The Center Strikes Back

Larry Bradley's Weekly Ezine #219 Who's Imposing on Whom?

Larry Bradley — Fri, 18 May 2012 20:56:50 GMT

1. Notes on Events

2. Who’s Imposing on Whom?

1. Notes on Events

First, I am once again selling for charity through my Kiwanis Club packets of General Admission tickets to the Men’s College World Series in Omaha, Nebraska June 15-25/26 (depending on how the final three game playoff goes). I’m selling a book of ten for $80.00, a $30.00 discount. They are good for any one of the games. Not interested for yourself, but want to help? Buy a book and not only will the proceeds go to charity, but we can donate the tickets to a local orphanage or similar organization so some deserving kids can get to see some great baseball. Make your check out to the “Downtown Kiwanis Club of Omaha” and mail it to Kindred Minds Enterprises, 663 N. 132Street, Ste 125, Omaha, NE 68154. I’ll cover the cost of getting the tickets to you. To that end, make sure you include the name and address you want the tickets sent to.

If you’re interested in hearing my talk in Independence, MO at the Blue River Community College on June 5, then please call Carol Brown at 816.604.6585. They’ve had a hiccup with their software, so you need to call rather than register on line.

My presentation to UMKC’s Communiversity is June 4. The link is next and I’m in the summer catalog on page 17. Check them out. They offer some great classes. http://www.umkc.edu/commu

The catalog is now out for Omaha’s Metropolitan Community College’s Non Credit classes and you can register for my class on June 18. I changed the title of the talk at their request to “The Two Party System: Let’s Fix It”. The updated link for registering is:

http://www.mccne.edu/ce .

There was an interesting primary election in Nebraska this week. Deb Fischer’s victory in the Republican contest for the U.S. Senate nomination drew national attention. I’ll have something to say about those results next week.

2. Who’s Imposing on Whom?

Since President Obama’s recent announcement on same sex marriage has made the topic prominent again, I offer these thoughts in the interest of perspective.

There are two sides to good college education. One is the learning gained from the classroom. The other is the learning gained outside the classroom from living with other students. I lived at home my first two years of college and commuted to campus. I was saving money, but I was in a fraternity and I realized I was missing out on the potential of the other side.

Accordingly, I made the decision to move out from home and into the fraternity house. Making the decision I made meant I would have to pay all my living expenses. In turn, that meant I had to work 30 hours a week at a job in addition to carrying a full load of class work. Of course, I was also willing and able to participate in the fun side of campus life to the degree my schedule and budget allowed.

My purpose in telling you this is not to have you feel sorry for me. These were choices I made and I enjoyed myself immensely. My purpose is to set the stage so you will understand what comes next.

There were many occasions when I came back into the house late at night from work. I was already tired, but now I faced at least another hour or two of studying to be prepared for my classes the next day. As I climbed the stairs, I saw people in the other apartments of the house reading magazines, watching TV and playing cards. For some reason, those playing cards annoyed me the most. At least if you’re reading a magazine or watching TV you have the opportunity to learn something. Playing cards, however, seemed to me to be a complete waste of time. “Boy,” I thought to myself. “If I had the time available to do something besides work I sure as Hell wouldn’t waste it on playing cards.”

I largely . .

To be able to read the rest of the Ezine, please email customerservice@KindredMindsEnt.com and subscribe to our free weekly Ezine by providing your first and last name, an email address and your zip code. We will forward a copy of the complete text of this Ezine to you and you will receive all future editions in your in-box. We do not share our list of subscribers for any reason, You may unsubscribe at any time (as noted in the Administrative Instructions included with each Ezine) by replying to the Ezine with the word UNSUBSCRIBE anywhere in the subject line.

Once you have subscribed, we suggest you check your spam file in your email account to make sure you’re receiving your copy of our weekly Ezine.

Thank you in advance for becoming a member of our community seeking pragmatic solutions for our political problems by overcoming polarized politics.

Larry Bradley's Weekly Ezine #218 Education as an Investment

Larry Bradley — Fri, 11 May 2012 21:23:08 GMT

1. Clarification on a Couple of Topics

2. Education as an Investment

1. Clarification on a Couple of Topics

First, I’m going to postpone commenting on President Obama’s announcement about his views on Same Sex marriage until next week.

Second, I want to show you some links to recent articles reinforcing the philosophy advocated here at The Center Strikes Back and this Ezine. The first link is to Clarence Page’s article about how poorly informed voters are. This applies whether voters are registered party members or independents. Appalling really. How do you expect to perform well in any endeavor if you can’t be relied on to know if you should be on offense or defense? http://www.omaha.com/article/20120509/NEWS0802/705099960/-1

The second link is an article by Carl B. Leubsdorf of the Dallas Morning News assessing the impact of third party candidates for President in 2012. Like us, Leubsdorf concludes the third parties will have little impact. What’s more, we think only running a candidate for President without an equal effort to put your party’s people into the Congress is foolishness of the highest degree. http://www.omaha.com/article/20120511/NEWS0802/705119938/-1#carl-p-leubsdorf-third-party-more-hype-than-hope

Third, paragraph two today is about the value of borrowing money in order to get a college education. As a matter of disclosure, I’m probably not the person who might be best to ask about this. I didn’t borrow any money to go to college. My first two years I lived at home and hoarded every dollar I earned with plans to go to Law School. Unfortunately, those were the years when the United States was offering free all expenses paid trips to a place called Vietnam and a low Draft number caused me to change those plans. By the time I finished my first military obligation I was married and had had four years of relatively decent pay behind me. The thought of going back to being an impoverished student, even with the help of the G.I. Bill, was unappealing.

I am proud of myself I recognized the value of college comes only partially from what you get from the classroom. The other value is the friends you create and the experiences you have outside the classroom. In order to have that value, I moved out of my parent’s house and into the fraternity house. Doing so required me to work 30 hours a week while carrying a full load of classes and being involved in several campus activities. Those other things limited my time on my studies and my cumulative undergraduate grade point average reflects the distraction. I’ve often wondered how my outcome might have differed if I had chosen to borrow money and made better grades, along with some other choices. The reality is, however, we all make the best decisions we can with the information we have at the time. We can’t go back and change what has already happened, but we can try to better apply what we learn to our future decisions.

My advice to students today is to minimize borrowing in favor of working part time and taking a longer time to graduate. Yes, there is the additional expense of perhaps two additional years of living expenses to be earned if you take 6 years instead of 4. The up side is if you can find part time employment then you can emerge with no or minimal debt—and that is a significant advantage to begin life with.

No employer worth working for is going to care if you needed six years to get a degree. Employers especially won’t care when they find out you not only have a degree with decent grades, but a track record as a dependable employee with the obvious habits of discipline needed to have those achievements. And, if they do care, then they care about the wrong things and they don’t deserve you.

