1. Other Aspects about Rule and Ruin of Note 2. Political Past Shown as Prologue 1. Other Aspects about Rule and Ruin of Note Yes, we realize there is a lot of frothing at the mouth type of hyperventilating outrage out there this week about topics like the IRS’ focus on Tea Party organizations. But you should know by now our focus is not to give you the knee jerk reaction without all the facts. If that’s what you want, you have lots of choices. What you get here is a dispassionate analysis that gives you the perspective you need to keep from riding off in the wrong direction. So, stand by. We’ll have something to say about those topics. Later. Today’s paragraph two is our review of the book, Rule and Ruin, a history of the Republican Party over the last 60 years. Given space constraints in paragraph two, we wanted to offer you some additional topics and quotes in the book we think make it worthwhile. p. 273 the impact of Kevin Phillips and his book “The Emerging Republican Majority” which used race as a wedge issue in the aftermath of Civil Rights legislation to leverage Southern voters. How Nixon distrusted and undermined moderates and smart people p. 321 An amazing story of Donald Rumsfeld’s party first loyalty over personal friendship p. 322 p. 330 Rep Peter McCloskey described Republican principles as “individualism, openness and truth in government, and in human rights and dignity” and bemoaned the drift from those values. How Watergate destroyed Nixon’s attempt to create a “New Majority” p. 340 How the 1968 Republican convention, based on the 1964 election, slanted delegate representation to favor the South and small states p. 355 How organizations like the Heritage Foundation came to be p. 344 P 345, comment by stalwart Illinois Republican Henry Hyde on banning semi-automatic weapons and concerns about “Saturday Night Specials”. “In those days, there was less pressure on you to take a particular ideological position if the evidence convinced you otherwise.” p. 350 H. K. “Bud” Crowl, an Ohio party official, speaking of using the local primary to remove Charles W. Whalen (see paragraph two), “We may lose a seat but keep our honor and integrity.” Once Whalen was removed, the Democrats took the seat for the next twenty years. p. 355 How “Supply side economic theory” gave Republicans an advantage in elections. p. 377 How Republicans were turned into a party as a mechanism for delivering << MORE >>

1. Musing on Meacham 2. Negotiation, Consistency and Leadership 1. Musing on Meacham Bellevue University hosted an outstanding program on May 4, 2013 featuring Jon Meacham. Meacham is a historian, Pulitzer Prize winning author and Executive Editor and Executive Vice President of Random House. You will probably recognize him from his frequent appearances on programs such as Meet the Press. Meacham delivered a very compelling presentation based on his most recent book, Thomas Jefferson—The Art of Power. Of the marvelous insights he offered, I was most taken with these. Those whom we considered to be our most outstanding Presidents had two critical skills: They were able to convince the people to sacrifice and have something less now in order to have something more in the future. They had the ability to make deals. Meacham’s remarks are thus in keeping with both another source I’ve recommended before and with today’s paragraph two. In Stephen Covey’s interview with Tony Robbins circa 1992*, Covey stated that for organizations to work effectively, they must be able to make deals. And for people and organizations to make deals, they must have trust. Yet the impact of polarized politics, said Covey, was to destroy trust. So it is I despair for the ability of our political system to put people in place who will have the trust needed to make the deals that must be negotiated/made. That’s why I continue to argue our first task is to modify our political system so it can put people in place with the trust needed. Otherwise we are in serious trouble. *http://training.tonyrobbins.com/1900/stephen-covey-1932-2012-a-model-for-what-human-beings-are-truly-capable-of 2. Negotiation, Consistency and Leadership You don’t get what you deserve; you get what you negotiate. --Chester Karrass The recent flap about furloughs for Air Traffic Controllers brought Karrass’ saying to mind. How appropriate, too. I don’t travel for business as much as I used to, but there was a time when you couldn’t go through an airline magazine without seeing an advertisement for one of Karrass’ seminars. The fees for those seminars were always hefty, but maybe President Obama and the Democrats should make the investment. Let’s review the facts to illustrate the need for the training. During and after the 2012 election campaign, Democrats have argued << MORE >>

