way and were replaced by a younger cohort, a rapid shift was only be a matter of time and those who supported it would occur sometime around 2020.
By 2009 support had grown to 37%. This 10% increase was primarily due to passing of older cohorts who are against it and being replaced by a younger generation. The results two years still pointed that the 50-50 point would be reached around the end of this decade.

A week ago the Pew Research Center released survey results that indicate that the opinions are undergoing a more rapid change and that the 50-50 point could happen by 2014. The latest survey indicates that 46% of voters are supportive of gay marriage. Going from 37 to 46% is a dramatic shift over a two year period. It indicates that the debates in the public square are causing those in their mid 40s to early 60s to re-evaluate their opinions. More and more middle aged Americans are coming to the conclusion that they do not agree with the rationale put forth from those who are most vigorous in their opposition to gay marriage. An increasing number of people are concluding that gay marriage will not and does not diminish hetero-sexual marriage any more than interracial marriages (same arguments on interracial marriages were used in the 50s and 60s to defend interracial marriage prohibitions).

With the tipping point rapidly approaching it will be only a matter of four to five years after that that states legislatures will come under growing pressure to change their laws. Once the tipping point is reached it will quickly rise to the 60% marck. No longer will anti-gay marriage support be a "winning issue" for Republicans. The rapid approach of the tipping point also indicates that any other group that relies upon the public’s good will for its strength and who is strongly opposed to gay marriage will find themselves part of diminishing minority and with fewer supporters to their party or cause.

American Civil War and States Rights

2011-03-06T18:30:00.005-05:00

This year marks the 150th Anniversary of the commencement of the American Civil War (April 11), a war that on numerous levels transformed the United States. These transformations ranged from hundreds of technological advances to military strategy to the elimination of slavery to how the nation would think of itself both internally and internationally.

Why did the Southern States secede? One of the most commonly reason given is that the South seceded over a fight for state’s rights against an overbearing central National government. Over 55 to 70% of respondents today give this as the primary cause with slavery representing about 20 to 25% and the election of Lincoln receiving a slither of responses, 2 to 5%. Some surveys have 10 to 20% of respondents stating the cause was tariffs and taxes.

Was state’s rights the primary issue? Shortly following the Civil War, a growing number of the surviving Confederate civic, corporate and military leaders articulated states rights was the root cause. As the number of leaders articulating that states rights as the reason, it was not long before the general population of the southern states to state the same, and then by the middle of the 20th century a growing number in the northern and western states listing states rights as the dominant cause.

Do the South’s pre-Civil War newspaper reports, letters from leadership and the secession documents speak of state’s right? If this was the primary cause, not slavery, then we would find state’s rights repeatedly articulated in the South’s documents and newspaper reports before and during the Civil War. There is not a hint of state’s rights in South Carolina’s “Ordnance of Secession” or in the passionate rhetoric filling the Palmetto State’s newspapers. Instead they speak of the right to own and trade African Americans. Mimicking the Revolutionary call “give me liberty or give me death,” the cry of the South Carolinian leaders was “Give us slavery or give us death.”

South Carolina’s complaint was that their northern neighbors have “deliberately refused, for years past, to fulfill their constitutional obligations, and we refer to their own Statutes for the proof” and to “an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery.” What SC were referring to was northern states banning slavery from their soil, allowing slaves to marry and in some cases granting them citizenship and the right to vote in local elections. If anything, with northern states exercising rights to ban slavery, South Carolina was against their northern neighbors exercising states rights and their anger that the national government was not repressing the actions of the north, including prohibiting the formation and meeting of anti-slavery associations.

Mississippi’s and Georgia's Secession documents and newspapers speak of slavery, not state’s right. State after state in the Confederacy echo South Carolina’s documents, letters and newspapers. States right is not found as a triggering cause. Slavery was the primary cause and the election of Lincoln, a man who openly and strongly argued against slavery, was the last straw and the end of a process that started in the 1830s with South Carolina’s nullification crisis that President Jackson put down.

What has occurred is that after the Civil War those who know that they seceded over slavery restating their rationale with a falsehood, and the general population of succeeding generations has accepted a falsehood as truth.

Societal Trends

2011-02-13T13:33:00.005-05:00

Societal trends over two to four decades can be telling in helping one to understand significant shifts that are taking place. Since 1980 the average personal income in the United States has increased from $24,079 to $40,454, adjusted for inflation. How does that 168% increase compare to other major expenses.

Average gasoline prices have increased from $1.25 to 2.85, at 228% in real dollar terms. While the number of miles driven a year have increased by about 22%, with more efficient engines the amount spend on gasoline when inflation is taken into account has increased only 12%, from $2,015 to 2,269.

First class stamp has increased 193% from 0.15 to 0.44, This increase does not take into account inflation.

Milk has increased from $2.16 per gallon to 3.29, a 52% increase.

The cost of the average new home has risen from $76,400 to $268,800, 251% in real dollar terms. Primarily due to more expensive land, much larger and more well appointed homes, the increase is new home prices has been a greater rate than income increase. When inflation is taken into account, the increase drops below 160%.

Over the last thirty years the amount spent on health care on a per capita basis, and adjusted for inflation, has increased 202%, again at a much higher rate than income. Health care is consuming more and more a person’s budget from 1980 when it consumed about 7.5% of the average person’s income. Today health care consumes almost 14% of a person’s income…and with more than three times the rate of people who uninsured than ever before. An aging population is a factor but it and lawsuits are not as significant a factor as the citizenry believes. The major factor is a growing profit return at all levels.

Suppliers of equipment and medicine profit share on a per dollar of sale prices has increased dramatically. In 1980 most major health care insurance plans and hospitals were run by nonprofits companies who had 3.5 to 5.5% rate of return whereas today the insurance and hospital market is dominated by profit firms who have pushed the rate of return to 18 to 20%. In 1980, 95% of insurance premiums went out to providers whereas today that has dropped to 82 to 80%. This does not take into account that for profit hospitals are retaining a greater share of each payment they receive. Further it does not account for fewer benefits being provided and with co-pays that are rising three to fivefold. Matters are not expected to improve for the better as companies seek to increase the rate of return to 78%.

Healthcare is and will continue to be one of America's greatest challenges, and will become even more so over the coming years. Significant changes are not likely to happen until the system starts to crash. Hopefully it will not take the type of protests and marches that took place during the Viet Nam error or at the level we have just witnessed in Egypt.

America's Commitment to Democracy is Tested

2011-02-12T18:52:00.002-05:00

With what has been taking place in Egypt we are seeing played out in the White House and in Congress the depth and nature of the United States’ commitment to democracy and the citizenry choice of government. Politicians of both parties and citizens of the United States repeated proclaim that democracy is one of its core values, yet cracks have appeared in the nature and depth of that commitment when an American friendly despot is being openly challenged by his citizens.

Some have criticized President Obama and his administration from giving mixed signals to Egypt in the first day or two the protests started. One can understand some mixed signals while information is being evaluated. In those early hours we heard statements supporting the citizenry to peacefully express their opinions, for the Egyptian leadership to listen to those voices and not respond with violence. As the days passed the public statements by the Obama administration clearly signaled that the Egyptian despotic government had lost credibility.

There were too many political voices who have insist that the United States government should have stood behind Mubarak as Mubarak had been a good friend. Those voices still continue to insist that it was better for the USA to support a tyrannical regime that is friendly to the USA than risk the people establishing, even via a democratic process, a government that is less friendly or even hostile to America. When it is all boiled down to the essence, those voices, regardless of pontifications otherwise, are stating the democracy, an empowered citizenry, and personal freedom are not the dominant principles as they hold them to be.

Junk Mail...Does It Ever End?

2011-02-07T20:33:00.004-05:00

Junk mail, junk mail, and more junk mail. I can take it in my mail box for once I walk in the door I can readily sort through the mail and immediately toss it into the garbage. My email box is another matter where to my frustration it clutters and multiplies.

While the junk mail keeps coming to my street address, the volume is limited by the costs which run about $0.18 to 0.23 per item, excluding production and name costs. Costs are not the same limiting factor with emails addresses as once the name is purchased for a two to four cents per address, the cost to send emails when done in bulk with millions of addresses becomes less than a penney. Hence the volume of email junk mail keeps building and building.

I have tried to avoid getting on email junk mail lists but it is not possible. I know it will keep coming. All it takes is for one or two product registrations and subscriptions to sell the address to a broker and it multiplies. It took me some time but I finally concluded that I needed to create one or two email addresses to use for product registrations. Now I have two "dummy" addresses that can get cluttered to my hearts.

Check the Details or Rue the Results

2011-01-09T19:45:00.004-05:00

We have all been victimized by not double checking our work, but when it is going into print for wide public circulation it is even more important. Check the details and spelling or you may end up with unfortunate result.

One of the classics in the development field was a southern California advertisement campaign for a religious organization that was launched in print, in direct mail letters and on television. Some one forgot to double check the phone number. When people called the number it went to a sex line. Two numbers got reversed.

Below is another recent advertisement. One letter difference significantly changes the meaning...or maybe it was a Freudian slip.

Why Are People Celebrating Women Outnumber Men at High Council As Progress?

2010-12-18T10:03:00.005-05:00

I am somewhat perplexed by a host of Salvation Army blogs and other blogs by Salvationists that are making a big deal out of the upcoming High Council having more female representatives than male. They make it sound like this is a sign of great progress.

What gives? When did we stop thinking? Has our bloviating shut down our ability to reason? When did we settle for a shadow of the real thing?

Last decade, once the General elevated the spouses of TCs to the rank of the spouse, every High Council going forward was bound to have females equaling or outnumbering males. It is a demographic reality. Rarely are male TCs single, and even then, their wives are deceased. Single female TCs or IHQ department heads are a much more common occurrence than single male TCs. Hence, it takes only one female as a TC or IHQ department head to bring about females outnumbering males at a High Council.

A big measure of progress on female equality about which to crow would be either a) one of the married female High Council attendees being elected General rather than the husband, or b) that a female married officer is appointed to be a TC rather than the husband.

For well over century, theoretically both "a" and "b" have been possible but neither has happened, and it is not likely to occur in the foreseeable future. How many Salvationists truly believe that one of the married women at the High Council will be nominated ahead of her husband? How sad it is that none of us envision that happening. Does this mean that we do not have highly gifted females who are married to men who may have skills and talents, but less so than the wife?

I do not take such a dim view of our female officers. As Catherine Booth noted, it is not due to lack of nature on the female's part, but a lack of nurture and opportunity that married female officers are not in a position for either "a" or "b" to happen. Once either "a" and "b" happening more often we then will have something to celebrate.

Even before the wide spread of the suffrage movement the Army had female leaders. We had a great start and were well ahead of the crowd, but now where are we? It is unfortunate the western world has long passed us with regard to female leadership and equality so much so that we brag about females outnumbering males at the High Council.

Sigh!

We Have Been Victimized Again By a Great Fraud

2010-10-07T21:21:00.004-04:00

What a laugh. I guess Evie and I will need to think twice about planning a trip to Greece. We are all victims of a great fraud. This was the precursor to the global warming conspiracy and fraud.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/historians-admit-to-inventing-ancient-greeks,18209/

Preflight Presentation

2010-10-02T21:48:00.003-04:00

Monday at 6:30 AM I fly to Cleveland for some meetings, including dinner in at the Football Hall of Fame in Canton. I return home late Tuesday night. On both flights it is unlikely that I will be watching the preflight safety presentation as I have heard it so often.