2. Education as an Investment

Financing college educations has been in the news lately because of two factors. One is the proposal to double the interest rate paid on student or Stafford Loans. The other is student loan debt in America is now over $1 Trillion, more than the amount owed for credit cards. Holy debit card, Batman, that’s a lot of money. Couple those factors with upcoming spring graduation ceremonies on campuses across the country and this thought comes to mind. Is owing that much money worth having a college education?

If the question is reframed to, “Is having a college education likely to mean more earning power than a high school education?” then the answer is clearly yes. Moreover, those with college educations are more likely to be employed than those with only a high school diploma.

More specifically, the question is posed from this frame of reference. When buying a car, astute buyers know there is a significant difference between the sticker price and the price the dealer paid the manufacturer. Astute buyers also know . . .

Once you have subscribed, we suggest you check your spam file in your email account to make sure you’re receiving your copy of our weekly Ezine.

Thank you in advance for becoming a member of our community seeking pragmatic solutions for our political problems by overcoming polarized politics.

Larry Bradley's Weekly Ezine #217 Buckskins or Tuxedos?

Larry Bradley — Fri, 04 May 2012 15:09:11 GMT

1. Reinforcement to Earlier Points on Outrage

2. Buckskins or Tuxedos?

1. Reinforcement to Earlier Points on Outrage

Last week’s paragraph one talked about the difficulties of expressing yourself in such a way that people would capture what you mean without misinterpretation. The Between Friends cartoon I saw for May 4, 2012 illustrates the same thought beautifully. (Obtained from this web site that says its free. http://www.oregonlive.com/comics-kingdom/?feature_id=Between_Friends )

2. Buckskins or Tuxedos?

Today I want to use my remembrance of one of the disillusionments of my boyhood as the basis for thoughts on the now seemingly inevitable nomination of Mitt Romney by the Republican Party for President of the United States.

One of my favorite characters from one of the many Westerns on TV during that time was scheduled to be on a variety show. This man’s character was the rugged, self reliant, super macho buck-skinned dressed scout for a covered Wagon Train. What a seemingly ideal life he had in my young mind. He rode ahead of the wagons making sure that what was to come was passable, occasionally shooting game for the wagons to find and feed on, and returning to report in time for supper. No encumbrances of wagons or choking trail dust for him. Every day was a day at play for him.

Such is the fantasy for all men as they grow up (if they ever grow up). The fantasy is one of the keys to the success of songs like Dion’s The Wanderer (Well, I’m the kind of guy who likes to roam around) or The Beach Boys’ I Get Around (I gotta find a new place where the kids are hip). Doubtless, women have their own version of the fantasy and writing this makes me wonder what that is—but I digress.

The star who played the scout came on the variety show dressed not in buckskins, but in a tuxedo. Even more surprising to the point of appalling for my boyhood mind was his admission he didn’t really like being in buckskins or riding around on his horse. He confessed he would rather be dressed up in the tuxedo and doing a song and dance routine. What heresy! How in the devil could a man prefer to do song and dance over riding a horse and shooting game with your rifle??!!

The point is, until that moment, the man was such a good actor I was convinced he truly and naturally was that rugged, self reliant, super macho buck-skinned dressed scout for a covered Wagon Train. He was a good enough actor to fool a kid like me.

Here’s what that means to you as a voter regarding Mitt Romney as a Presidential candidate.

Is Romney . . .

To be able to read the rest of the Ezine, please email customerservice@KindredMindsEnt.com and subscribe to our free weekly Ezine by providing your first and last name, an email address and your zip code. We will forward a copy of the complete text of this Ezine to you and you will receive all future editions in your in-box. We do not share our list of subscribers for any reason, You may unsubscribe at any time (as noted in the Administrative Instructions included with each Ezine) by replying to the Ezine with the word UNSUBSCRIBE anywhere in the subject line.

Once you have subscribed, we suggest you check your spam file in your email account to make sure you’re receiving your copy of our weekly Ezine.

Thank you in advance for becoming a member of our community seeking pragmatic solutions for our political problems by overcoming polarized politics.

Larry Bradley's Weekly Ezine #216 Outraged by the "Outrage"

Larry Bradley — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 20:51:02 GMT

1. Causes of Outrage (And Some Dates)

2. Outraged by the “Outrage”

1. Causes of Outrage (And Some Dates)

I think I may have covered this before, but the thought is worth repeating. One of the difficulties in writing and speaking is trying to express what you mean in a way that fences the thought off from what you don’t mean.

For example, in doing an efficiency report once for one of my officers, I wrote he was an exceptional officer in the field. My intention was to be highly complimentary. A more seasoned officer routinely reviewed mine and others’ writing. He called me in and asked me if I was trying to convey that the officer was a poor garrison officer. Well, in fact I did not and changed what I wrote accordingly.

I often think of this when I see criticisms of what elected officials say and write. Sometimes those criticisms are deserved, but at the same time the news media and the blogosphere has trained us to look for “gotcha” moments instead of how to ask intelligent clarifying questions like that more senior officer did for me. Please realize the stresses of the day and space limitations can often leave a vulnerability in an argument which might be easily resolved if the right question is asked.

I’m preceding publication of my next book with a series of presentations. I have what I call my full presentation lasting about an hour followed by time for questions and discussions. I also have a 20 minute extract of that talk I’m offering to clubs and other organizations. I already have three scheduled for May and July. My working title so far is Why the Two Party System Isn’t Working Anymore (And What to Do About It).

If you belong to an organization and would like to have me speak, then please contact me via email to schedule a time. Include a phone number and I’ll be happy to call.

I am scheduled to give my full presentation three times in June, twice in the Kansas City area and once in Omaha.

June 4 I will be speaking through UMKC’s Communiversity in Kansas City. My talk will be at the Central Library, Room 312, 14 West 10^th Street (10^th and Baltimore) in Kansas City, MO from 7:00 to 9:00 p.m. Sign up through Communiversity at http://www.umkc.edu/commu. UMKC just sent me the final proof yesterday, so the summer catalog may not be out for a couple of days.

June 5 I will be speaking in the evening at the Blue River Community College in Independence, MO. More details will be available once their summer catalog is out.

June 18 I will be speaking in Omaha at the Millard South High School from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. Registration will be though the Omaha Metropolitan Community College at the following link. http://www.mccneb.edu/ce/classresults.asp

2. Outraged by the “Outrage”

Predictably, the news we hear in this election season is all about what we as voters should be outraged about. We live in an era and a climate of a continuing political campaign, so we have outrage on a continuous basis. The nearer we get to the actual election, the more intense the focus on outrage.

Certainly there are, and always will be, deserving targets of outrage. Outrage sells. Outrage makes good headlines. Outrage focuses ears on radio shows, eyes and ears on television screens and eyes on newspaper stories. Eyes and ears on media stories sell advertising and drives contributions to political campaigns. So everyone is happy, right? Well, not really.