1. The “Grounds Crew” of Elections 2. Perspectives on the Gun Vote 1. The “Grounds Crew” of Elections Showing up to vote is easy for us voters. Voting is easy because some other folks labored long and hard to make it so. That’s the lesson I learned from attending the annual meeting of the Omaha chapter of the League of Women Voters. The speaker was Neal Erickson, Nebraska’s Deputy Secretary of State for Elections. Those of us who are concerned with politics and governance tend to focus on elections from the perspective of policy and partisanship. People like Erickson in a state’s Secretary of State Office or a County Clerk office have another perspective. Who votes in what location is both a political matter and a practical matter. Drawing a precinct line in a certain way for a certain level of office may make great logic for that one consideration. The difficulty is in assessing the ripple effect with other voting categories such as school board, city council or utilities. The more subcategories you have jammed into a polling place, the more variations you have on the ballot. This compounds the complexity of the number of ballots you need to have on hand at a polling station, as well as making sure the ballot you give a voter is “their” ballot. Further, how do you predict the total number of ballots you have on hand at a polling station based on predicted turn out? What’s your plan for delivering additional ballots if you run out? Part of the expense of an election is printing ballots. For the sake of the security of the process, you can’t allow ballots to be printed at the polling site. Further, the ballots must be << MORE >>

1. One Other Quality to Emulate 2. What Voters Should Emulate about Conservatives 1. One Other Quality to Emulate Today’s Ezine is about the qualities Conservatives exhibit as voters that make them a formidable force in American politics and, therefore, worthy of emulation. Just as in any other area of competitive life, there are certain disciplines that must be adhered to in order to attain success. If you wish to have political/electoral success, regardless of your political philosophy, then you should copy the disciplines of conservatives. I want to add one other emulation worthy quality to the list in paragraph two. Conservatives recognize electoral success requires putting their money where their mouth is. Conservatives recognize having a government that behaves in the way they want it to behave is worth investing in. Conservatives recognize voters must be communicated with and persuaded. They therefore make contributions to candidates and parties. They buy memberships that support think tanks and Political Action Committees. They attend fund raising dinners. I recently paraphrased a teaching of Brian Tracy’s to a young job seeker. He was saying a photo of him doing a particular activity on Facebook should not matter to a potential employer. “You’re right,” I said. “It shouldn’t matter. But it does. So why should you give someone a reason to reject you?” Similarly, you might say money shouldn’t matter in politics. But it does. Read the rest of our list in paragraph two today. 2. What Voters Should Emulate about Conservatives Regardless of whether you favor or oppose one political viewpoint or the other, there are certain aspects of the behavior and beliefs of conservative voters all voters should recognize and emulate. Here are those aspects. Conservatives pay attention. Conservatives realize government affects them (and you, i.e. all citizens) personally. Politics is not like a sport you don’t like and can, therefore, ignore because its outcomes have no personal effect. Politics determines the government you have and government impacts the life you live. Like it or not, you need to pay attention. Conservatives have a vision << MORE >>

1. Freedom in the Wind? 2. Achieving Freedom through Frugality 1. Freedom in the Wind? A recent random reading brought my attention to some thoughts about wind and solar energy. Those thoughts are in paragraph 2 today. My reticular cortex having been activated, I came across this article by a Nebraska State Senator that offers some excellent supporting thoughts, which I offer at the link. http://www.omaha.com/article/20130415/NEWS0802/704159995 Before you go on to paragraph 2, we want to express our concerns for those affected by the recent events in Boston, MA and West, TX. May healing come quickly in both cases and (in the case of Boston) justice be not far behind. As I write this, justice in Boston is in hot pursuit of resolution. We say to our people in uniform—be as safe as you can, keep your head down and your powder dry. 2. Achieving Freedom through Frugality One of the concepts impacting me the most from reading The Millionaire Next Door is this. Those who become millionaires often do so because they reach one important conclusion. Keeping up with the Jones became secondary to them. What became primary was creating their own personal (to quote the book) “Go to hell fund”. “Go to hell’ is interpreted as--I don’t like you, I don’t want to work for you and/or I don’t want to do business with you—and you can go to hell. The desire to have the freedom to make their own choices was the driving force behind their desire to be independently wealthy. We as a country might want to apply that concept to energy independence. What linked the two thoughts for me was << MORE >>