On the other hand, if the presentation is like the one below, I may well watch for the entertainment value.

Neat Little App

2010-09-18T09:45:00.002-04:00

Two weeks ago I bought an iPad. One of the free apps I downloaded is a handwriting app that allows me to write on the screen using my fingure, save the note and even email the note to myself or another. By using the different font colors I can even have a crude filing system by nature of subject. What a neat way to take a quick note at the meeting, out on the road or wherever and then email it out.

The following was a practice effort that I did a few days ago on the number of electric sites in state parks...they are relatively too few to the overall total. I emailed out the note to see how it would look. I is sent in a photo format. It is a neat little app.

Email Received

2010-09-09T20:37:00.003-04:00

The following is an email we received. It reflects the attitude of a large number of fundamentalists and the more conservative evangelicals…a group that makes up a large component of the Tea Party movement.

The spirit behind the email boldly reflections what is termed as “American exceptionalism”….that America is the most enlightened country in the world, that it was created by God, whatever America does is right and the best, and its mission is to bring American democracy Republican democracy to the world. It also means that Americans cannot learn from other countries. as such cannot learn anything from other countries.

Though the content of email is posted as received, the font size was more than three times what follows.

WOULDN'T IT BE GREAT TO TURN ON THE TV AND HEAR ANY U.S. PRESIDENT, DEMOCRAT REPUBLICAN,

OR WHATEVER, GIVE THE FOLLOWING SPEECH?

'My Fellow Americans: As you all know, the defeat of the Iraq & Afghanistan regime has been completed.

Since Congress does not want to spend any more money on this war, our mission in Iraq & Afghanistan is complete.

This morning I gave the order for a complete removal of all American forces from Iraq & Afghanistan. This action will be complete within 30 days.. It is now time to begin the reckoning.

Before me, I have two lists. One list contains the

names of countries which have stood by our side during this conflict This list is short .. The United Kingdom , Spain , Bulgaria , Australia , and Poland are some of the countries listed there.

The other list contains every one not on the first list. Most of the world's nations are on that list. My press secretary will be distributing copies of both lists later this evening.

Let me start by saying that effective immediately, foreign aid to those nations on List 2 ceases indefinitely. The money saved during the first year alone will pretty much pay for the costs of the Iraqi war. THEN EVERY YEAR THEREAFTER It'll GO TO OUR SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM SO IT WONT GO BROKE IN 20 YEARS.

The American people are no longer going to pour money into third world Hell holes and watch those government leaders grow fat on corruption.

Need help with a famine ? Wrestling with an epidemic? Call France ..

In the future, together with Congress, I will work to redirect this money toward solving the vexing social problems we still have at home. On that note, a word to terrorist organizations: Screw with us and we will hunt you down and eliminate you and all your friends from the face of the earth.

Thirsting for a gutsy country to terrorize? Try France or maybe China .

I am ordering the immediate severing of diplomatic relations with France , and Russia . Thanks for all your help, comrades. We are retiring from NATO as well.

I have instructed the Mayor of New York City to begin

towing the many UN diplomatic vehicles located in Manhattan with more than two unpaid parking tickets to sites where those vehicles will be stripped, shredded and crushed. I don't care about whatever treaty pertains to this. You creeps have tens of thousands of unpaid tickets. Pay those tickets tomorrow or watch your precious Benzes, Beamers and limos be turned over to some of the finest chop shops in the world. I love New York.

A special note to our neighbors: Canada is on List 2. Since we are likely to be seeing a lot more of each other, you folks might want to try not pissing us off for a change.

Mexico is also on List 2. Its

president and his entire corrupt government really need an attitude adjustment. I will have a couple thousand extra tanks and infantry divisions sitting around. Guess where I am going to put 'em? Yep, border security.

Oh, by the way, the United States is abrogating the NAFTA treaty - starting now.

We are tired of the one-way highway. Immediately, we'll be drilling for oil in Alaska -which will take care of this country's oil needs for decades to come. If you're an environmentalist who opposes this decision, I refer you to List 2 above: pick a country and move there.

It is time for America to focus on its own welfare and its own citizens.. Some will accuse us of isolationism. I answer them by saying, 'darn tootin.'

Nearly a century of trying to help folks live a decent life around the world has only earned us the undying enmity of just about everyone on the planet It is time to eliminate hunger in America . It is time to eliminate homelessness in America . To the nations on List 1, a final thought. Thank you guys. We owe you and we won't forget.

To the nations on List 2, a final thought : You might want to learn to

speak Arabic.

God bless America .. Thank you and good night.'

If you can read this in English, thank a soldier.

(Please forward this to at least ten friends and see what happens! Let's get this to every USA computer!)

Toronto Pictures

2010-08-27T20:28:00.008-04:00

Following are a few pictures from Evie and my trip to Toronto a week ago. The first picture is made up of three pictures.

Surprise Delivered

2010-08-21T21:15:00.001-04:00

This weekend, to the surprise of my parents, Evie and I have been in Toronto. They did not know we were going to be in town until they arrived for dinner at the Royal York's Epic Restaurant.

The surprise started in May when we received a letter from Sue, Ron Sears’ wife, informing us of a surprise birthday for Ron who was turning 70 this weekend. With Dad’s birthday being one day removed from his baby brother we decided to do something for Dad. The last time I was able to do anything special for my father’s birthday was in 1984 when I took him to a Blue Jay game. Since then we have not been around for his birthday. Attending Ron’s party and surprising dad seemed to be a great idea.

Cathy hosts each year after Christmas a family reunion. The last one we attended was in December 1999 when my position allowed me to be away between Christmas and New Years. With Evie having a job where she cannot take a day off between Christmas and New Year, and with my office having to be staffed from December 26 through New Years, I not able to get away for more than a day. Henbce we cannot attend the reunion.

With sufficient notice and the date is free of other events, attending summer events are possible. This past May’s event was not possible as it fell on the weekend Josh was flying to Texas and the weekend of Jonathan’s engagement party. This particular weekend was free of all conflicts and we would not have to be concerned about snow across the Penn Turnpike or along the shore of Lake Erie as we do in winter.

Evie and I offered to pay for Mom and Dad to stay Friday night at a hotel in Toronto so as to allow them to travel from up from London the Friday before Ron’s birthday instead of traveling both ways on the same day. We booked them into the Royal York, the grand dame of Toronto’s high end hotels, and where the Queen stays when she is in town. We also told them that we had arranged for them to have dinner at Epic, a classy restaurant in the hotel.

We withheld from them that we planned to be there too. I explained to a Royal York official what I was doing and why, that it was a surprise for my parents and that they would not know that we were there until dinner. The hotel not only assigned them to a room on the 15th floor, one of the premium floors with its own elevator, and a room with a lake view, but they also sent them a fruit and cheese basket. The staff of the Royal York was wonderful.

Evie and I took Friday as a personal day. We left Washington at 3:30 Thursday and traveled party way that night. We arrived at the Royal York early Friday afternoon, just an hour or so before Dad and Mom, and made sure their room was on our card. For us, the rest of the afternoon was spent touring the waterfront. We learned later that when Dad and Mom arrived they spent time walking around the area where Dad spent about 40 years of his professional life. Apparently on the way into town they went looking for the homes where Mom lived, and they took a picture of the home in which she was born. I think it was great for them to reconnect and recall their past.

For Evie and I it was a gratifying surprise to deliver. We shared a lovely quiet dinner with Mom and Day. We enjoyed a wonderful breakfast together before heading to Cheryl’s home for Ron’s surprise party. It was also great to see my uncle and aunt Eva, and a host of cousins. Between Saturday and the trip in July I have been able to visit with each of my siblings.

As I write this it is Saturday night and Evie and I are in North East PA. In the morning we will to travel home and hope to get to Maryland before the heavy home bound traffic coming out of the mountains of Maryland. No doubt by the time we get home we will be an exhausted from the long and quick trip, but it will be a satisfying exhaustion.

Public Education Is Not A Republican Priority

2010-08-11T04:46:00.004-04:00

Falling housing prices, lower tax revenues are forcing state, local governments and school boards to cut expenses. Towns are turning off the neighborhood street lights, closing pools, playgrounds, parks, and libraries, limiting the distance a police car can drive in a day or sit idling. Fire stations are being closed, or rotating fire department station closing from day to day which Philadelphia is doing (three different stations in the day and three in the evening). Roads badly needing repaving are not only not being repaved, but towns and counties are taking the cheaper option of removing the asphalt and turning the road back into a low cost maintenance gravel road.

With schools across the country opening this month, 116,000+ teachers who were in the classroom last year have been told that their positions were eliminated as if there were not funding. Today the Democrats House of Representatives with the support of a handful of Republicans passed a bill which the President signed three hours later to save teachers jobs.

The same bill provides four months of Medicaid expenses for medical expenses of those who are low-income and the unemployed. States would be funding Medicaid without federal funding but in the process states would be laying off tens of thousands of fire fighters and police officers. The funding allows States to provide medical care without laying-off public safety personnel.

It would seem that the bill would have strong Republican support. Instead the Republican leadership said keeping teachers employed was a waste of money. One Republican leader pontificated that schools, local and state governments have been blotted for decades and it is time to downsize them all and thereby once again demonstrating that the Republican championing that they are compassionate conservatives is disingenuous and empty marketing. The Republicans politicians and their dominant deep pocket contributors are more than happy to substantially increase public school class sizes while sending their own children to private schools. For a party that boasts to be the party of Lincoln, this position is a far cry from where Lincoln stood on education...though he was self educated he advocated for a strong public education system for all citizens.

To keep police on the street, the majority of the Republicans in the House would have been happier to remove the expectation that States are required to fund Medicare and care for their poor citizens so are not concerned about healthcare of the common worker.

The costs of the bill are being paid by closing loop-holes that have allowed American based companies not to have to pay taxes on money earned oversees which the average citizen is not allowed to do and which have encouraged them to move jobs to other countries. By calling this bill a wasteful special interest bill the Republicans are indicating that they lack of interest in the needs and priorities of the middle class.

I am one independent voter who is quickly seeing that the Republican Party party is not fit to govern, that regardless of what their slogans and soundbits may claim, they lacks compassion for the blight of the avearage citizen and undermining the value and strength of the middle class.

2010 Crossmen Show

2010-08-10T18:31:00.002-04:00

Following is the link to the 2010 Allenton Crossmen show.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErnhxJZ96Vo

Pre-Performance Work

2010-08-08T17:27:00.004-04:00

Following is a clip that gives you an idea of what takes place ahead of each performance a DCI Corps undertakes. The caravan here is representative...for the Crossmen to vehicles are missing, the souveneir truck and trailer, and the volunteer van.

Josh is seen several times in this clip, once early as he walks towards the camera in yellow/gold shorts.

After the show, all the equipment is packed up, they change, they hang out and eat, take in the remainder of the show and then leave for the area of the next show...and sleeping on the bus and then on a gymn floor when they arrive between 2 and 6 AM in the morning.

Truth Turned to a Lie: A Noble Woman's Story Maliciously Twisted

2010-08-02T15:25:00.009-04:00

A fundamental law of communication, context of any statement is critical to understanding a statement or story. A statement or phrase taken out of context is can readily be twisted to mean not only something contrary to the message delivered by the speaker.