You all say you’re outraged? Well, I have decided to be outraged by the outrage. I invite you to join me. If everything is an outrage, then nothing is an outrage. How do you sort between . . .

Once you have subscribed, we suggest you check your spam file in your email account to make sure you’re receiving your copy of our weekly Ezine.

Thank you in advance for becoming a member of our community seeking pragmatic solutions for our political problems by overcoming polarized politics.

Larry Bradley's Weekly Ezine # 215 The "Right" People Myth

Larry Bradley — Fri, 20 Apr 2012 19:46:49 GMT

1.A “Titanic” Metaphor for Life

2. The “Right” People Myth

1. A “Titanic” Metaphor for Life

Last Sunday was the 100 year anniversary of the sinking of the Titanic. It was also my youngest girl’s birthday. (I have often been reminded about how ignominious it is to have your birthday on the same day as the one Titanic met its fate, Abraham Lincoln died, and everyone in the U.S. has to pay their taxes.)

For her birthday, my daughter wanted to go to the Titanic exhibit now at the Union Station museum in Kansas City. The exhibit is terrific with a great explanation of the events leading up to the disaster and a display of salvaged artifacts.

Towards the end of the tour, one of the guides offered a thought about the tragedy I hadn’t heard before. The Titanic sank because the ship tried to turn to avoid the iceberg. The ship made contact with an underwater spur of the iceberg. As the ship grated against the spur down the length of the ship six compartments were damaged. The ship was designed to still float with damage to several compartments, but six was too many.

Instead of turning, had the ship simply cut power, then the ship would have rammed the iceberg head on. Certainly one or two of the compartments would have been damaged, but the ship would have survived.

Isn’t that a metaphor for life? How often do we attempt to avoid trouble and in the process find ourselves caught up in even greater trouble? How much better off might we be if we face up to our trouble immediately and minimize the damage, note the lesson learned and go on with our lives?

I’m reminded of the saying of an old boss of mine. He said, “Bad news, like dead fish, does not improve with age.”

And as Brian Tracy writes, “Eat Your Frog.” If you will take the most distasteful thing you have to do in a day and get it done first (like having to eat a frog for breakfast), then the rest of your day will be much better.

Wishing you a frog free week.

2. The “Right” People Myth

Today’s subject is about one of the myths held by Independent voters. The myth grows as a variation from the assertions of the members of the major political parties of, “If we can just elect our people, then everything will be all right.”

This translates among independent voters to, “If we can just elect the right person for this office, then everything will be all right.” Or, alternatively, “If we can just elect the right people, then everything will be all right.”

This sounds like a reasonable thought. One of the issues with the thought, however, is this. How do you define the “right” person in a pluralistic society like America’s? Isn’t the “right” person for one group the “wrong” person for another group?

What is your definition of the “right” person? What is implied of course, are personal characteristics, not a position on the ideological spectrum. Both liberals and conservatives are looking for the “proper” person to represent their views. Liberals are not looking for the “left” person while conservatives are looking for the “right” person. For each group, the word “right” is intended as “proper”.

What is, then, your definition of . . .

To be able to read the rest of the Ezine, please email customerservice@KindredMindsEnt.com and subscribe to our free weekly Ezine by providing your first and last name, an email address and your zip code. We will forward a copy of the complete text of this Ezine to you and you will receive all future editions in your in-box. We do not share our list of subscribers for any reason, You may unsubscribe at any time (as noted in the Administrative Instructions included with each Ezine) by replying to the Ezine with the word UNSUBSCRIBE anywhere in the subject line.

Once you have subscribed, we suggest you check your spam file in your email account to make sure you’re receiving your copy of our weekly Ezine.

Thank you in advance for becoming a member of our community seeking pragmatic solutions for our political problems by overcoming polarized politics.

Larry Bradley's Weekly Ezine #214 Nothing Worth Going Out For

Larry Bradley — Fri, 13 Apr 2012 23:33:05 GMT

1. Friedman: Grand Bargain on Capitalism

2. Nothing Worth Going Out For

1. Friedman: Grand Bargain on Capitalism

Tom Friedman had a column recently reviewing the content of a book entitled Power, Inc. The point of the column is Capitalism definitely won out over Communism. The question being decided now is whether the dominant form of Capitalism in the world will be America’s—or someone else’s.

The article is well written and makes you want to read the book, but what took my eye was the description of the effect our politics has on the contest. “. . . if we continue to treat politics as a reality show played for cheap theatrics,” argues Rothkopf, “we increase the likelihood that the next chapter in the ongoing story of capitalism is going to be written somewhere else.”

The same negative potential exists for almost anything else you care to name so long as we continue to do politics as we are doing them. The system we’re using to do our politics is having a negative impact on our way of life, our personal prosperity and our business economics. To reverse the impact, we must change the system first.

Here is a link to the article.

http://www.omaha.com/article/20120412/NEWS0802/704129970/-1

2. Nothing Worth Going Out For

Given a special occasion recently, my wife and I made rare plans to go see a movie. There are a couple of reasons we don’t go often. One is our experience in front of our TV set. We have two recliners and five minutes after our feet are up one or both of us are fast asleep. Why pay the price of movie tickets (doubling the investment if you buy snacks) to sit in a darkened room and sleep while a movie is on? We can do that at home for free.

This time, however, we were taking a couple of days off and thought the extra rest would make a trip to the movies worthwhile. We ran headlong, however, into the other reason we don’t go often. We didn’t see anything offered we considered worthwhile.

I don’t like to go to a movie my wife won’t like, especially one where she will spend her time averting her eyes from the screen. Similarly, my wife would rather go to a movie she and her girl friends would enjoy by actually going with one of her girl friends rather than making me go.

I’m sure my wife and I are not alone in this difficulty. Further, when the difficulty arises, we are more likely to stay home. That’s when the DVR gets emptied out and DVDs get rented. The point of the foregoing as it relates to our usual topic is this.

How many people are not voting because they simply there are simply no candidates or issues they consider worth going out for?

Consider the recent Wisconsin Primary. (I could use any state. The phenomenon is nation wide, not in just one state.)

Wisconsin, according to the 2010 census . . .

Once you have subscribed, we suggest you check your spam file in your email account to make sure you’re receiving your copy of our weekly Ezine.

Thank you in advance for becoming a member of our community seeking pragmatic solutions for our political problems by overcoming polarized politics.

Update to Weekly Ezine #213

Larry Bradley — Sat, 07 Apr 2012 16:34:34 GMT

Had a bad link for paragraph 1 yesterday.

Here is the link you should have gotten.

http://www.moaa.org/Main_Menu/User_Group/Retired_Still_Working/Tech_Tactics_-_Truth-Testing_on_the_Internet.html

Larry Bradley's Weekly Ezine #213 Boss and Worker Relations

Larry Bradley — Fri, 06 Apr 2012 21:49:06 GMT

1. Check the Facts

2. Boss and Worker Relations

1. Check the Facts

One of the organizations I belong to is the highly respected Military Officers Association of America (MOAA).