1. Matrices and Questions for the Gun Debate 2. What Our Local Election Means to You 1. Matrices and Questions for the Gun Debate The amateurish nature of the debate about guns is implied in the title. This is a debate about weaponry and firearms. The fact we can’t use the proper terms is indicative of the level of the debate. The debate is, of course, highly charged emotionally. This is the worst kind of debate because (like weaponry itself) the subject matter should involve the most rational of logic possible. One of the issues in the debate it seems to me is being clear about what type of weapon violence we’re talking about preventing. This is a big country. The needs and uses for weaponry are much different in rural Wyoming than they are in places like Los Angeles, Dallas, Chicago or Cleveland. So part of the discussion has to be if you’re proposing some rule intended to help urban America is to avoid some unintended burdensome consequence on rural America. A second category in the matrix concerns mentally unstable shooters. Based on recent events, that leads to other questions. First, how do we identify them? Second, how do we keep them from getting firearms? The Virginia Tech, Tucson and the movie theater shooter examples say we need better control at the retail level. Two Omaha shootings (Von Mauer and the murder in Millard Schools) and Newtown say we need to have existing gun owners better secure their weapons. How do we do those things? A third category is the gang and drug related violence. The reality is America experienced a similar level of violence during the Prohibition era. In fact, the grotesque violence was one of the factors behind repealing Prohibition. Prohibition should have proved to us anytime you have a commodity in demand that is not subject to the open laws of commerce you will have a trade overseen by the law of the jungle and predictable carnage as a result. So, not only do we have the societal cost of the violence in terms of death and destruction due to weaponry, we also have the costs of incarceration. As part of this discussion of weaponry, will we also have a discussion changing how we do business? Should we legalize certain drugs? Will we not only lower the cost of incarceration, but stop spending tax money trying to stop the unstoppable? Shouldn’t we be talking about no longer spending tax money to try to stop this trade and instead bring in tax money from regulating the trade? And finally, what should be done to address << MORE >>

1. Commentary by Two Conservatives 2. Omaha Could Have Had a V-8 Vote 1. Commentary by Two Conservatives I read with interest two articles by Conservative commentators about the impact of the Iraq War on conservativism in general and the Republican Party in particular. One is by Ross Douthat and the other by Jonah Goldberg. I don’t necessarily agree with all the points in both articles, but having their perspective is worthwhile. I was particularly taken with Douthat’s description of where we are today. “Just as the post-Vietnam Democrats came to be regarded as incompetent, wimpy and dangerously radical all at once, since 2004 the Bush administration’s blunders — the missing W.M.D., the botched occupation — have been woven into a larger story about Youth and Science and Reason and Diversity triumphing over Old White Male Faith-Based Cluelessness.” The inability to grasp this perspective is part of the reason we have the continuing conflict we have today. Here are links to the articles. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/24/opinion/sunday/douthat-the-obama-era-brought-to-you-by-the-iraq-war.html http://townhall.com/columnists/jonahgoldberg/2013/03/29/can-gop-reverse-the-damage-done-by-iraq-n1552105 Your input, as always, is welcome. 2. Omaha Could Have Had a V-8 Vote There is a well known commercial where the main character slaps their forehead and utters a phrase about having a healthy drink instead. When you’re finished reading this, you should have a similar thought about how local elections such as the upcoming Omaha Mayoral election are done. (And since most cities and towns do their local elections in the same way, this likely applies to you and where you live, too.) The current election process means voters will probably have to go to the polls twice. Voters will go once in April to narrow the existing candidates down to two. Voters will then << MORE >>

1. The Monkey Head of Gay Marriage 2. Conspiracy for Feudalism? 1. The Monkey Head of Gay Marriage Looking at the opinion polls on the issue of Gay Marriage would seem to indicate more and more people are properly applying the Monkey Head Theory to this political issue. If you get involved in a discussion on the topic, I hope you will use the Monkey Head Theory to set the tone for the discussion. Not only will be get more people thinking in a constructive way, but hopefully we can get more people to apply the theory to the other issues we can’t seem to resolve and are holding back our progress as a society. 2. Conspiracy for Feudalism? Conspiracy theories are not limited to a single spectrum of the political continuum. While the right side of the spectrum is deeply suspicious of government in and of itself, the left is deeply suspicious of a government controlled by moneyed interests. A prime example is Dennis Marker’s book entitled Fifteen Steps to Corporate Feudalism: How the Rich Convinced America’s Middle Class to Eliminate Themselves. Reading this book left two overall impressions. First, the book is written for ease of reading. The book is not academically rigorous. The book’s footnotes are few and the language is geared to an lower reading level. Such characteristics are not necessarily bad things. Better to write a book more people are capable of and motivated for reading than less, but the limited use of documentation makes the book vulnerable to being dismissed as conjecture and conspiracy theory. This leads to the second impression. This book continuously implies there was a conspiracy among some shadowy unnamed entity to impose Feudalism on America. Marker’s contention is the things done to the American economy and government began with the end result of Feudalism in mind. The more accurate assessment is this. Having read books << MORE >>