This fundamental law is understood by journalists, historians and preachers alike who have long learned that proof-texting is not only a dangerous exercise but one which should be avoided. Whether one is interpreting the Bible, an ancient Roman text, Shakespeare, the writings of Madison, Jefferson, Lincoln, or Sir John A McDonald, or the statements of a friend or spouse, appropriate analysis of the full text, understanding it in is context is a time honored process. Functionally we all understand the law and for the most part follow it. I dare say that if we did not follow it, how many of us would be fearful to utter much more than two or three words at any given moment.

In the last week we have had a perfect example of a violation of this law. Andrew Breitbart, a conservative blogger and operative who looks for “gotcha” opportunities, took a video clip of an address by Shirley Sherrod and creatively edited the clip and intentionally feed it via various channels into the conservative electronic media. The clip is edited in such a way that leaves Sherrod sounding like a racist and the NCAAP audience sounding like cheerleaders for her racist attitude.

We have come to understand the full story, that the “gotcha” opportunity has rightly and justly blown up Breitbart’s face. His malicious and mean actions have exposed his heart and created a wake of damage. Not only have they maligned a woman who if the whole story had been told had an enlightening and noble experience but should be commended for telling the story in the first place. This lady whose family had been the victims of racial attacks, some violent, had at that moment when dealing with the farmer a confrontation with her own pain and an opportunity to lash out.

In the following link, Scalia in her post at 3:31 PM on Monday regarding th Breithbart video raises questions about the clip as it appears that there is something more to the story and that Sherrod was setting the audience with the rest of the story. Breithbart who later claims not to have had the whole clip evidently lacked the ability to see what Scalia noted. Further he failed to do what CNN did when they saw the video, take a deep breath and dig deeper. Breithbart and various officials were blinded by the their own biases and accepted the video without any critical evaluation, without attempting to put it into context or seeking to hear the full speach.

Instead Briethbart feed a gullible Fox and his ultra-conservative friends his edited story. He claimed that the video is proof the the NAACP is a rasist organization and that Obama has racists in his administration. When the context is understood and the full tape heard, Sherrod is far from being racist. Likewise, the audience was not affirming any racist actions. Rather the audience were nodding and vocalizing their understanding of her feelings and her temptation to respond in a racist manner and then lauding her for not doing so.

Not only are Breitbart’s actions to twist and misuse the truth despicable, so are those of the conservative media and blogs for swallowing the story whole, making their judgments without any journalistic integrity, without seeking for any response and shamelessly being anything but fair and balanced. Their bias and rush to judgment was atrocious.

On Monday evening Hannity on commenting on the story stated, “My only thing is they [the administration] weren’t the ones that caught it. It was on Breitbart.com and it happened some time ago. So it’s interesting that it took the new media to expose this.” Various commentators that evening and the next day complained that the "liberal media" was slow to jump on the story and call out racism that is on the tape. These critics of the silent media seemed not to fathom that the other organizations would take their time to investigate the story to make sure it was a true story. These other organizations appear to have the wisdom to know that in today's electronic media, that pictures, videos and audio clips can readily be redacted and altered for nefarious reasons. These other organizations have the common sense to know not to accept uncritically what is feed to them and they knew they needed to understand the context and fuller story before putting out a twisted part story. In other words, the other organizations by being slow were doing proper journalistic work.

What did the slower to report media discover? There was not story to be caught in the first place. If the whole tape were shown, and the story of how she helped the farmer save his farm regardless of her past and the farmer’s attitude to her, it demonstrates that Sherrod is just the type of person to have government. As the farmer has stated, she helped him save his farm. She did the right thing, helped. What does she get for doing the right thing, being besmirched by Breitbart and a conservative media blasts the twisted falsehood to the nation, and for pontificators like O’Reilly to demand, “And Ms. Sherrod must resign immediately” even though when he was accused of sexual harassment loudly proclaimed for people not to rush to judgment on the initial claim and statement from his accuser.

Not only is the conservative media’s conduct shameful but so was that of her boss Tom Vilsack. Newt Gingrich commended Vilsack for his quick actions, “Secretary Vilsack did exactly the right thing. I mean I often disagree with this administration. But firing her after that kind of vicious racist attitude was exactly the right thing to do.” A former Speaker of the House commending Vilsack for by-passing due process and making a snap judgment when there has been no time to let the dust settle and examine the facts is atrocious. Given that as Speaker of the House he was second removed from the presidency, I am deeply bothered by Gingrich’s stance and lauding Vilsack for not following due process for an employee. For seeking political gain he has demeaned the fundamental right every American citizen has with regard to due process.

Even when the Atlanta Constitution's and CNN's coverage was showing Tuesday morning serious issues with Breithbart's video individuals like Laura Ingraham continued to ignore the warning signs while contratulating the unethical Breithbart for doing "a great piece on the whole thing. That afternoon though the news wires were showing more cracks to Breitbart's work and claims Limbaugh hailed Breithbart's lie as a "great work" and therefore signaled that his statements are may well be more based a strong dose of bias than anything else. Limbaugh and Ingraham seem to be more interested in bias spin than they are upon understanding truth and reality.

Breitbart's malicious damage is done. He has stood on tall hill, taken a knife, ripped open a feather pillow tossing them to the wind. While some of feathers can now be gathered, many more will never be gathered back up. I hope that in the end, Breitbart will be marginalized...but I fear that he will lay low and in a few months conservatives, including Fox News, will again be feasting uncritically upon what he produces.

Following is the link to Media Matter’s tracking of how the false story quickly spread.

http://mediamatters.org/research/201007220004

For A Laugh

2010-07-15T19:41:00.011-04:00

Three men hiking through the forest...

across a raging and violent river they needed to cross.

Each prayed to God.

The first prayed, "God give me strength to cross the river." God miraculously gave him extra strong legs and arms. He struggled in the current, he walked where he could but most swam his way. Two hours later and almost drowning several times he made it to the other side.

After witnessing the near death of the first man, the second man cried, "God, give me the strength and the tools to cross the river."

And God gave him a kayak, strong arms, strong legs and agility,

After fighting the river for an hour and almost flipping four times, the second man arrived on the other side exhausted.

The third man seeing the struggles of his friends prayed differently, "God grant me strength, tools and intelligence to cross the river."

And God generously granted him his prayer and within moments he was transformed into a woman. With new insight, the map was carefully checked.

She noticed that there was a bridge two hundred yards upstream. She hiked two hundred yards and crossed the river with a smile on her face.

Guys, when you don't first succeed, take a deep breath and do it the way your wife first suggested.

A Sobbering Letter

2010-07-13T18:50:00.004-04:00

The following taken from June Wandrey's, a WWII nurse, letter home regarding what she saw after a German Concentration Camp was liberated the American Army. The quote is taken from Bedpan Commando, The Story of a Combat Nurse during WWII I have just finished reading the book.

6-4-45 Allach, Germany

Dearest family, I'm on night duty with a hundred corpse-like patients, wrecks of humanity...macerated skin drawn over their bones, eyes sunken in wide sockets, hair shaved off. Mostly Jewish, these tortured souls hardly resemble humans. Their bodies are riddled with diseases. Many have tuberculosis, typhus, enterocolitis (constant diarrhea) and huge bed sores. Many cough all night long, as their lungs are in such terrible condition. They break out in great beads of perspiration.

Then there is the roomful of those that are incontinent and irrational. It sounds like the construction crew for the tower of Babel...Poles, Czechs, Russians, Slavs, Bulgarians, Dutch, Hungarians, Germans. What makes it so difficult is that I understand only a few words. Their gratitude tears at my heart when I do something to make them more comfortable or give them a little food or smile at them.

One of the day nurses had a patient that kept leaving his cot and crawling under it to sleep on the bare wooden floor. She decided to put his mattress, sheets and pillow under there too as it seemed to be his favorite place.

The odor from the lack of sanitation over the years makes the whole place smell like rotten, rotten sewage. We wear masks constantly, though they don't keep out the stench. There are commodes in the middle of the room. Patients wear just pajama shirts as they can't get the bottoms down fast enough to use the commodes. God, where are you? Making rounds by flashlight is an eerie sensation. I'll hear calloused footsteps shuffling behind me and turn in time to see four semi-nude skeletons gliding toward the commodes. God, where were you?

You have to gently shake some of the patients to see if they are still alive. Their breathing is so shallow, pulse debatable. Many die in their sleep. I carry their bodies back to a storage room, they are very light, just the weight of their demineralized bones. Each time, I breathe a wee prayer for them. God, are you there? In the morning the strongest patients have latrine detail, it takes two of them to carry a commode pail and dump it. They also sweep the floors and carry out the trash. Many patients are only seventeen. Our men sprayed the camp area to kill the insects that carried many of the diseases.

We were told that the SS guards who controlled the camp used to bring a small pan of food into the ward and throw it on the floor. When the stronger patients scrambled for it, like starving beasts, they were lashed with a long whip. It's a corner of hell.

Too shocked and tired to write anymore. Love, June

What is sobbering, is that such suffering can happen today. The type of hearts that created this suffering still walk amongst us. We still have groups being demonized and dehumanized.

Crossmen and DCI Show in Arlington

2010-07-08T21:21:00.001-04:00

The following is a video clip that will give you some insights as to why Josh loves the Crossmen and has not moved to another Corps.

Following are scenes from the DCI show held in Arlington on June 26. The Blue Coats and Carolina Crown are two of the strongest corps and one, possible both, will finish in the top five.

Crossmen, "Full Circle"

2010-06-26T23:33:00.007-04:00

This evening Evie and I took in the DCI show that took place at Wakefield HS in Arlington. Though the seating was packed and parking was a challenge for those who did not arrive more than 90 minutes before the show, the show itself was very good and entertaining. We cannot wait to see how the performances will improve over the next month.

From work on Friday we traveled to Bowie MD where the Crossmen were staying. We caught them rehersing and the run through. As you can see from the first photo the field in Bowie was in rough shape and dusty. We visited with Josh for 5 minutes and gave him a care package before he had to run off for a shower (they are given assigned times).

Below are pictures from the Arlington show. Josh is in each picture. In the first he is in the center of the picture...in the second he is the one moving.

In the above and below picture he is in center of the picture but in the back beside the contra-base.

Evie and I enjoyed the Crossmen show. We really enjoyed the show from two years ago entitled "Planet X". We think this year's show, "Full Circle" is stronger and more entertaining than "Plantet X".

We did not get to see Josh today...we did not expect to do so with the crowds and all the logistics that take place. Seeing him before is impossible as they are warming up and remained focused on show preperation. Catching him after a show is most difficult as they are packing equipment and getting ready to leave.

We head out on a camping trip in the morning. We delayed heading out of town to see the DCI show.

Co-opting of Language

2010-06-22T10:59:00.001-04:00

The primary meaning of a word can evolve over decades so that a primary definition in one age becomes a secondary in another with a new primary understanding. An example of that is “faggot”, a word that transitioned in the 1950s and 60s to have a new primary meaning and then transition out from common communication in the 1990s. The word’s historical meaning referred to small branches and sticks that one gathered to start or keep a fire going. By the mid 60s the word was used as a derogatory term to refer to a person who was gay. Due to its derogatory nature, it moved out of polite conversation and then out of acceptable conversation in the 1990s and today is rarely used.