MOAA is both a non-partisan organization and recognized as one of the most effective lobbyists for their constituents in WA D.C. They argue for the interests of all military personnel, not just officers. Further, they advocate for current active duty, reservists, retirees, and former military people and their spouses.

In keeping with their role, they pride themselves on advocating based on facts, not emotion. Recently they posted a list of fact checking organizations on the Web who help sort between fact and rhetoric. Below is a link to the list.

We’re coming into the season where the intensity of the anger producing emails you receive about the political campaigns and the candidates are going to become even more intense. Before you forward on the email, I urge you to check one of these fact checking sites for validation.

What you’re going to find all too often is you’re reading something that has been out before and disproven. A few key facts have been altered to fit current circumstances and blasted out. Even if you don’t find something, I would submit the issue to the web site itself. It might take them a couple of weeks, but they can usually get to the bottom of things rather quickly.

Further, after you’ve repeatedly found the content of the emails you’re being sent is untrue, what attitude do you think you should have towards the individuals sending you those emails and the candidates they endorse? Save yourself some time and start deleting those emails.

Or, hit reply all and give them the link to the site disproving the claim. Watch how quickly you get dropped from the email list because you’re not a true believer.

Here’s the link.

http://www.moaa.org/Main_Menu/User_Group/Retired_Still_Working/Tech_Tactics_-_Truth-Testin

2. Boss and Worker Relations

“The organization does well only those things the boss checks.”

U.S. Army General Bruce C. Clark

The new Friday night schedule for the CBS reality show Undercover Boss has caused me to watch several episodes. The episodes reminded me of GEN Clark’s saying. I’m certain Clark never put on a disguise and used an assumed name to check on the performance of his units. On the other hand, I have heard stories of one of the heads of the U.S. Army Ranger Department putting on an “aggressor” uniform so he could observe first hand how his prospective Ranger student patrols was performing.

If you haven’t seen it, here is the format for Undercover Boss. The CEO for a relatively large company agrees to put on a disguise and work under an assumed name at the very lowest levels of the company. Obviously, the company has to be large enough and far flung enough so lower level employees will not recognize the CEO. A cover story is concocted about why this new and untrained person is being brought in and all the cameras are recording what goes on.

What usually happens is the CEO admits to . . .

To be able to read the rest of the Ezine, please email customerservice@KindredMindsEnt.com and subscribe to our free weekly Ezine by providing your first and last name, an email address and your zip code. We will forward a copy of the complete text of this Ezine to you and you will receive all future editions in your in-box. We do not share our list of subscribers for any reason, You may unsubscribe at any time (as noted in the Administrative Instructions included with each Ezine) by replying to the Ezine with the word UNSUBSCRIBE anywhere in the subject line.

Once you have subscribed, we suggest you check your spam file in your email account to make sure you’re receiving your copy of our weekly Ezine.

Thank you in advance for becoming a member of our community seeking pragmatic solutions for our political problems by overcoming polarized politics.

Larry Bradley's Weekly Ezine #212 Electability Continued with an Etch-A-Sketch

Larry Bradley — Fri, 30 Mar 2012 21:54:17 GMT

1. Please “Like” The Center Strikes Back on Facebook

2. Electability Continued with an Etch-a-Sketch

1. Please “Like” The Center Strikes Back on Facebook

An unhappy event this week emphasized to me my need to separate my personal Facebook persona from my professional one.

Accordingly, if you are on Facebook, please like my page at the link below. That will help me sort personal traffic between family and friends from those who primarily share my interest in politics and government.

If you are a personal friend who also has an interest in politics and government and we somehow haven’t connected yet, then by all means like both pages.

Many thanks in advance.

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=576780808#!/pages/The-Center-Strikes-Back/185498791547709

2. Electability Continued with an Etch-a-Sketch

As one commentator said last week, a political gaffe is when some candidate or their representative tells the truth without meaning to.

The commentator was evaluating remarks by a Mitt Romney campaign manager. The manager was asked about the positions on issues Romney was taking to earn the Republican Presidential nomination and how those positions would be responded to by other than Republican voters during the General Election. The manager responded in essence there would be no worries. The candidate would erase the old positions as if the positions were drawn on an Etch-a-Sketch and start all over again.

The reaction from Romney’s opponents was predictable and rapid. Santorum and Gingrich had already questioned whether Romney was a “true conservative.” Santorum, in particular, objected. Santorum told listeners if they voted for Romney, then they might as well be voting for Barack Obama. According to Santorum, there was not that much difference between them (Romney and Obama).

Here’s what this means to Independent Voters

First, realize all candidates must first take positions to satisfy their party’s voters first. Appeal to the general public is for naught if you don’t earn your party’s nomination and have your name on the ballot.

Once the candidate does have the nomination secured, adjustments are not only necessary, they’re expected. After all, . .

To be able to read the rest of the Ezine, please email customerservice@KindredMindsEnt.com and subscribe to our free weekly Ezine by providing your first and last name, an email address and your zip code. We will forward a copy of the complete text of this Ezine to you and you will receive all future editions in your in-box. We do not share our list of subscribers for any reason, You may unsubscribe at any time (as noted in the Administrative Instructions included with each Ezine) by replying to the Ezine with the word UNSUBSCRIBE anywhere in the subject line.

Once you have subscribed, we suggest you check your spam file in your email account to make sure you’re receiving your copy of our weekly Ezine.

Thank you in advance for becoming a member of our community seeking pragmatic solutions for our political problems by overcoming polarized politics.

Larry Bradley's Weekly Ezine #211 Freedom of vs. Freedom From

Larry Bradley — Fri, 23 Mar 2012 21:27:14 GMT

1. Speaking Dates and Times

2. Freedom of vs. Freedom From

1. Speaking Dates and Times

I am starting to schedule various talks in conjunction with my new book. My intention is to record the full/complete version of my lecture about the book and offer it as a DVD.

Next Friday, March 30, 2012 I will be giving the shortened version of my lecture to the Downtown Kiwanis Club of Omaha. The club meets at the Scott Conference Center, 6450 Pine Street in Omaha, NE. The Club convenes at noon and I will speak about 12:30. The title of the talk (so far, I’m still working on the final title) is “Why the Two Party System Isn’t Working Anymore (And What to Do about It)”.

I’ll have more details later, but I’m scheduled to give the complete lecture through the University of Missouri at Kansas City (UMKC) Communiversity on June 4 at 7:00 p.m.

I’ll also be doing the complete lecture in Omaha on June 18 as a non-credit personal development course through the Omaha Metropolitan Community College at 6:30 p.m.

Let me know if you have a service club or other organization you would like me to speak to.