1. Larry On Television Sunday Night 2. How to Not Follow the Wrong Signs 1. Larry On Television Sunday Night Larry was interviewed by Brian Mastre of Omaha’s NBC affiliate WOWT Channel 6. Brian intends to use the interview for the 10:00 p.m. Sunday, March 24 News show. The interview is about how using Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) would make Omaha’s elections for Mayor, City Council and the School Board more effective and efficient (plus would save money). Here’s a link to their web site if you want to try to watch on line, plus we will likely feature a link on our on line places. http://www.wowt.com One additional thought about our review of Hannan’s The New Road to Serfdom. Hannan is very complimentary of America’s Primary system for political parties to determine their candidates for the general election. Hannan sees it as far superior to a system whereby the internal party apparatus chooses who will be the party’s representative. We agree, with this caveat. Our system’s inability to tolerate multiple competitive political parties discourages competition and too strongly constrains elected officials because of the threat of primary challenges. Without the existence of alternative parties, the only possible realistic competition is within the parties as to what the position of the party will be. Not only does the potential for this internal civil policy war constrain how an elected official votes, it also constrains the general public’s choices. Having more choice and competition is just another reason we advocate instituting RCV in all 50 states for all offices. 2. How to Not Follow the Wrong Signs The paratroopers landing in Normandy for World War II’s D-Day invasion didn’t know where they were. Anti-aircraft fire caused their planes to fly off course and the paratroopers to jump somewhere other than the place they planned. This in turn caused them to rely on posted road signs to determine where they were and which direction to go. Unfortunately, they found out the Germans had changed the signs. This meant the paratroopers were going the wrong way until they discovered their error and went back to the unalterable fundamentals of map and compass (No GPS in those days!). Reading The Road to Serfdom (Reader’s Digest condensed version by F. A. Hayek) and the modern The New Road to Serfdom, by Daniel Hannan brought that story to mind as a metaphor for their content. The recollection is appropriate, given that the original Road was a cautionary tale from the world’s experience with the rise of Fascism in World War II. The pervading sense one gets from reading both these books is << MORE >>

1. What the Tax Code Has Wrought 2. Wealth Distribution: Ideal, Perception and Reality 1. What the Tax Code Has Wrought Today’s paragraph two shows what the tax code has wrought on wealth distribution. Before we go there, though, I want to offer a couple of comments on last week’s Ezine. There seems to be a great hue and cry that our national budgetary problems are spending and spending alone. Could it be this argument is being made in order to distract you from how little our largest businesses are paying tax on their profits? Consider this article by Robert Scheer and make up your own mind. http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/03/12-0 And for those who think federal spending is surging out of control, consider this. https://pollways.bangordailynews.com/2013/01/03/maine-politics/no-federal-spending-isnt-surging-its-falling 2. Wealth Distribution: Ideal, Perception and Reality One of the keys to effective management begins with the act of comparing the ideal (or goal) for something with the reality of the situation. The contrast between the two often reveals what needs to be done to make the ideal closer to the reality. As voters, our job is to ensure the people we elect to office are implementing policies which use reality to form plans for achieving the ideal. A recent video offers just such a contrast regarding American wealth distribution*. Although the video refers to the author of the data being << MORE >>