In the past year I have become increasingly concerned about the co-opting of a word in such a manner that the word itself is in the process of being redefined in the United States. The word is, “patriot,” which is a word that means one who loves, supports and defends one’s country. The word is being co-opted by the right wing of the conservative movement in such a way that it is implied, and sometimes outright stated, that if you do not agree with their view that you are not a patriot. In other words, if you do not agree with their social and political agenda then you may well be a traitor.

One’s passion for one’s country can take various expressions. In the United States democratic processes and freedom of expression are highly valued. People are encouraged to debate, to disagree passionately with each other in a civil manner as it helps strengthen ideas, allow its citizens to arrive at a more informed decision, and in the process build a better society and nation. Accepting and encouraging widely differing perspectives, and all points in between, are not only welcome but are the safeguards against tyranny of a single viewpoint and the expectation that all will adhere to that one viewpoint such as is found in tyrannical monarchies and dictatorships.

A person who is far removed from my social and political viewpoint can be just as patriotic as those who agree with me. Though opinions differ, through the exchange and debating of ideas, each of us is ardently fighting in a civil manner to build a better and stronger nation. Hence, my alarm over the co-opting of “patriot” by a political movement that implies by the use of “patriot” that only they are correct and those who disagree with them do not love, support and defend their country. The co-opting of the term brings subtle and not so subtle pressure to conform to that movement’s point of view. The co-opting of the term and its ongoing association with a narrow set of political ideas means that in the coming years, and for the coming generations patriot will no longer mean being a lover, supporter and defender of one’s country but as one who holds a defined set of political doctrines. If we were all to be patriots in keeping with how the term is being used and its implied meaning, the United States will have moved towards the tyranny of a single mindset which the nation rebelled against in 1776.

Photocopier and Security of Private Information

2010-06-15T20:03:00.001-04:00

Scarry thoughts about photocopiers. Check this link out.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6412572n&tag=contentMain;contentBody

Family News

2010-06-14T20:40:00.003-04:00

After a busy Spring my schedule is settling down. There were stretches where I was in the office only one day in ten. For the next month I will be more or less in the office four or five days a week.

We have been so busy that it was not until ten days ago that we pulled the cover off the RV and took it out of storage. It has had its annual Virginia inspection. Now we have to clean it up and air it out before going out.

This past weekend, Josh flew back from Texas for 36 hours. Oakton High School's Symphonic Band was debuting "Atlantic Odyssey". Alum who performed "Hymn of the Highlands" in 08 were invited to participate in the first performance of the work. About 20 alum, give or take one or two, returned for the playing of "Highlands" before debuting "Odyesey". The crowd was strong and the music the band's performance was strong indeed.

Once again Josh made the Dean's list. Starting in September he will be attending George Mason which is a few miles from home. Their music program has become a top quality program in the last five years. Attending Mason means he will have a stronger student teaching experience in a northern Virginia school (Louisianna high schools are amongst the worse in the country) and will better position him to get a teaching position in VA.

Josh is inheriting Evie's convertible. This had been planned for over two and a half years. Evie and I are in the process of short listing the desired models. Initially we had some two seat convertibles on our short list but with Josh living a home a used two seater is out. So the Nissan Z, Audi TT and Honda 2000 are no longer being given consideration. The Prius has also been eliminated...not sure that it is a comfortable vehicle for a long distant road trip.

The Crossmen will be performing twice this season in our area, in Arlington at the beginning of the season on 26 June and at George Mason in Fairfax in early August. Hence we will get to see the show in its early and late forms. Business responsibilities will preventing us from attending the DCI World Championships in Indianapolis.

Josh says that the show this year has them at points moving at a 240 beat rate. I found this little clip on Youtube. The clip is of learning the drill and gives a glimpse of that pace. To this they will add the music.

Memorial Weekend Jonathan and Maggie had an engagment party at Fair Lakes Park. This week they are with Maggie's parents enjoying the shores of the Outer Banks.

On 27 June we will be taking a week's vacation in Maryland. We are staying at to MD state parks...Cunningham Falls and then Greenbrier. We will be back home for two weeks before we take another week's vacation.

We have yet to decide where we will go for a week's vacation in September. We may not settle on a location until mid to late August.

Denise and Erma have received a new appointment...York PA. This appointment brings them to within a half hour of Evie's mother and step-father. I know Mom and Paul are happy that they will be so close. Evie and I are looking forward to seeing them frequently too.

I am happy that Chicago Blackhawks won the Stanley Cup, and the Hersey Bears the Calder for the second year in a row (Hersey is the Washington Capitals farm team).

Why Are Evangelicals Silent

2010-06-04T17:13:00.002-04:00

Within a few decades of the American Revolution, the American political environment has gone through cycles of intense animosity and division. The bitterness ahead of the election of Thomas Jefferson and during the Andrew Jackson era are particularly notable periods if division. Of course the most divisive period was the fifteen years before the start of the civil war. America has cycled back to age of nastiness and where doing anything to gain political advantage over the other is viewed as expedient, justifiable and rationalized as good for the country as it keeps the enemy out of power, or frustrates the enemy’s legislative agenda.

As evidence by the governor’s race in South Carolina, the nastiness has spilled into internal politics where Nikki Haley is running against Andre Bauer. Haley, a woman who converted to Christianity from the Sikh religion has been called a “raghead” and her conversion many years ago questioned as been part of a great subterfuge to put a Sikh into the governor’s mansion. Out of respect for her parents, Haley occasionally attends Sikh ceremonies for which she has been criticized.

To undermine her credibility, without offering any proof two men have come forward saying that they had affairs with her. Innuendos and the subterfuge claim are intended to undermine her credibility. She denies the charges and though there is no evidence Bauer has outlandishly argued that she should take a lie detector test.

The party which proclaims to be the family value party and cries for honesty frequently turns to such tactics such as unfounded character attacks, use of derogatory terms, subterfuge, obfuscation and other negative attacks as a tool to destroy an opponent. And this from the party that aligns itself with the Christian Right and the Christian Right staunchly supports. What is further unfortunate about the Christian Right is that they not only remain silent on the use of such tactics, or say “that is them but not us,” the evangelical community is often the tool being used to help spread such attacks rather than being a tool to criticize their use.

Evangelicals should not be silent, but they are. Where is the outrage? Just as they were silent on the abuses and unethical actions of the Bush administration, evangelical leaders and pastors by enlarge remain silent. To those outside the church's influence it appears that they support the telling of lies and unethical attacks and conduct. It says to the world that religious beliefs take second place to helping their person get elected.

Venice 2010 - Part two

2010-04-12T00:27:00.005-04:00

On our first full day in Venice we traveled to Murano, an island just north of Venice, which is well known for its glass factories and glass artisans. Our concierge arranged for us to travel via taxi down the Grand Canal and to have a private tour of the factory, its museum and grand showrooms. The grand showroom has some of the most exquisite handmade glass I have seen, ranging from chandeliers that are a quarter of million dollars to vases costing up to $20,000, to drinking glass sets trimmed in gold. Below are some pictures taken at Murano.

The first picture has the factory on the left. The water taxi is parked in front of the sales shop where we bought some items to bring home. The water taxi took us around to Venice from the opposite direction from which we came, thereby affording us a chance to see the other end of Venice from the one we had seen coming in from the airport and on the way to Murano.

Venice 2010 - part one

2010-04-11T16:56:00.007-04:00

Though weary Evie and I arrived at our hotel in Venice, Hotel Bauer, Saturday afternoon around 3:30. We were to arrive just after 12:30 but just as our aircraft out of Rome was cleared for take-off a warning light went off. The aircraft returned to the gate, and we had to be rebooked to the next flight. A number of passengers were angry, but I am more than willing to be delayed rather than risk my life. The crew and Alitalia did the right thing. Alitalia even gave us a free coupon for lunch.

Out of Washington we almost missed our flight. We were there in plenty of time and were sitting at the gate almost 2 hours ahead. I nodded off and Evie with her hearing difficulties did not hear the boarding call. I awoke and was in the restroom when I heard them calling us by name…so we made the run for it and were the next to the last onboard the puddle jumper. The flight out of Boston was very comfortable, but long when you cannot sleep. Dinner was a lovely meal, breakfast was so-so. I spent much of the night reading my Kindle and listening to my iPod before trying to catch some sleep when I was too exhausted to read any more.

Though our flight was late, the firm with which we had booked our shared water taxi understood and once another couple arrive shortly after us, we were on the way to the hotel. We are staying at the Hotel Bauer, a lovely hotel that is on the Grand Canal and has its own taxi stop. Part of this upscale hotel which is a 3 minute walk from St. Mark’s Square was at one time a monastery built that was built in the early 1700s. It became a family run hotel around 1890 and ten years ago finished $38 million in renovations.

Our room is in the newer section that overlooks a small canal. We can highly recommend the Bauer if you were to visit. After taking a much needed shower and getting about 2.5 hrs of sleep we wondered down street and made our way northeast to backside of Teatro La Fenice (opera house) and up to Campo S. Angelo via small narrow streets. Just north of the campo (square) we found a lovely restaurant for dinner. We enjoyed a pleasant unhurried dinner, I had lasagna and Evie penne, for less than 50 Euros. Afterwards we wondered north a little further before cutting east via small out of the way streets to a major shopping street which we took to within a few streets from our hotel.

The visit to Venice has been pleasant to this point. The room is comfortable and the company is very enjoyable. Following are a few pictures from Venice. The first is the water taxis shots, the dock at the airport and the interior of the taxi (the back has a glass ceiling which can be pushed under the wooden ceiling, which we did to take in the sun and to take pictures).

Above, glass item in the Brauer Hotel lobby.

Below is the little canal beside our hotel...beyond in the Grand Canal. Our room is on the third flow overlooking the canal and the gondolas.

Recess Appointments

2010-03-28T13:56:00.003-04:00

This weekend President Obama made 15 recess appointments which has brought forth complaints from the Republicans.

The recess appointment process allows the President to make an appointment during a congressional recess to a position which required Senate approval. The device allowed for the smooth functioning of government in an era when communication was slow, travel was by horse and buggy, and when Congress could be recessed for many months at a time. The appointments serve until the next round of congressional elections.

Modern presidents have used the device to make appoints of appointees who have been stalled in the Senate, either due to the candidate being a poor choice or due to the opposition party using tactics to block the president’s qualified nominees and thereby hindering the President’s ability to be the executive in chief.

In the modern age there should be little need to make recess appointments. When a president makes recess appointments as a means to by-pass Congress or as a means to install highly questionable candidates the president is abusing the process. All parties, the press and the public should cry out against his actions. On the other hand when such appointments are necessary because a handful of Senators for political reasons are blocking qualified appointees from receiving an up or down vote by the Senate then the nation should speak out against the Senate.

It seems that the current list of appointees fall into the latter category. All have long received majority support in the committees overseeing the appointee’s area, but vote on the nominees by the full Senate are being blocked by a number of Republicans.

Speaking to President Obama’s appointments Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl said the GOP would react “very strongly” if Obama bypasses the Senate. POLITICO quotes Kyle saying “It has to be done very sparingly.” This is from the man who defended the 179 recess appointments made by President Bush (that it at a rate of about 22 a year over his 8 years, about 25 if one dismisses the last eight months when such appointments are rare).

Kyle goes on to note that such appointments make it very difficult to have bipartisan cooperation when the President is arrogant with power. Kyl criticizes Obama for not adhering to the rule of the Senate while blocking the Senate from expressing its will by a recorded vote. The will Kyl is speaking about is not the majority will of the Senate but the will of a minority that is using the system to block nominees from coming forward.