2. Freedom of vs. Freedom From

Since the men and women’s March Madness basketball tournaments are upon us I’m reminded of a talk given by top ranked college basketball referee. The referee was asked what the most difficult call to make was and he replied it was blocking or charging. Did the offensive player charge into an already established defensive player? Or did the defensive player physically block the offensive player’s movement?

Similarly, questions of religious freedom often seem to revolve around whether the actions of one overtly running into someone else’s already established space or keeping someone from going where they feel they have a right to go.

In basketball or in real life, the interpretation of events by the spectators is usually determined by which side they naturally root for. For those spectators who don’t care one way or another who wins and are only there to watch (hopefully) a good competitive game played, the interpretation is based on how the rules are written. For the latter type of spectator, part of seeing a good game is seeing the rules enforced as written to the same standard for both teams.

Recent events (as well as repeated commentary on Facebook to the effect of saying the problem with schools is that God is not allowed in schools) seem to call for some thought on this matter, especially as the subject relates to behavior during employment or at public schools.*

Psychiatrist Viktor Frankl’s memoir Man’s Search for Meaning details his experiences and discoveries during his time as a prisoner in a World War II Nazi Concentration Camp. One of his discoveries was his captors had only the capacity to control his body. They did not have the capacity to control his mind and his thoughts.

Knowing that, isn’t the assertion God is kept out of schools disingenuous? If you say you believe in an all seeing and all knowing God who knows your every thought, then doesn’t God walk right in the school building with you? Isn’t that same God available on demand at whatever time you wish?

It’s not God, then, who is kept off public school property. What’s kept off is . . .

Once you have subscribed, we suggest you check your spam file in your email account to make sure you’re receiving your copy of our weekly Ezine.

Thank you in advance for becoming a member of our community seeking pragmatic solutions for our political problems by overcoming polarized politics.

Larry Bradley's Weekly Ezine #210 What Does Electability Mean?

Larry Bradley — Sat, 17 Mar 2012 00:10:34 GMT

1. Two Thoughts about the Republican Presidential Primary

2. What Does Electability Mean?

1. Two Thoughts about the Republican Presidential Primary

Point 1: There is a lot of discussion and angst about the fact the campaign is now over halfway over, Super Tuesday has come and gone, yet no decisive front runner has emerged. Had Republicans incorporated Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) into their process, they might have avoided this scenario.

Using IRV, they could have had each state determine the top two vote getters and apportioned delegates accordingly. Going to a winner take all using IRV would have been self defeating. Getting to the point of determining the top two would have retained the proper amount of flexibility.

Using that system would mean Ron Paul would have virtually no delegates and the votes for Gingrich and Santorum would combine against Romney.

Democrats might want to take notes. They are likely to have the same issue in 2016.

Point 2: The results in Ohio reemphasize a point made here before. There are 217.8 Million Americans over the age of 18. Approximately 8.8 Million of those live in Ohio. Assume for the sake of illustration 20% of that number are non-voters (in nursing homes, incarcerated) or are affiliated with political parties other than the Democrats or Republicans. Of the remaining 80% split them down the middle as Democrats or Republicans. This gives you the number 3,523,519. Of that potential number of Republican leaning voters, 1,203,403 voted in the Republican Presidential Primary. This means only 34% of concerned adults over the age of 18 could be bothered to participate.

If the same exercise were done with almost any other state, then you would likely see the same type of percentages. In fact, I can’t think off hand of any state who would give us a significantly different result, but I know better than to say “never” on any topic. There are always exceptions.

The point is 66% of Ohio’s potential Republican voters (by the criteria established here) were willing to let someone else decide was going to have control over the ability to determine how much personal freedom they would be allowed, what they’re taxed on, and how much they pay in taxes.

As Jim Rohn always taught, if you’re content to go with someone else’s plan, then guess what they have planned for you? Not much.

2. What Does Electability Mean?

As the nominating process for the Republican Party’s nomination for the office of President of the United States continues, one word used repeatedly about the qualifications of their candidates is “electability”. This leads to questions not only about what the word means, but what the word implies.

The word’s meaning seems simple enough in one sense. Electability would seem to revolve around a simple question. How likely are general election voters to vote for the Republican nominee? But even that simple question can have multiple meanings based on multiple factors.

For example, how will general election voters judge the superiority of one candidate over the other?

Is superiority judged by debate performance, especially the projected capability of the candidate to debate President Obama? Conservatives today seem to look forward to the prospect of the debate with all the fervor of a boxing match between two champions who have never met before. They want to see blood drawn by decisive debating.

Using those criteria, some Republicans are arguing for . . .

To be able to read the rest of the Ezine, please email customerservice@KindredMindsEnt.com and subscribe to our free weekly Ezine by providing your first and last name, an email address and your zip code. We will forward a copy of the complete text of this Ezine to you and you will receive all future editions in your in-box. We do not share our list of subscribers for any reason, You may unsubscribe at any time (as noted in the Administrative Instructions included with each Ezine) by replying to the Ezine with the word UNSUBSCRIBE anywhere in the subject line.

Once you have subscribed, we suggest you check your spam file in your email account to make sure you’re receiving your copy of our weekly Ezine.

Thank you in advance for becoming a member of our community seeking pragmatic solutions for our political problems by overcoming polarized politics.

Larry Bradley's Weekly Ezine #209 Why Social Issues Now?

Larry Bradley — Sat, 10 Mar 2012 02:34:03 GMT

1. How Do You Kill 11 Million People?

2. Why Social Issues Now

1. How Do You Kill 11 Million People?

Welcome to our fifth year anniversary of publishing this Weekly Ezine.

How Do You Kill 11 Million People is the title to Andy Andrews’ latest book. Andy’s books are always thought provoking and this is no exception. This is a short book and very easy to read. The premise is how can we as Americans find the answers to three questions which will let us find common ground and a unified focus on the future.

Andy’s answer to the question posed by the book’s title is this. Governments lie to their people about their true intents. I would say that is a true statement as far as it goes. What I would add is people make it possible for their governments to lie to them by believing in things that aren’t true in the first place. Governments then use those mistaken beliefs to influence people to move in the direction they want to go. So, the culprit is not just the people making up the elected government. The culprit is the people who are unwilling to question their underlying beliefs and are, therefore, gullible enough to be susceptible to manipulation.

To reiterate the quotation from Will Rogers, “What gives us problems is not what we don’t know. It’s what we know that just not so.”

I recommend Andy’s book, which is enjoyable for its ability to make you think.

2. Why Social Issues Now?

The bewildered question being asked by many pundits over the last month is why the Republican Party, especially in state legislatures like Virginia, are choosing to focus their efforts on anti-abortion legislation. The source of the sense of, “Huh?” is the genuinely outraged opposition to the proposed legislation. Pundits ask, “Don’t Republicans know this type of legislation will galvanize Independent women voters to vote against them in the November election?”