1. More on Revenue and Taxation 2. We Spend Too Much 1. More on Revenue and Taxation We want to clarify our thoughts in paragraph two. We are not saying Facebook should not take a legitimate tax break and maximize profit for its shareholders. We want Facebook to make as much in profits as they possibly can, as we wish for all other businesses. Profit, as we have written before, is not a dirty word. What we have a problem with is the tax break being made available at a time when we have deficits and increasing debt. Our expectation of elected officials should be something like this. Government functions are analyzed for need and level of effort. Give and take occurs. I may want something done for my constituents I consider vital, but someone else considers frivolous. The someone else has something else they consider vital, but I consider frivolous. Between ourselves and our colleagues, we barter. We arrive at a total cost for all these endeavors. We consider that total cost in relation to the impact assessing that cost will have on the private economy. We adjust as we can, but at some point we have to say, “We must have this amount of money.” So now we turn our attention to how we will raise that money. Borrowing is << MORE >>

1. More on Being “Conservative Enough” 2. Choices for Those Weary of Constant Political Crisis 1. More on Being “Conservative Enough” Welcome to issue Number 260, our fifth anniversary of political thought and analysis. Certainly there is never any lack of material to write about. In paragraph two today, we talk about constant political crisis, the latest of which is (of course) the sequestration mess. The essential truth is when both sides set this up they thought the 2012 election would result in “their” side being totally in charge and being able to resolve the matter “their way.” But then voters threw them the biggest curve of all by not giving total control to either side. That’s what we wrote about in Ezine #248 High Centered. Settle in folks, you have another 22 months of this to endure. Last week’s paragraph one asked for definitions of what it means to be “Conservative enough”. One reader (who prefers to remain anonymous) offered the following: Larry, Good morning! Here are my thoughts on the fact some Republicans are glad Johanns is retiring, and Fortenberry is not an acceptable replacement, because neither are conservative enough! Is this the beginning of the end of the Republican Party as we know it? And if so, who will emerge as the "new" party or parties? Tea Party? Conservative Party? Ultra Conservative Party? Ultra Ultra Conservative Party? Survivalist Ultra Ultra Conservative Party? These party's conventions aren't sounding like very much fun! Remember the movie "Life of Brian"? (or was it "Bryan"?) There were << MORE >>

1. What Does It Mean to Be “Conservative Enough”? 2. Stories about Rubio and Reagan 1. What Does It Mean to Be “Conservative Enough”? Several U.S. Senators have announced they do not intend to seek re-election in 2014. One of those Senators is Nebraska’s Mike Johanns. This has set off speculation on who might run for his seat, especially from the Republican Party. This led to a story in the Omaha World Herald* about a how a sitting Congressman from the Nebraska delegation was considered unworthy of running by an out of state PAC because the Congressman was (in essence) not “conservative enough”. I invite you dear readers, therefore (especially the ones who consider themselves to be conservatives), to tell me what you think. What does a candidate have to do to be considered “conservative enough”? Post your replies on (first choice) my Facebook page, my Blog or just reply directly to me. Let’s see what you have to say. *http://www.omaha.com/article/20130221/NEWS/702219886 2. Stories about Rubio and Reagan U.S. Senator Marco Rubio’s unscripted moment delivering the Republican rebuttal to President Barack Obama’s 2013 State of the Union Speech is similar to another such moment President Ronald Reagan once suffered. Rubio, in case you didn’t see it for yourself, developed what is known in some circles as “a bad case of the cottonmouth.” In other words, Rubio got very thirsty and needed a drink of water to go on. In other settings, water is usually << MORE >>

1. Writer Says, “No to Partisanship” 2. How Bad Is It? 1. Writer Says, “No to Partisanship” “I watched a good portion of Chuch Hagel’s recent Senate confirmation hearing. What would the hearing would have been like if Mitt Romney had been elected and had nominated Chuck Hagel for defense secretary? “I submit to you that the questions would have been exactly the same, except the Democrats and the Republicans would have swapped each other’s cue cards and taken the opposing view. “This is why the word angry is correct when describing the electorate’s view of our political representation in Washington. Bury the political hogwash and do the right thing.” The preceding is an excerpted quote from a letter to the editor in my local paper yesterday*. His opinion is largely a reflection of my own. While I share the writer’s annoyance, I want him to also understand the reason for his annoyance and why officials are highly unlikely to “do the right thing”. To me, the writer’s comments seem to me to be based on the assumption that elected officials in our National government share a common goal and simply disagree over how to accomplish that goal. This is not a correct assumption. As paragraph two points out today, one of the two political parties has morphed into a parliamentary style party and the other party has been forced to reorganize itself to meet the challenge. These two parties have distinctly different perspectives on what the role and duties of government should be. Given this evolution, the two political parties are only interested in being able to achieve their agenda, not in doing the right thing. Just as drinkers might mix liquor with something else to make it taste better, voters have tried to temper the mix of elected officials by voting one political party into power for one branch of government and another political party into power for another branch. That approach << MORE >>