Kyl needs to get a life. Would these appointments be necessary if he and his friends had allowed for an up and down vote? In the past Kyl rightly and justly argued for up and down votes on Bush nominees. Yet now that his party does not hold the White House he has demonstrated that he really did not believe in his righteous arguments in the past but that they were empty words used to score points and play a political game. If it was wrong for the Democrats to block Bush nominees so it is equally wrong for the Republicans to do the same. Hypocritically Kyl is now part of the group that keeps such nominees from coming to the floor of the Senate for a vote.

2010 Vacation Trips

2010-03-22T19:57:00.002-04:00

Vacations have not been the easiest things to coordinate in our family in recent years. Between business meetings I have, periods when Evie must be in the office, other than for those real special trips it not being best for Evie to take more than one week at a time, and Josh’s Crossmen and academic calendar, finding weeks to take Evie’s four weeks is a rather cumbersome process.

This year has been no different. The last part of July is out for Evie due to reports that have to be at THQ by the end of the first week of August. ARC employees, including Evie, are not allowed to take any weeks after October 1.

The week of July 26 is off due to a business conference I must attend…fortunately it is one of the week that Evie needs to be in the office. The first week of August is out as the Crossmen are performing in the area, and so is the week going into June 26 for the same reason. The second and third week of August are out as that is when Josh returns from the Crossmen and then heads back to LSU. With taking July 17 to 25 as a vacation week, and not wanting to come back for a week and go out again, suddenly the rest of July and August are off the table.

With taking a week in a week in April we are left with two weeks to schedule, one in June and one in September. We are looking at taking the week going into July 4th and either the second or third week of September. While we have booked our July campground at a park we have wanted to visit for years, we are still settling on where to go at the end of June and in September. In September we are considering Boston for a day or two and then moving on to Acadia National Park for three or so nights. In June we may go to West Virginia or possibly to Annapolis.

Over the summer we will need to work in a few weekend camping trips in the area. My other five days will be taken here and there over the fall, mainly added to weekends to make create a few extra long weekends.

For those that are interested her is our basic itinerary for Italy starting on 9 April.
Leave Friday afternoon with a connection via Boston
Sat change planes in Rome for Venice and arrive in Venice around noon
Venice, staying in a hotel three blocks from St. Marks Square
Sunday, booked a gondola serenade trip in the evening
Tuesday morning – train trip down to Rome (about 5 hrs)
Rome hotel in the heart of ancient Rome - four blocks from the Coliseum
Wednesday – tour of the Coliseum and other ancient Rome sites
Thursday – tour the Vatican and Vatican’s art museum
Saturday – late morning, return to Washington via JFK

An Outrageous Lawsuit

2010-03-19T18:44:00.006-04:00

Just when you think you have heard everything, along comes a story about class action lawsuits against Toyota filed in Maryland, Florida and Colorado. The filing argues that Toyota has cars so badly flawed with safety defects and the recall so botched that owners of Toyota vehicles have no other option but to return the cars for a significant cash payment.

True Toyota handled poorly the initial complaints and the recall process was also fumbled, but to say that the cars are deeply flawed that they all need to be returned stretches reasoning beyond reason. Though I am not an advocate of tort reform, the arguments put forward by Hagens Berman does cause one pause to believe that some level of tort reform is necessary. That this type of suit is taking seriously show the flaws of the American legal system.

Berman is quoted as saying, "I don't know of any parent who would be willing to put their kids in a potentially unsafe car in exchange for a few hundred bucks." He also notes that "When we have talked with Toyota owners, they all voiced the same desire...to drive their Toyota back to the dealer, hand them the keys and pick up a check." Playing upon the irrational emotions of the gulable, a lawyer can guide the client into feeling "unsafe" and with a picture of big bucks in their head get them to sign onto the lawuit.

Toyota's are being fixed swiftly. I had my Camry into the shop two days after I called. I have never felt unsafe in my vehicle. My safety is more at risk from drivers who share the road with me and have not maintained their brakes, tires and other safety systems. My safety is more at risk from drivers who drive carelessly, who cut me off, who pass to closely or turn into traffic at a questionable moment. Some of these drivers who put my safety at risk may well be members firms that file these type of lawsuits.

In my view, this lawsuit is less about judicious redress than it is for a golden tongued law firm, such as Hagens Berman playing upon the irrational emotions of the gulable and the unduly anxious, to making themselves wealthy.

Guns Do Not Kill People

2010-03-14T08:30:00.001-04:00

Guns do not kill people, criminals kill people. To fault law abiding gun owners for the shootings misses the heart of the problem. The real problem is that we are not tough enough on criminals. People need to have guns to defend themselves and others against these criminals who have guns.

And so goes above the basic argument of gun rights advocates arguing against any gun control law.

Gun advocates point out that only criminals use guns to harm others. The question is, at what point did the man who shot two officers at the Pentagon become a criminal? When did the Virginia Tech shooter become a criminal? At what point do many others who use a gun in a crime become a “criminal”? Both the man at the Pentagon, the Virginia Tech shooter were law abiding citizens until the moments they used the guns for their criminal activity. Ten minutes before they opened fire they knew what they were going to do. Thinking about committing a crime is not illegal. Thinking about shoplifting, committing theft, filing a false tax return, etc. are not illegal activities. We do not convict people for having a thought. Rather it is the excursion crime that turns one into a criminal, and that is fallacy of the gun rights argument.

When police departments help the gun trafficking industry by trading and selling ceased guns to help fill their coffers to buy new equipment the nation has a problem. Would those who defend this practice advocate that an alcohol treatment organization should sell alcohol to help fund their programs? Should the police sell ceased alcohol? We would decry such a practice as helping to further the endeavors of what they are helping to fight.

Guns being sold by police departments have and will continue to turn up and be used to kill. Read this article. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100314/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_pentagon_metro_shooting_guns

Couragous Act and Shameful Acts

2010-03-11T16:55:00.004-05:00

Last night, March 10, the Itawamba County school board in northeast Mississippi cancelled the high school’s prom scheduled for April 2. The prom is one the major social events, if not the social event, in a high school’s social life, particularly for its seniors. School board’s have the right to withdraw prom authorizations, or authorization for any after school activity. That said, what the Itawamba County board did is disgusting and reminiscent to steps many southern government bodies went through to design and uphold racial discrimination.

Constance McMillan was planning to bring her lesbian partner to the prom. Constance would be dressed in the a traditional tux while her partner would be in a traditional prom gown. The school board has a policy that prohibits gays from bringing their partners to the prom. Constance was informed that she could attend, but could not bring her partner and wear a tuxedo. The ACLA informed that school board that their policy banning same-sex couples from the prom, a) violated the students’ rights and b) was an unwarranted and illegal discriminatory act.

The ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) was planning on taking the school board to court. Rather than fight an unwinnable battle in the court, the school board cancelled the event. The school board, and its supporters, by the board’s actions acknowledges that they are bigots, and that they would rather cancel the prom than to be chastised by the court for their bigotry and be “forced” by the court to have their children rub shoulders with and witness the interaction of a gay couple.

There is a move afoot to hold a privately sponsored prom. The location and date would be the same. Parents would still volunteer and the fees for the prom would be the same, but there would be no school sponsorship or school funding to help underwrite a portion of the costs. If a privately sponsored prom is held, which is highly likely, the organizers will be able to invite whoever they wish and exclude whoever they wish. You can well bet that Constance will be one of a handful, possibly the only, individual(s) to be excluded.

The board’s actions are shameful. Like their foreparents they are using their elected positions to maintain shameful bigotry.

What is even more shameful are the reactions of many of Constance’s peers and the parents of those peers who are blaming Constance for the cancellation of the prom. Constance is the victim and these fellow students and their parents should cease to victimize Constance . Instead they should give voice to and lay the blame the cause of the problem, the bigotry in their hearts, in the community and which is reflected in the school board members. The school board members who voted to cancel the prom should be shamed and voted out of office.

Rather than blamed Constance should be affirmed for her courage and willingness to expose this ugly side of her community that should be confronted and expunged from their midst.

Here is a link to one of the stories, http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_lesbian_prom_date

Message: Lets Not Dirty Ourselves

2010-03-08T11:07:00.001-05:00

Last Monday, 2 March 2010, the Archdiocese of Washington DC announced that it will no longer be extending medical benefits to the spouses of employees. Those currently covered are grandfathered in but as of the 2nd of March, new enrollments can take place.

This move was taken in response to a new law that is going into effect in Washington that permits same sex couples to marry. The Church does not want to provide medical benefits to gay couples because they argue, it legitimized gay marriage, and the church does not want to recognize gay marriage in any form.

This situation goes to the heart of a fundamental flaw with the health system in the United States. Medical coverage is employer based. Employers at a whim can and make dramatic changes to what they will cover, the extent of the coverage, who they will cover, or even if they will provide coverage at all. Good performing employees who have given long service can suddenly find themselves forced out because the employer drops medical coverage or even worse, lays them off or finds a way to fire them to help reduce healthcare premiums the firm is paying.

Healthcare is the greatest social justice issue facing the majority of the nation. The Washington Archdiocese has demonstrated that the Roman Catholic Church is not that significant issue. It cries that it is not willing to fight for significant healthcare reform.

The Archdiocese in San Francisco took a different approach. It allows employees to pay for the medical premiums and add any adult in their home to their medical plan. Employees can add parents, adult children, grandparents, a friend as long as they reside in the home of the employee. They broadened who will be added at the employee’s cost.

As for legitimizing gay marriages by providing coverage, providing coverage does not legitimize gay marriage any more than providing treatment and care to alcoholics legitimizes alcoholism, or supporting and ministering to a sex offender legitimizes sexual abuse.

The Roman Catholic Church has the right to do what it has done but in my eyes it is contrary to the Jesus’ message of loving one’s neighbor. Like the self-righteous conservative Pharisees who criticized Jesus for visiting and sharing a meal with a publican, the Roman Catholic Church has left the banquet table rather than be “tarnished” by sharing a meal with the publican.

Palin and Teleprompters

2010-02-11T22:03:00.005-05:00

Last weekend the current grand champion of the Republican right, Sarah Palin, at the Tea Party convention critized President Obama for using a teleprompter. In her folksy "awe shucks" manner questioned why a such an aclaimed public speaker would use such a device rather than speaking from memory or without any aids by speaking from the heart.

The gathered throng clapped and shouted at her comment. Take a look at the following pictures of Ronald Reagan, "Great Communicator", who the Republicans all but worship and quote his words as if they were holy writ. Maybe if Palin was half the critical thinker as the least critical thinker of modern Presidents she would realize a) why teleprompters, or speach cards (G.W. Bush) are used, and b) that she had also slammed Ronald Regan and every Republican President going back to Eisenhower.

Hollywood Walk of Fame

2010-02-09T14:10:00.000-05:00

The following have been given a Hollywood Star in Hollywood: Luis Miguel, Earetha Kitt (Santa Baby fame), Larry King of CNN, jazz singer Jack Jones, Janet Jackson of the Super Bowl outfit “accident” fame, television actress Mary Hart, and Juan Gabriel. The list goes on and on…see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_stars_on_the_Hollywood_Walk_of_Fame.

If you look for Paul McCartney on the list you will not find him. Evidently is he is not considered worthy enough. Considering how many lesser lights are on the walk, what gives?