The answers to those questions are actually simple. These proposals are right out of the standard Republican playbook. Republicans are not worried about galvanizing Independent voters. They want to galvanize Republican voters.

The leadership of both parties knows this. The party that wins will be the party who can execute their ground game and get their registered supporters to show up and vote. The parties are not concerned with people who may be outraged, but sit at home at the crunch time of Election Day.

What is being done is the reinstitution of a winning formula . . .

To be able to read the rest of the Ezine, please email customerservice@KindredMindsEnt.com and subscribe to our free weekly Ezine by providing your first and last name, an email address and your zip code. We will forward a copy of the complete text of this Ezine to you and you will receive all future editions in your in-box. We do not share our list of subscribers for any reason, You may unsubscribe at any time (as noted in the Administrative Instructions included with each Ezine) by replying to the Ezine with the word UNSUBSCRIBE anywhere in the subject line.

Once you have subscribed, we suggest you check your spam file in your email account to make sure you’re receiving your copy of our weekly Ezine.

Thank you in advance for becoming a member of our community seeking pragmatic solutions for our political problems by overcoming polarized politics.

Proposed Book/Lecture Titles

Larry Bradley — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 21:52:20 GMT

I'm working on a new book with an accompanying two hour lecture. My plan is to do several lectures while the book is being written and eventually record the lecture and make it available on a DVD.

What follows are some potential book/lecture titles I would like your input on.

Each title is numbered, so (to make things easy) just tell me the numbers of the top 5 or 6 titles that appeal to you the most. Don't worry about rank ordering your choices, just tell me your top 5 or 6. Of course, if you do have one you really like (or hate) please let me know which one and why.

If you don't see a title that appeals to you, then by all means tell me what title would appeal to you.

Thanks for your help. I'll announce the results in a week or so. Here's the prospective titles.

Potential Book Titles

Why National Politicians Aren’t Held Accountable: And What to Do About It (AWTDAI)
Why your vote doesn’t count: AWTDAI
Why your vote doesn’t matter: AWTDAI
Why the Two Party System Isn’t Working Anymore: AWTDAI
Why the Zealots Don’t Want You to Vote
Why the Extremists Don’t Want You to Vote
Why Polarized Politics Puts Your Prosperity at risk: AWTDAI
Why Polarized Politics Is Stealing Your Prosperity: AWTDAI
Why Politicians Aren’t Accountable to Voters: AWTDAI
How to Be a Smart Voter, Not a Gullible One
Why Are there so many Gullible Voters: AWTDAI
How to Save Ourselves from the Zealots: how to restore intelligence and common sense to America’s political process
It’s the Political System, Stupid: Why Dysfunctional Government is a result of the Electoral System we use: AWTDAI
Why Our Current Political System Will Always Give Us Lousy Government: AWTDAI
The Top Five Skills and Two Changes Voters Need to have more effective and efficient government
Will Rogers Was Right: How to Stop Believing in things that just aren’t so
Why Our Political System Will Always Give Us Lousy Results—And How to Fix It
Why Politicians Can’t Be Held Accountable for Screwing Up Our Prosperity: AWTDAI
Before You Do Anything: The Changes We Need to Make First to Have More Effective and Efficient Government
Before You Do Anything: The Changes We Need to Make First to Achieve Set It and Forget It Government
Before You Do Anything: The Political Myths that need to be Discarded First
Before You Do Anything: The Concepts and Changes You Need to Understand First to Restore Your Prosperity
Why Voters Are So Gullible: AWTDAI
Just How Gullible Are We: How to Enable the Majority to Vote for Their Self Interest Instead of Against It
Just How Gullible Are We: Why So Many Voters Vote Against Their Self Interest—AWTDAI
Intelligence over Ignorance: How to Go From Polarized Politics to Principled Politics
From Ignorance to Intelligence: How to Go from Dysfunctional Polarized Politics to Functional Principled Politics
How to Survive What the American Two Party System Has Become
Vote for Who and What You Want—Without Voting for Who and What You Don’t Want

Larry Bradley's Weekly Ezine #208 Gladiator or Emperor? Maximus or Commodus?

Larry Bradley — Fri, 02 Mar 2012 21:32:06 GMT

1. More Thoughts on Movies and Politics

2. Gladiator or Emperor? Maximus or Commodus?

1. More Thoughts on Movies and Politics

Paragraph two today discusses a repetitive theme in movies. The theme is repetitive because it fascinates us. The theme is how does someone respond to adversity? Especially, how does someone respond to adversity when they have ascended to a position of relative comfort and then had the position taken away? We have a lot of people now in that circumstance.

Jim Rohn always taught you should want to become a millionaire for what it will make of you. Pity the person who only has the money, but hasn’t earned it and doesn’t appreciate it. They will soon be parted from that money.

Think about it. Why are we fascinated by the TV Series or movie, The Fugitive? We’re fascinated because we want to see how Dr. Kimble responds to the adversity of being out on his own with only his wits and not his money and title to enable him to survive.

Similarly, think of Tom Hanks in Castaway, where he is marooned on a tropical island and presumed dead. What about Rocky III, where Rocky loses his title to Clubber Lang and must face his fear to win the title back. When Rocky gets mad and wins, he defeats more than Clubber Lang. He beats his fear and he does so by enabling his anger to take precedence over his fear.

We look for and admire persistence and courage and perseverance when the odds are long against us.

It’s one of the things I admire most about my parents. They suffered a serious business reversal when I was thirteen or so. They started over again and they came back from it.

In this economy and these political circumstances, maybe some of us need to confront our own fears and get mad. In doing so, let’s not get so mad we allow our anger to cloud our judgment. In the process, like the heroes and heroines of our favorite movies, we can emerge victorious in the end.

2. Gladiator or Emperor? Maximus or Commodus?

The recent Academy Awards ceremony brings to mind another movie whose themes are relevant to this year’s U.S. Presidential campaign. The movie is Gladiator, which starred Russell Crowe and won several awards.

All of us watching a movie have the tendency to identify ourselves with the lead character and hate the villain. Similarly, don’t we as voters choose to support or oppose political candidates in much the same way we look for heroes and villains in film?

Gladiator is set in the age of the Roman Empire. Crowe plays the commanding Roman General leading the Romans against the barbarians occupying the frontier of what is now Germany. The opening scenes of battle establish Crowe as the unquestioned leader of the Army. In all organizations, but especially military ones, there are at least two forms of leadership and authority. One is the appointed authority coming with the occupation of a position of leadership. The other is the authority coming from the credibility the individual has for their position by virtue of demonstrated performance. Crowe, as the Roman General Maximus, shows he has an abundance of these qualities.

The men in Maximus’ command follow him not just because of the power of his appointed position. Rather they follow him because he has demonstrated his appointment is due to his personal qualities as a warrior and his willingness to endure the same risks as those he leads. Today in business, both men and women can see themselves as warriors as they seek to lead their enterprises to conquer the market and be successful on the battlefield of the marketplace.