1. Same Source, Different Lesson 2. Lessons of the Bin Laden Raid 1. Same Source, Different Lesson The confirmation hearings for John Brennan as head of the CIA are going to cause you to hear a great deal about the use of drones and other intelligence capabilities in America’s counter-terrorism efforts. One of the aspects you’re going to hear brought up is the concern of the impact of drone use on civil liberties. That’s not a bad debate to have, but when you have it, you should keep in mind the other side of the story. The other side is described well in the same book we refer to in paragraph two today, namely, Mark Bowden’s The Finish: The Killing of Osama Bin Laden. Specifically, you should know the confluence of drones, special operators and intelligence is highly effective. And before you start tut-tuting too vigorously about your concerns for civil liberties, realize the alternative to developing and using these tools is a massive and highly expensive expansion of our military. I invite you to seriously consider the costs of these two alternatives before you start condemning one or the other. That means you need to read Bowden’s book. I would also recommend reading the following analysis from Stratfor. http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/avoiding-wars-never-end My bet is once you do you will have a different perspective. 2. Lessons of the Bin Laden Raid The successful raid to kill Osama Bin Laden had its roots in counter terrorism operations conducted in Iraq. Iraq was where the bonds were created between the CIA and the military. Iraq was where the procedures, tactics and relationships were formed. Those assertions came from former U.S. forces in Afghanistan Commander General Stanley McChrystal in a Bloomberg News interview. Those comments offer an opportunity to explain a key point to regarding our recommendations for changing our political system. We think McChrystal’s assessment is accurate, but needs to go farther back. The success McChrystal describes goes back to something called the << MORE >>

1. None of the Above 2. Steroids in Business and Politics 1. None of the Above Every once in a while I hear incredibly stupid proposals from people who believe they are incredibly smart. This week was one of those times. I had someone in a discussion forum whose proposal for making political parties more responsive to the desires of voters was this. This person thought the solution was to have a space on the ballot for each candidate stating “None of the Above”. Their rationale was if enough voters marked their ballots that way, then the parties would have to know the voters were dissatisfied with them and be forced to change. How misguided and illogical. Please send people like this to me. I have prime ocean front property in western Nebraska and I’m looking for the right person to sell it to. The purpose of an election is to put people in office who reflect your views. People elected to office get to approve budgets and write laws making their point of view a reality. The Civil Servants in government then implement those budgets and enforce those laws. (That’s why many of their jobs are in law enforcement.) The two parties could care less if you mark your ballot “None of the Above”. They will be in office and you will be on the outside bitching. You may as well have stayed home. If you don’t like the two major parties, then get behind our program. Give yourself the option of being able to vote for another party without fearing your least favorite choice will win. Don’t be stupid and think you’re smart. Do something that shows you really are incredibly smart. Get your friends to do it, too. 2. Steroids in Business and Politics The events about to be described are important to you (regardless of your interest in those events) because they demonstrate principles important to society as a whole. Recent events highlight society’s rejection << MORE >>

1. Are You Listening GOP? 2. Internal Republican Critics 1. Are You Listening GOP? To add to the background of today’s paragraph two comments, we have additional comments by Colin Powell http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/21/colin-powell-birther_n_2520578.html?icid=maing-grid10%7Chtmlws-main-bb%7Cdl12%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D260024 As well as comments by RNC Chairman and former Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/haley-barbour-stupid-comments-hurt-gop-86716.html And comments about Republicans not being the “stupid party” by Louisiana Republican Governor Bobby Jindal. http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/jindal-gop-a-populist-party-86699.html?hp=l2 Let me add this news flash. Americans expect their politics to work the same way their economy works. Competing manufacturers build something and compete to see which one of their products more people will buy. The way to win is to have more people buy what you build. The way to be seen as cheating scumbags is to win by keeping people from buying your competitors’ products so your sales look like they’re better. If you didn’t win the competition on a level playing field, then you need to find the flaws in your product and change them. If you’re unwilling to change your product, then accept the fact you’re going to keep losing because your product is not what people want. Oh, and here’s another hint. Ask yourself what you’re going to do about the people who say “stupid stuff”. You can’t << MORE >>