Too Quick To Judge?

2010-02-04T20:55:00.002-05:00

We are sometimes too quick to judge. The following video though funny gives us pause about being too quick to judge.

He Who Controls the Megaphone

2010-02-02T18:20:00.003-05:00

Two weeks ago the US Supreme Court tossed out the limits on what can be contributed by individuals or companies to politicians and political action committees. The court also tossed out what individuals or political action committees are able to spend on political advocacy advertisements in the weeks before an election.

The Court’s 5-4 majority position is that contribution limits hinder free speech, stifle dialogue and hinder the election process. These wise judges on the Court dismiss the idea that money can influence elections. They do agree that a small group who can control the megaphone, outshout their opponents and can pour money into slick messaging will overpower the message and arguments of their opponents and in the process determine who will be in power.

Essentially their position is that minor parties who have tried to get candidates elected have not been successful because the messages of these candidates have not had any traction. Lack of access to the public forum has little to do with their lack of success.

American and world history is replete with examples of the powerful installing elected officials into office and having them function more or less as their puppets. Over the centuries various despots have learned that he who is able to control the mass communication process will control the masses. The Iranian government fully understands this principle as it used the mass communication system over and over again to limit the extent and then to quell the protests over the election process.

Over the last 13 Presidential elections since 1960 the Republicans have won seven times. Over the last 9 Presidential elections the Republicans have won five times. Rarely has 58% or more of the House or Senate been in the hands of one party. If the Court is correct there will not be a significant shift in this pattern over the next ten to fifteen years. On the other hand if critics of the Court's ruling are correct, out ten years there will be fewer Democratic victories in races for the House, Senate and White House with well healed corporations and the wealthy pouring money into candidates of their choice, most likely Republican races. Increasingly Democrats will sound like current Republicans and more Republicans will start to sound like Forbs 500 executives. The end result is that America could move towards having the trapings of a democracy with elected officials functioning as an extension of an oligarchy.

The theory that he who controls the megaphone controls the election results is about to be tested.

Financial Reform

2010-01-31T20:57:00.002-05:00

Nations around the globe are still feeling the impact of the financial crisis that resulted from institutional and individual greed. To limit the collapse of the financial system and the impact of the damage governments pour billions into the financial system.

Leaders of financial and real estate institutions created innovated, confusing and misleading products to make billions of dollars and fleecing tens of millions of people in the process. Financial reform has been proposed but the leaders of the financial industry are resisting saying that reform is not needed and reforms will hinder their ability to generate a maximum return for their shareholders.

Various politicians, mainly staunch conservatives, are lining up to resist reform and allow only cosmetic changes be made. While it may be hard to believe there are some who are advocating for greater deregulation and blaming what regulations remain in place as the cause of our economic problems.

While various factors ranging from subprime mortgages to inflated housing prices to derivatives to deregulation of the financial industry are behind the collapse let’s be clear that the primary underlying factor was greed. Greed will always exist, and any claim that the financial industry will not repeat the same mistakes naïve thinking. Deregulation removed many of the regulations that came out of lessons learned from the Great Depression and low and behold the financial industry repeated several of the same mistakes that created the Great Depression.

When a firm has become too large to fail, the country has a problem. When a bank can hold my bank account, my loans, sell insurance, be engaged in hedge fund trading, and other highly speculative instruments, the bank a bank in name only. No firm should be too large to fail. A firm like AIG that gets into difficulty should be closed with the profitable segment/accounts sold off/liquidated by the government, and shareholder equity lost.

Banks that hold my loans and accounts should have a higher level of accountability than an investment back. This may mean that a bank would be smaller than some of the existing megabanks.

Serious financial reform is necessary. If meaning reform fails, we need to watch our pockets like a hawk and view with askance anything our financial institutions put out as claims and promises.

Auto Quality and Recalls

2010-01-30T14:14:00.000-05:00

In this past week Toyota recalled 1.8 million vehicles in North America to correct a gas pedal problem. The recall was widened to include an additional 2.3 million vehicles worldwide. This is the second recall in recent months for many of the same vehicles. Yesterday, Honda too announced a recall of 640,000 vehicles worldwide.

While a recall if handled swiftly and correctly can indicate that a company is concerned about its customers, Toyota has somewhat stumbled on the gas pedal problem. Though the company has been aware of the problem for some time, they issued the recall only after weeks of conversations with the US government and with the knowledge that the government was moving toward issuing a mandated recalls. Their slow response is a repetition of the errors American manufacturers were making twenty years ago.

Toyota made a further misstep when word came out that the replacement parts were being shipped to factories and that they would not be sent to dealers for some time yet. This decision shows that Toyota is more focused upon selling new vehicles first and then dealing with existing customers. Toyota should have sent 55 to 65% of the first parts to dealers so that they can get the repair pipeline going.

Recalls are not new to the Japanese automakers, it is just that they have not received the news coverage in the past as they are now or as American automaker recalls. When one has a small share of market, recalls take place with little notice by the press or public. Now that Toyota and Honda have such a large share of the market place, they will have to get use to the increased press coverage.

The larger the company, the more media attention you receive and the greater the chance that there will be a problem with a part. In an effort to keep manufacturing costs down and maximize profits, problems with the manufacturing of a part or a design flaw will be increased.

The recalls do not indicate that the Japanese vehicles are inferior vehicles. Rather they indicate that they have flaws just like their American competitors. For though for last ten years Ford and GM have made quality vehicles across many of their lines that are at or near the level of the Japanese, the perception of Ford and GM of the past has continued to impact public perception. With increased attention of the Japanese recalls and their problems, Ford and GM will be viewed in a fresh light.

Stunning Thoughts

2010-01-16T23:09:00.003-05:00

The following two clips speak volumes. The thinking behind such views and comments is beyond rationality and sensitivity.

The They Can Get Help Falacy

2010-01-06T06:51:00.002-05:00

In the health care debate there are those who argue that it is not necessary as people can already get medical treatment by visiting an ER as hospitals cannot deny them. This perception is both partly true and false. It is true that hospital ER rooms cannot deny a person who has a life threatening condition. They are required to offer treatment but only to the point where the person is no longer in the life threatening condition. Hence, a woman can receive care when she is starting to deliver her baby, but she cannot receive any treatment before that moment, and if the baby is born and mother and child well, they are quickly released.

Is the service that the hospital provides really free? No. The hospital will still go after the patient for the cost of the bare minimum to stabilize them. They will be billed and if the bills go unpaid and there are assets to which a lean can be attached, a lean is attached. If the person has a job, their salary will be garnered. The collections process adds costs and overhead to the hospital. What remains uncollected is still recovered by the hospital. The hospital does provide medical charity. It is a profit making venture and its losses are charged off in the fees charged to other patients.

For those who lack health insurance there is a double whammy, they get charged a higher rate for that which they cannot afford. We have several bills from my wife’s recent annual check-up. Each of the half-dozen items are discounted from 35 to 50% off which the insurance plan pays 80% leaving us with the remaining 20%. For example the one item that was billed at $323 was discounted to $170 with the plan paying $136 leaving us to pay $34. If we did not have medical insurance there would be no discount and would owe $323. Hence, those cannot afford medical insurance, or are denied coverage due to a pre-existing condition, or who have changed jobs and have yet to get beyond the 90 day, or 120 day or 180 day wait period, for that which they cannot afford in the first place are charged a much higher rate.

By the way, if she used a provider not approved by the plan (less than a third of the doctors in our area are approved) then the discount would be far less and our portion would be 30 or 40% depending on the nature of the item.

An Insidious Selfish Nature of a Complaint About Health Reform

2010-01-05T15:50:00.001-05:00

Circulating amongst some critics of health care reform is that the health care system cannot handle all the extra new people who would come into the system. They state there are no provisions for increasing hospital capacity or the number doctors. Hence, there will be longer waiting times to see a doctor or get treatment in a hospital so health care should resisted.

In my August 7 blog was the first time I noted this criticism. While I touched upon it then, due to its insidious selfish nature it is worth visiting again. While expressed in various frameworks, the argument is essentially, if you are not already insured I do not want you in the system as I will have to wait a little longer to see my doctor and wait longer in an emergency room or get a bed in a hospital. While people using this argument may be good and well intentioned, I suspect that most are using this uncritically and without any thought as to its self-centered natured, that they would rather someone else not get medical care because they do not want to wait. What I have found most disappointing is that this thinking is circulating within the evangelistic community, the very community the speaks with pride about the value of sacrificing self for others, and the importance that we love and care for those in need.

As for hospital capacity, let us not forget the hospitals are private corporations that are expected by their shareholders to make at least a 20% profit annually (see my Sept 10 post). The firms that run hospitals are some of the most profitable firms on Wall Street. Like any corporation, their mission is to make as much money as possible by charging as much as they can while keeping their expenses as low as possible. As there is such competition between hospitals, they are driven to have the latest and largest machines possible, to provide décor and frills for staff, patients and visitors that are designed to make people feel more positive about the hospital in question so that they will give them their business.

If hospitals feel that they can make more money by expanding, they will do so. If expanding services does not add to their bottom line, they will not expand. As hospitals are a for profit identities, the government should not fund their expansion so that they can increase their profits. Government should only fund hospital construction when there is a clear benefit to the citizens, such as in attracting a hospital into a low income or rural community, or that there will be some control on fees charged.

As for the number of doctors, whereas in other industrialized countries governments are heavily invested in paying the majority of the costs of medical training, this does happen in the United States. Whereas in other countries the government helps to regulated how many individuals may be accepted into medical schools, in the United States this does not happen. Each medical program sets its own enrollment levels which are balanced between the demand-supply formula, attrition and the costs of producing a medical practitioner. While medical schools may get some funding from government grants, the bulk of a medical school’s funding comes from tuition and donations from the public, corporations and private foundations. A student receiving grants/forgivable loans to work in underserved communities is another matter. Ultimately, if there is a demand for more doctors, nurses and other medical personnel, and if the schools can raise the funds, and if there are sufficient qualified applicants, they will produce more medical personnel.

The United States unlike Canada and many other developed countries produces far more specialists that general practitioners. In Canada, France, Scandinavia, Germany, Great Britain, Italy a as well as in many other industrialized countries, more doctors are GPs than specialists. In these countries governments are involved in funding medical education at a much high level than is the United States. These countries allow only so many specialists to emerge from their medical schools for they place their focus upon preventive care and catching problems at an early stage. Within a financially driven system as exists in the United States the medical schools produces more specialists than GPs since specialists have greater earning potential than do GPs. In Canada I often could get into see my GP for a non-pressing matter in less than half the time it takes for me to see my GP in Iowa City or in Fairfax.

Health Care Reform and Rationing of Medical Care

2010-01-03T14:30:00.002-05:00

Another red herring attack against health care reform is that it will lead to rationed medical treatment. Still another issue is that the reform will put the government between me and my doctor. As these are two sides of the same coin I will deal with them at the same time.

If you consult your medical coverage manual to check if a procedure is covered, you are already under the umbrella of a rationed system. If you have a list of doctors who you can visit under the plan at the full deductable and that list does not cover almost every doctor in the community, you are under already living under a rationed system. If you have to contact your provider for approval of particular procedures before receiving treatment or visiting the specialist, then you are living under a rationed health care system. If there are annual and/or life-time treatment limits in your medical plan (most plans have such a feature), you are living under a rationed system.