Richard Harris plays Marcus Aurelius, the Roman Emperor. The Emperor has a son named Commodus (Joaquin Phoenix). Commodus is introduced to the viewers by arriving at the Roman encampment after the decisive battle with the barbarians is already over. “Oh,” Commodus says in disappointed voice, “Is the battle already over?” The implication is clear. Commodus lingered wherever he was in order to avoid participating in the battle. We admire those who make sure they are there to stand with us at crunch time. We have little respect for those who avoid the hard times and the hard work, but expect to be rewarded as if they were there as they should have been.

A frail Marcus Aurelius, to his credit, recognizes the flaws in his son and legal heir apparent to his position as leader of Rome. Marcus Aurelius tells Maximus he intends to appoint Maximus as his successor upon their return to Rome. Later, while alone with Commodus, Marcus Aurelius tells his son of his intentions. Commodus responds by killing his father.

Knowing he is at risk so long as Maximus lives, Commodus orders Maximus to be arrested and killed. Maximus, in another demonstration of personal capability, kills the four soldiers sent to execute him and escapes. He mounts a horse and rides day and night in an effort to prevent the execution of his wife and son by Commodus.

Unfortunately, Maximus arrives too late and is left for dead by Commudus’ soldiers. The barely alive Maximus is picked up by a gladiator trainer. Stripped of everything, including his name, (but not his warrior skills or unconquerable spirit) Maximus works his way back to Rome through his exploits as a gladiator. There Maximus forces a final fight to the death with Commodus in the arena. Despite the fact Commodus cheats by wounding Maximus with a knife to the ribs before the fight even begins, Maximus prevails. Maximus kills Commodus and in his dying breath gives instructions to members of the Army still loyal to him regarding the final wishes of Marcus Aurelius.

Here is what this movie may mean to you as a voter.

Do you as a voter . . .

Once you have subscribed, we suggest you check your spam file in your email account to make sure you’re receiving your copy of our weekly Ezine.

Thank you in advance for becoming a member of our community seeking pragmatic solutions for our political problems by overcoming polarized politics.

Larry Bradley's Weekly Ezine #207 The Oscars, The Godfather, and Iran

Larry Bradley — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 21:57:28 GMT

1. A Note about the Academy Awards and an eBook Announcement

2. The Oscars, The Godfather, and Iran

1. A Note about the Academy Awards and an Announcement

This Sunday is the 2012 Academy Awards. Like so many other people, I love a good movie. For some reason, I don’t get to as many of them as I would like. I saw The Descendents and liked it. Alexander Payne seems to have my number by making movies about men who are either widowers or about to be widowers.

When you think about it, trying to determine which the best movie is for a given time period is as complex as trying to choose political candidates. Do you make your choice based on the story itself or on the difficulty of the task of performing the story? How much weight do you give to the technical aspects such as sound or cinematography or historical accuracy? How do you compare a musical to a drama or to a cartoon? That’s why the Academy created special categories such as best documentary.

But what I most want to call your attention to as a means of envisioning what might be possible is this. The winners are determined by Instant Runoff Voting (IRV). As an Academy member, you are no longer faced with having to choose only one movie, one actor or one actress. You’re able to say, “This is my choice for the best in this category, but if I can’t have my first choice, then this is my second choice (and my third, fourth and/or fifth, etc.)” There must be something satisfying about a process that allows you to acknowledge the viability of more than one and the body as a whole can be more satisfied with the ultimate winner.

I’m just saying—if we can choose the best movie that way, then we can choose the best political candidate that way, too.

Now here is the announcement. No, I’m not going to act in a movie. For all you owners of Kindles and Nooks, I have republished Neither Liberal Nor Conservative Be as an eBook and its available on Amazon and Smashwords at the links. I added a new preface to make the book even more meaningful and instructive.

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&field-keywords=neither+liberal+nor+conservative+be

http://www.smashwords.com/books/search?query=Neither+Liberal+Nor+Conservative+Be

2. The Oscars, The Godfather, and Iran

With the Super Bowl played and the Grammys over, attention now turns to the upcoming Academy Awards show. That event brings to mind a couple of movies with a message appropriate to the on-going political campaigns.

One issue the Republican candidates seem unable to resist rattling their saber over (except Ron Paul) is the potential of Iran developing a nuclear weapon. There is, of course, significant discussion of whether or not to bomb Iran in order to prevent said development. The trouble with talking tough is eventually you have to back up that talk and the price required to back up your mouth may be more than you’re willing to pay.

Here’s a lesson offered to us in 1963 from the aftermath of the Korean War as published in T. R. Fehrenbach’s book This Kind of War. (One is reminded of one of Harry Truman’s favorite sayings, “There’s really nothing new in the world. There’s only all the history you don’t know.”) The lesson of Korea Fehrenbach wrote in his book (commissioned by the Association of the US Army) was as follows. “You may . . .

To be able to read the rest of the Ezine, please email customerservice@KindredMindsEnt.com and subscribe to our free weekly Ezine by providing your first and last name, an email address and your zip code. We will forward a copy of the complete text of this Ezine to you and you will receive all future editions in your in-box. We do not share our list of subscribers for any reason, You may unsubscribe at any time (as noted in the Administrative Instructions included with each Ezine) by replying to the Ezine with the word UNSUBSCRIBE anywhere in the subject line.

Once you have subscribed, we suggest you check your spam file in your email account to make sure you’re receiving your copy of our weekly Ezine.

Thank you in advance for becoming a member of our community seeking pragmatic solutions for our political problems by overcoming polarized politics.

Larry Bradley's Weekly Ezine #206 The Monkey Heads of Contraception and Choice

Larry Bradley — Fri, 17 Feb 2012 21:52:35 GMT

1. Why Competitive Third Parties Matter

2. The Monkey Heads of Contraception and Choice

1. Why Competitive Third Parties Matter

I’ve been participating in a discussion of political terminology which again reminds me of this saying. Arguing with a zealot is like wrestling with a pig. You both get dirty, but the pig loves it.

Actually, the discussion has been rather respectful, which is a hard quality to find in political discussions. The point being this is the kind of discussion only those interested in the deepest depths of political nuance could really find enjoyment in. Along the way, though, I came across this other thought beneficial to those disturbed by the performance of elected officials, but uninvolved in party politics.

With the system we have today, if you want to see a political party change its policies and positions to the ones you favor, then you must be prepared to do battle. You must go into the working meetings of those parties and debate the members of those parties. The reality is most people are unwilling to have those kinds of confrontations. Specifically, most people are unwilling to have on going arguments with people who share the beliefs of people such as Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Keith Olbermann and the like.

With the political system we have today and only two competitive political parties, the reality is this. If you disagree with the policies of those two parties, then you have no where to go where your vote will matter. Enabling third parties to be competitive means you are able to vote with your feet and join the party best reflecting your points of view.