1. Views on Tax Sources and Uses 2. Throw the Bums Out! 1. Views on Tax Sources and Uses The debate over government spending and taxation was not completely resolved by last week’s avoidance of the so-called Fiscal Cliff. Accordingly, here are four different perspectives on American wealth distribution and the insights they offer into the questions of what the U.S. Government spends taxpayer money on and which sources should be tapped to obtain that money you should find useful as the debate drags on. The Crisis of the Middle Class George Friedman http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/crisis-middle-class-and-american-power?utm_source=freelist-f&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20130108&utm_term=gweekly&utm_content=readmore&elq=0d566aa00a2d462887ff07e484f3fb8e Bernie Sanders, The Soul of America http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/01/09-12 Robert Reich The Hoax of Entitlement Reform http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/01/07-3 Stewart vs. Krugman and the Religion of Austerity http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=9520 2. Throw the Bums Out! The last minute Fiscal Cliff compromise ignited social media and the blogosphere with the cry of, “Let’s vote the bums out!” This piece is intended to show those with this sentiment (or something similar) why voting the “bums” (whoever they are) out is much easier said than done. First of all, how do you differentiate between a “good” elected official and a “bum”? Apparently, therein lays the first difficulty. As was quoted recently in Bloomberg news, there is a significant difference between << MORE >>

1. Lessons from an Austin Powers Movie 2. Lessons from a Fitness Center 1. Lessons from an Austin Powers Movie Since paragraph two today (in keeping with the fact we’re going towards Golden Globe and Academy Award season) is an analogy about movies, I want to squeeze in this other random thought. In one of the Austin Powers movies (it’s the one that’s a spoof of Thunderball) there’s a scene where Mike Meyers’ villain character Doctor Evil has ordered Austin Powers to be taken out and killed in some exotic way. Doctor Evil’s son Scott Evil objects. “Don’t do that,” Scott says. “Every time you try to kill people like him in some fancy way they escape and come back and screw things up. Let’s finish this now. Get me a pistol and I’ll shoot him right now.” After a comedic exchange between father and son Doctor Evil prevails. Powers does indeed escape and come back and screw things up. All of which leads to this thought. Why do we seem to always try to solve our political issues with some fancy solution that satisfies neither side? And so the problem results in some unintended consequence and comes back and screws things up even more? Why can’t we seem to go get a pistol and make sure the problem goes away? (Understand the point I’m trying to make is I admire the decisiveness and once-and-for-all finality of the action, not the violence.) My answer is the system << MORE >>

1. Hindsight for the Future 2. Annoyed and Disgusted 1. Hindsight for the Future I wrote paragraph two today before the midnight New Year’s Eve deal on the so-called Fiscal Cliff. As I write this New Year’s Day, I find the hindsight for what I wrote to offer an instructive perspective. My new year’s prediction is not one that’s difficult to make, although I hope I’m wrong. The new Congress we’re going to have is going to continue the brinksmanship and contentiousness. Expect the posturing and last minute deals to continue to be a part of the political landscape for the next two years. The only ones with the power to change things are us, the voters. The way to change things is to change the way we elect the people who are elected. The way voters are going to change how representatives are elected is for more voters to hear and re-tell the story about making that change. As Seth Godin says, “Story matters.” One of my new year’s resolutions is to clean out my in boxes and other things I have been storing for various reasons. My habit is probably not the best, but the process of review yielded a four year old post by Seth that will give you not only perspective on the last two elections, but paragraph two, as well. http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2008/11/marketing-lesso.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2Fsethsmainblog+%28Seth%27s+Blog%29 2. Annoyed and Disgusted When I reflect on the impact our politics has and is going to have on the way our government (especially at the Federal level) is going to function in the next two years two of the words I would use to describe my sour mood are annoyed and disgusted. How about you? What are the words you would use? I know I have company. I was browsing around yesterday and found a poll* clearly showing the negativity people have towards their anticipation of the events for the coming year. Surprising, though, is the difference between their attitudes towards how they think their government is going to perform contrasted with how they think their personal life is going to go. All of which reminds me of one of Jim Rohn’s sayings. Jim would always say, what i << MORE >>