All but the most luxurious plans are rationed health care. The plans control which doctors I can visit with the plan covering the fees and what treatment they will cover. When my health care provider requires pre-approval, denies a service and mandates an alternate treatment be explored first a health care bureaucrat, most of whom have no medical training, has come between me and my doctor. Since living in the United States I have had more health care bureaucrats involved in medical decisions than I ever experienced under the Canadian system.

Annually my employer tweaks the medical plan in an effort to control costs. A shifting plan is a reality of the American system. Americans live under one of the most rationed health care systems in the world. The problem is that the average American is totally powerless to impact their design and shape of their health care plan. The decisions are made by the employer and the medical insurance provider as to what will or will not be covered. I could purchase off-system packages, but they are costly and full of loop-holes many of which only become apparent when I need treatment.

The average American would be surprised by the freedom and the quality of care they would experience under the German system, or the Swiss system, or the Italian, or the Japanese or the Canadian systems, all of which have been rated as having a superior system for the average system and at a less cost. In none of those countries are the range and extent of the American pre-approval processes does not exist. In those countries the plan outlines what is covered and what will not be covered, and that list is often more extensive that most American plans.

Then why would Americans strongly defend their existing system while turning a blind eye to the shortcomings of their own system? One reason is the American exceptionalist mindset. Americans, both leaders and the masses, believe that in most areas they have a superior systems and that while the world can learn from them, they have little to learn from others. American pride holds that America is the best in all areas, only grudgingly concede they are not the best in an area only when the volume of data indicates that their “best” position is no longer defensible on that matter.

In 1994 Taiwan decided to overhaul its medical system. Taiwan is a country that looks to copy the United States as much as possible. The Taiwanese initially looked at the American system and started to consult ex-patriots and second generation Taiwanese-Americans who were involved in the American system. The Taiwanese government heard over and over again, do not copy the American system as it is inferior to any other health care system existing in the developed world.

Healthcare Unconstitutional

2010-01-02T23:01:00.003-05:00

On of the arguments being made against the American health care reform is that it is an unconstitutional act by the Federal Government. It is argued that the Constitution does not explicitly grant the Federal Government authority over health care. It is true that the Constitution does not give the Federal Government authority over health care just as it does not give the Federal Government authority over a host of matters such as the transportation and telecommunication system or over employment and safety practices.

Hence, federal authority is non-existent to regulate regarding mine safety changes that have literally saved hundreds of lives a year, pollution of the water and air, the air transportation system and funding of roads. It also means that the federal government has overstepped its authority to set mandatory standards regarding automobile safety. I for one would not travel by air or even feel comfortable driving my vehicles above 30 mph without the assurance of Federal regulations and processes from air traffic control, aircraft maintenance, and safe automobiles.

We must remember that there is a distinction between that which is prohibited versus that which is not explicitly addressed. Involvement and regulation of health care is not prohibited the Constitution.

Advocates who argue that health care reform by the Federal Government is unconstitutional are by extension arguing against the Federal Government’s involvement legislating regarding the airwaves and Internet content. Many of these same advocates are calling for the Feds to put in place regulations to put further limits upon things such as pornography. Many of those who are using the unconstitutional argument also call upon the same government to outlaw abortions. If we accepted their unconstitutional argument then they are calling upon the government to do an unconstitutional act, albeit on a different issue, as the Constitution is silent on the pro-life vs pro-choice/abortion debate.

We must remember that the Constitution was penned in one age and in what the authors could envision happening in the future. No one has advocated that the authors of the Constitution were prophets or clairvoyants who foresaw a society far beyond their own. They could not foresee the abortion debate. Abortion was rare and very dangerous in the 18th century, so much so that it was known only to a small handful of people. They saw the world within the national and international political realities of the day and the technology that they could envision of the horizon. They knew of health care, but it was a crude undeveloped system. Hospitals were rare. People lived and died in their homes using home remedies. They did not foresee the modern transportation and telecommunication processes.

That said, they did understand that society and the world evolves. Hence, they empowered a process that encouraged debated and a process of designing laws and regulations to address new challenges. They designed a government that is called to be flexible and creative in addressing modern issues based upon the founding principles.

One of the other arguments that some grasp to argue against the current legislation is that it has passed because of add ons that were done to secure a person's votes. The American political system is not a Parliamentary system where legislation is focused and rarely includes special riders. From the beginning the American system is about trading of favors whereby one member of Congress will support another in return for his/her support for their proposals or for a rider to be included. Hence in the United States to gain a vote it is it not uncommon for a rider to a transportation bill to have a special grant for a company or public work in a particular district. What happened in getting the 60 Senate votes to prohibit a filibuster is such a common event that rare is a bill passed that does not have several riders, a good number of which have little to do with the particular bill.

Tyranny and Theocracy

2009-12-21T18:30:00.002-05:00

The purpose of the Iranian revolution was not just to overthrow the Shah and his despotic regime but to establish a theocracy. The Iranians held a theocracy under a collective of spiritual men would establish and lead a just upright society and the country would flourish.

One of the principle architects of the theocracy Grand Ayatullah Montazeri recently died at the age of 87 as an outspoken critic of the theocracy he helped established. As one of the theocracy’s founders and Grand Ayatullahs Montazeri even though under house arrest since 1997 he had greater freedom to speak his mind and thereby give some legitimacy to the Green Movement for questioning the results of recent elections.

While maintaining he was not disillusioned he criticized the theocratic government for exchanging one oppressive tyranny for another. Monatzeri took issue with political clerics for amassing power and wealth rather than serving the people. He condemned ongoing mass executions of dissidents and for issuing death statements that give people the impression that the Iranian theocratic government is in the business of killing people. He came to advocate freer speech and an open press that he repressed in his earlier years.

I suspect that most conservative and middle of the road Christians would say that they are not surprised by the religious tyranny and clerics using their positions to accumulate power and wealth for themselves. They are not surprised because Iranians cannot have a true theocracy since they worship a false god and have a flawed human penned holy book. Hence, the theocracy is a failed experiment. Rather than the clerics being spiritually minded and guided by the God’s Spirit, they are guided by self-centered motives and do things to keep themselves in power rather than serving the people.

I concur that the Iranian theocracy has not served the Iranian nation and that it is a very impressive regime. History is replete with examples of leaders corrupted by absolute power. It happened in Rome, in France, England, and the Soviet Union. It occurred in the Roman Catholic Church. It happens within an unfettered capitalist system. Even though there are checks and balances against absolute power, the corrupting nature of power and amassing of wealth through office also happens within a democratic system.

Some conservative Christians dream of having a theocracy. If a Christian theocracy were established in any country would we see the same corrupting influence? It is pity to say this, but yes we would see the same. Human beings who are high minded have a way justifying their actions while doing ungodly and unrighteous things. It would not take long for narrow set of religious views to prevail while those who differ in thought and lifestyle are oppressed, and sometimes oppressed in an ungodly fashion. Quietly at first leaders would gather greater power and the wealth trappings of that come with it. Two decades or so later their hording of self-serving power and gathering of immense personal wealth will be done less quietly. Hence, over the years tyranny would be firmly entrenched.

Regardless of the title or the justification absolute power is dangerous for the populous.

Are “War on Christmas” Warriors Helping to Further the Secularization of Christmas

2009-12-18T11:28:00.003-05:00

For at least two decades the conservative element of the American church, particularly fundamentalist and a significant part of the evangelical church, has been concerned over the secularization of Christmas and fearing the Christian holiday in a secular holiday.

Since 2005 heavily driven by right wing Christian elements and spinmister Bill O’Reilly a “war on Christmas” has been waged. The “war on Christmas” is an effort to keep “America’s favorite holiday” from being secularized and neutered so that non-Christians are not offended. The Family Research Council argues “Christmas” is inherently a religious term and therefore the holiday is inherently a Christian holiday and should be celebrated as such. They argue that if a person is to celebrate Christmas then it should be celebrated as a Christian holiday or not at all. In essence this most benevolent position holds that whether a person is a Christian or not, they should use the religious greeting, use the religious symbols, the trappings as if they are Christians. The argument is that they should put on a mask and behave as if they are Christian.

As part of the war O’Reilly has created a “Christmas friendly” measure to which merchants are evaluated regarding their friendliness towards Christmas. Merchants who do not use “Christmas” in their advertisements, have their staff say “Merry Christmas” and who do not put up an adequate display of Christmas trimmings are scored poorly. A merchant is graded down and berated for advertising “Holiday” sales or using the phrase “Happy Holidays.” Rather than leaving it to their staff to decide what to say many merchants have mandated that their employees say “Merry Christmas”. Advertisements are festooned with Christmas greetings and artwork and stores are decorated according to the seasonally politically correct manner and that “Christmas” is prevalent.

Four years ago The Salvation Army was criticized by the soldiers of the war on Christmas for becoming politically correct and removing “Merry Christmas” from its kettle signs. “Merry Christmas” was never removed as it was not on the sign to begin with. The other day I was looking at some old pictures and came across three of with kettle signs from the late 1970s…no “Merry Christmas” was on these old “Need Knows No Season” signs either.

The other week O’Reilly and one of his colleagues running into bombast were pleased that they made a difference and are winning the war on Christmas. They are pleased to be in the forefront in beating back the secularization of Christmas.

For all their glowing pride, these soldiers who are fighting against the secularization of Christmas are decades late. Just a rose by any other name is a rose, Christmas by any other name is a secular holiday in both Canada and the United States. It is time for that we take a deep breath, get a life and recognize the reality that Christmas is a secular holiday. GASP.

Yes the celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ rests below the surface, but it the celebration and worship of the Christ child has become encased in layers and layers of cultural celebrations. One only has to work one day in a Salvation Army distribution center or stand at a kettle outside WalMart for a day to see that people of various non-Christian faith traditions are participating in the gift exchange.

Though efforts are made to tie the Santa story into the Christian story of Christmas, Santa has nothing to do with the religious holiday. Neither do the decorations and the parties. The great Christmas feast is not part of the Christmas story. Likewise, the tradition of traveling great distances to spend the holiday with family and friends has no connection with the Jesus story and worship of the Christ-child. The timing of the holiday is tied to ancient pagan Roman, Germanic and other ancient cultures celebration of the winter solstice. All these elements have become attached to the celebration of Christmas and as each was added, each in their own way added to the secularization of Christmas.

A stone through from my office is the Egyptian Embassy where last week they put up a Christmas tree and decorations. Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, druids, atheists, etc. are celebrating the holiday by putting up trees, lights, decorations, exchanging gifts, and partying with friends and family. Many of these folks are comfortable with being greeted by “Merry Christmas” and giving the greeting too. Evie and I know Jewish families that celebrate both Hanukah and a secular Christmas holiday. In Iowa I knew a Hindu family that celebrated Christmas as an American cultural holiday…they sang the songs and carols, they put up the decorations, they bought and exchanged gifts and other than going to church you would not know they were any different from our family.

Outside the Sunday Advent readings and carol or two sung, from my observations few Christians become mindful of the religious component of the holiday until Christmas Eve, and possibly part of Christmas Day. Why I say part of Christmas Day is that the birth of the Christ-child is not part of or upon the minds of the family during much of what happens during the Christmas Day celebration with family and friends. Sure we listen to Christmas music on the radio, ipods, stereos, etc., but the religious carols intermingle with the secular songs and the Santa fable to be part of a cultural celebration.

As for expecting, nay demanding “Merry Christmas” be widely spoken and be the standard retail establishment greeting once we are into December, a troubling question plays upon my mind. Given the “Merry Christmas” greeting being mandated by managers, and expected to be said to all and from all their employees regardless of their faith, how would the “Merry Christmas” advocates react to a store requiring all their employees to give a Jewish or Hindu or Muslim greeting during those religions high holidays and festivals? I fear that there would be a huge cry out from the Christian community over such a requirement being placed upon Christian employees and the greeting being spoken to all. Such an outcry would expose the fallacy of the “war on Christmas” position and that such a hard stance is not in keeping with the constitution.

I shake my head and laugh at the “war on Christmas” warriors. Instead of getting to the heart of the issue and challenging the Church to jettison the secular elements, to simplify the holiday and focus upon the heart of the Christmas story and the worship of the Christ-child, I suspect that in the long run the “war on Christmas” warriors are reinforcing the opposite of that which they seek. The more “Merry Christmas” along with all the celebration and trappings are used and spread about within the secular and non-Christian communities, the deeper Christmas will become an American cultural celebration. In so doing they are helping to reinforce the commercialization and secularization of the holiday that is celebrated by everyone, regardless of one’s faith system.

Warriors like O’Reilly are focused upon and battling for a phrase, as if that phrase was a mystical magical phrase. They are treating the phrase as if it were lucky rabbit’s foot, say it enough and all will be well with the country because God will bless us type of mindset. They are repeating the same error Israel did with the Tabernacle which they brought into their camp thinking it would give them victory (they lost badly).

These warriors push retailers and civic leaders to have the trappings of Christmas. They are attempting to keep the holiday from being neutered many decades after it has already been commercialized and neutered. In their fight for the Christian Christmas face, they are overlooking the message of Hosea 6:6, that it is not the trappings and the practice of a religious ritual that is called for, but the a generous compassionate heart.

The Necessity of the Separation of Church and State

2009-12-14T12:51:00.006-05:00

As a Canadian who is also an American citizen, one of the most puzzling things about American society is how the separation of church and state is understood. The concept has gone well beyond the separation Canadians understand.

In Canada the government is religious neutral. It does not promote or support one religious faith above another. It recognizes that every resident has the right to congregate for worship and worship as they so wish without governmental interference. People are free to hold any religious views a person so wishes. Likewise her residents are free to reject any and all religious believes as conscious so dictates. In return what the government and the country expects is that its faith communities to be respectful of those that hold different beliefs, to carry out religious dialogue in a civil manner and to respect the law of the land.

In return, the government protects the individual’s and group’s right to religious express if that expression is not contrary to the law of the land. Each group’s property is treated the same and allowed certain property tax exemptions and its income is tax exempt if it falls within designated bounds. Gifts to all recognized religious bodies treated the same with no group being favored above the other.

In other words, in Canada not only is government and religion not antagonistic towards one another, they frequently partner together to provide significant good for the overall welfare of the community. In the United States there is an antagonistic edge towards church and state relationships.

When the Unites States was created, it appears that the founders had similar religion neutral practices in mind. In various commentaries penned by them regarding the founding documents are references to religious neutrality and the recognition that other than Judaism other religions such as Islam may well be part of the American milieu. They also recognized that it would be left to subsequent generations to work out religious neutrality in practical terms as the country evolves and changes.

The religious neutrality has been an ongoing challenge, particularly in the last six decades. As the nation became more pluralistic court ruling and other laws were specifically designed to be religion neutral. Unfortunately some the the reaction from the conservative church became anxious that the Lord's Prayer and other Christian expressions were being removed from schools and other government locations. The intent was for neutrality but various elements in the church saw it as a threat to the church and the "dechristianization of the Christian nation." While there was some cause for concern as there was some rulings and legislation that appeared to be an effort to create a religion free environment, the bulk was an effort toward religious neutrality. As with many other conflicts the more conflicted the spirit, the further both parties pushed each other apart so that increasingly a religion free environment seemed to the goal.

Today there is a growing reluctance to see religious communities be involved in any venture that involves public funds. A religion free rather than religion neutral stance appears to have greater force. Some on the left fear that the funds will be used to proselytize while some on the left see the funds as providing an opportunity for the government to dictate religious belief, conduct and employment policies. The church does not have innocent hands.

What I find most interesting is those who are most fearful of governmental interference in her beliefs and practices are frequently the very same groups that are aggressively attempting to force government legislatures to design various laws around their religious teachings. The Roman Catholic bishops and the right to life elements of the church are demanding that government funding for abortion for any cause (including incest, rape and immediate physical health risk to the mother) be explicitly prohibited in the health reform legislation. This is an example of religious views being pushed out upon the country which on the whole does not support such an extreme position.

One bishop has gone as ask a Roman Catholic Congressman not take communion because he is willing to allow for federal funding of abortion. Communion within the Roman Catholic Church is one of the primary sacraments of grace, and the Church is withdrawing that primary vehicle from the Congressman because he will not agree with the Church on this one point. There is no separation of church and state.

Another example of a branch of the church that is attempting to force its views upon the community as a whole is the ballot and other initiatives regarding gay rights and gay marriage. While the initiatives are carefully crafted in their wording, and positioned to be defending “the traditions marriage”, what underlies it all is inflexible religious teachings and homophobia. As an aside, any cursory understanding of western and world history through the course of history shows us that the “traditional marriage” is anything but traditional, but is for the most part a modern North American creation.

Interestingly these groups do not see their political lobbying as being wrong or as entrenching a particular set of views upon the country at large. If the Jehovah Witnesses had greater political clout and were pushing for blood transfusions not be permitted or paid from public funds, would these same groups not take issue with the JWs for imposing their religious views upon the country as a whole? I doubt that they would remain silent.

It is such political activities of the religious right that pushes for people to have a stronger demarcation between church and state within the United States. In the last year I have come to see that the more dogmatic views of the separation of church and state is necessary in the United States whereas it is not in Canada. The separation is necessary to protect the state and the citizens of the country at large from a highly active and forceful religious group from having undo sway and having that brand of religion receiving preferential treatment, or worse tyranny of one religious viewpoint dominating society and how the country is governed.

Bowl Challenge - My Choices

2009-12-12T20:11:00.027-05:00

The other day I posted a blog challenge....to pick as many as possible 20 bowl winners. While all five BSC games must be in the mix, the other 15 can be selected from any of the remaining 29 bowl games. My 20 selections are in red. For a few I have provided some rationale.

My pics are in red...when the game is over the winner will be enlarged and in bold.

BCS Five

BCS No. 1 vs. BCS No. 2...... Alabama vs. Texas

Rose Bowl (1st).... Oregon vs. Ohio State

Allstate Sugar (1st)...... Florida vs. Cincinnati
I would love to see Jeff Quinn, Cincy’s interim coach and his charges defeat Florida, but I cannot see the Bearcat defense handling the Florida offense, particularly when they are out to show that their lost to Alabama was a fluke. I hope Quinn does a strong enough job to earn the head coach position.

Tostitos Fiesta (4th)..... TCU vs. Boise State

FedEx Orange (5th) .....Georgia Tech vs. Iowa
My heart hopes for Iowa but my realist side says “get a life.” Though Stanzi is back, he will be rusty after being out for the last three games. GT’s triple option offense will challenge and overwhelm Iowa’s defense. After LSU trouncing GT last year, GT will be playing with a chip on their shoulder. Ferentz will have Iowa prepared and they will be gritty, but they lack the depth on both sides of the ball to handle a top tier team like GT.

My Other 15 Selections

St. Petersburg (19th)..... UCF vs. Rutgers
Meineke Car Care (26th)..... Pittsburgh vs. North Carolina
Emerald (26th)...... USC vs Boston College
This is the under achievers versus the over achievers. USC’s pride is on the line. I expect a hungry and focused USC to win by at least 14.

AdvoCare Independence (28th)..... Texas A&M vs. Georgia
Champs Sports (29th)..... Miami (FL) vs. Wisconsin
Pacific Life Holiday (30th) ......Nebraska vs. Arizona
I do not think Nebraska has another game in them like they had against Texas. Arizona’s offense should score at least 17 points. I do not think Nebraska’s poor offense should score more than 13 pts.

Insight (31st)..... Iowa State vs. Minnesota
Chick-fil-A (31st)..... Tennessee vs. Virginia Tech

Outback (1st) ..... Northwestern vs. Auburn
Konica Gator (1st) ..... Florida State vs West Virginia
On paper WV should win and will because FSU’s defense is too anemic to stop the running of Divine and the scrambling QB Brown who has an arm that will pick FSU’s secondary apart. Though FSU will be motivated to give Bowden his last victory, and Bowden will have a good game plan his defense will not be strong enough to handle the Brown-Divine attack.

Capital One (1st) .... Penn State vs. LSU
My head says go with Penn, but I am selecting LSU. LSU could carry the day if the right LSU team shows up. A focused LSU defense should handle Penn’s offence, but the LSU D-line will need to keep pressure on Clark or Clark will have a field day with the passing game. Jefferson will need to have a great game like last year’s Chick-fil-A Bowl in order to compensate for an anemic run game that is missing the injured Scott.

Valero Alamo (2nd) ...... Texas Tech vs. Michigan State
Mich State does not have the horses to match Texas Tech and Mich. State coaching has made questionable calls throughout the season. I will still be cheering for Michigan State to upset Texas Tech.

PapaJohns.com (2nd) ..... Connecticut vs. South Carolina
SC is a well coached team and while UConn has done very well and is building a solid program, its offense will not have a tough go against SC and SC’s inconsistent offense which started to mature late in the season should have enough success to win if they can avoid turnovers and the untimely bad penalties

AutoZone Liberty (2nd) ..... Arkansas vs East Carolina State
Ark defense is too porous – ECS has handled high powered offenses like Ark and has a solid offense too. Also Chip Holz is a creative motivational coach who is on the rise…his team will be ready and disciplined.

International (2nd) ...... South Florida vs. Northern Illinois
Nor Ill almost took down to Big Ten teams and they are stronger than they first appear. SF started well but stumbled in the last third of the season. If SF is to win, they have to stop NI’s strong running game and again have a solid offensive game that they showed against Florida State.

Others – italic print are teams for whom I am cheering and believe will win:

Brut Sun (31st) ..... Oklahoma vs. Stanford
AT&T Cotton (2nd) .... Oklahoma State vs. Mississippi State
New Mexico .... Wyoming vs. Fresno State
Gaylord Music City .... Clemson vs Kentucky
Sheraton Hawaii ..... Southern Methodist vs. Nevada
Little Caesars Bowl .... Ohio vs. Marshall
Texas .... Navy vs. Missouri
Roady's Humanitarian ..... Idaho vs. Bowling Green

Football Bowl Challenge

2009-12-10T18:46:00.001-05:00

This is a challenge that for the most part is primarily for Josh, Evie and myself…and possibly for Christian too…as we tend to follow US college football more intentionally than others in the family. The challenge is to go on the record as to the projected winner of 20 of the 34 bowls.

By the end of December 17, about 36 hours before the first bowl being played, select 20 out of the 34 bowls. While in the mix must be the 5 BSC bowls, it is left to the individual to choose which 15 of the remaining 29 bowls he or she thinks will be the winner. Feel free to explain your choice. Let’s see who is able to project the most winners and have bragging rights.

I plan to make my selections by Monday morning.