As things are now, if you vote with your feet, then there is nowhere for your feet to take you. The two parties you walk away from, knowing this reality, laugh and say, “Good riddance.” Those two parties have no reason to change.

The requirement to change this system is a simple one, but not easy. You must be willing to engage in at least one battle. You must be willing to battle to change the electoral system to make all political parties competitive by eliminating the winner take all single choice ballot and, therefore, the spoiler scenario. Doing so will enable you to choose a party populated with kindred minds like your own. You don’t have to argue to belong to an organization that believes what you believe. You simply seek the organization that matches their beliefs with yours. With the new system, when you walk away, someone will walk after you wanting you back.

It’s your choice. Have your vote matter or have your vote scorned. Which do you choose?

2. The Monkey Heads of Contraception and Choice

The current controversy over whether religious non-profit organizations should be required to provide contraceptives as part of their health plans provides another opportunity to apply the Monkey Head Theory of Politics.

The Monkey Head Theory works like this. Policy proposals are like proposals to have a replica of a monkey head mounted on your car like a hood ornament. The essential questions are these and revolve around choice. Is the proposal one where everyone is required to have a monkey head on their auto, with no choice in the matter? Or is the proposal one where people are to be given the choice of having monkey head on their auto? One would think the attitude of a tolerant people in a pluralistic society would be the desire to be able to either reject having the monkey head as a personal choice, but accepting of others who do desire to have a monkey head.

If everyone is going to be required to have a monkey head on the car, then one would look for some compelling argument such as fairness or economic necessity to justify making the monkey head mandatory.

Similarly, if having a monkey head is a matter of personal choice, then one would ask what compelling argument is there to deny those who want the monkey head their choice in personal expression.

The inability to sort between the distinctions of these two arguments causes us no end of grief as a society, particularly as they relate to issues regarding the First Amendment to the Constitution.

To a certain degree, the argument this issue creates reminds me of an issue I had being the Battalion Staff Duty Officer as a Lieutenant. Over a weekend or after duty hours, I was the officer charged with maintaining order in the barracks. To keep peace, our policy was to not allow stereos to be cranked up to blasting. As I used to say to offenders, “Your right to listen to your music does not supersede the right of everyone else not to listen your music. Go get yourself a set of headphones.” In that way, the stereo owner could enjoy their music, but the order and tranquility of the barracks could be maintained.

Returning to this case, one of the dilemmas here is how both questions are in play.

From the government’s point of view, the issue is . . .

Once you have subscribed, we suggest you check your spam file in your email account to make sure you’re receiving your copy of our weekly Ezine.

Thank you in advance for becoming a member of our community seeking pragmatic solutions for our political problems by overcoming polarized politics.

Larry Bradley's Weekly Ezine #205 Hateful Politics

Larry Bradley — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 16:06:17 GMT

1. New Book: Coming Apart by Charles Murray

2. Hateful Politics

1. New Book: Coming Apart by Charles Murray

A new book called Coming Apart: The State of White America 1960-2010 by Charles Murray has come to my attention over the last week. I’ve seen two articles about it in the NY Times and it’s been featured in the (also relatively new) web site/Blog Rise of the Center (links below).

From what I’ve read about the book so far, what makes the book interesting is its discussion of how white America has become “increasingly polarized into two culturally and geographically isolated demographics,” to quote the article at link one.

In fact, David Brooks’ article (link #2) talks about the need, based on the book, for there to be a national service program that would cause the two demographics to have to live together. Sorry, David, we’ve been way ahead of you on that one for quite a while now. Bring on the Lottery Draft with selection for three levels of service: military, para-military and social service. The Greatest Generation who fought and won World War II and came home to establish great prosperity for this nation had that very experience. On a very large scale under highly stressful conditions, they lived among people who were not like them and came to appreciate other people and places as a result. We do not have this today and we need it back.

The third article talks about the divide and explores the question of whether the upper 20% are the upper 20% because of genetics or because of better opportunity. If those who occupy the upper 20% think it’s because of genetics, then doesn’t that present us with something of a “master race” complex contributing to a feeling of superiority and/or entitlement?

Overall, what I think this discussion points up is the old adage about the blind man and the elephant. How the blind man describes the elephant depends on what part of the elephant the man is touching. Further, if the blind man is never given the opportunity to touch the entire elephant, then the description is going to be very limited.

The value of this book and others like it (such as Our Patchwork Nation), therefore, is to show us how enormously diverse we are as a nation. In other words, politically, what this means to us is if we have policies being generated based on assumptions which do not reflect the reality of our societal diversity, then those policies have a very low chance of success. Voters who assume everyone else thinks and believes as they do (and those who do not are somehow evil) in choosing candidates and policies to support are actually hampering our ability to find solutions to our problems.

I intend to add Mr. Murray’s book to my reading list. You might want to do so, also.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/06/books/charles-murrays-coming-apart-the-state-of-white-america.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha28

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/31/opinion/brooks-the-great-divorce.html?scp=1&sq=David%20Brooks%20Charles%20Murray&st=cse

http://riseofthecenter.com/2012/02/08/main-reason-upper-middle-class-sending-more-kids-to-elite-colleges-theyre-producing-smarter-children/7999?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=main-reason-upper-middle-class-sending-more-kids-to-elite-colleges-theyre-producing-smarter-children

P.S. Rob Ritchie of FairVote.org is going to be on C-SPAN’s Washington Journal this Sunday morning, Feb 12, 2012 at 9:15 a.m. EST (8:15 a.m. CST). Ritchie is an advocate of Instant Runoff Voting and similar modifications to voting to improve our Republic. I recommend watching.

2. Hateful Politics

Passion has always been part of politics and will always be. Anger has always been a prime motivator. But when voters allow anger to cross over into hatred, aren’t they violating the counsel to, “Don’t get mad. Get even.”?

Yet think of these recent events in the news. One is the finger wagging incident with Arizona Governor Jan Brewer towards President Obama. Another is the declaration by Florida Representative Allen West that President Obama, former Speaker Pelosi, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid could “go to Hell.”

What these incidents illustrate is crossing the line from anger over policy disagreement to hatred of the person because of their policy.

Those who manage people know a key management task is to separate the personality of an individual from their performance. The more difficult and creative the nature of the task the individual performs, the more difficult the task for the manager to make the distinction. For example, finding salespeople who can sell and will sell can be extremely difficult. When businesses find such an individual, the propensity is usually to overlook personality foibles in order to retain productivity.

One of the most famous public examples of this phenomenon came from the American Civil War with President Abraham Lincoln and General Ulysses S. Grant. Figures jealous of Grant wanted to have him replaced with others they found more favorable. Those figures approached Lincoln with . . .

Once you have subscribed, we suggest you check your spam file in your email account to make sure you’re receiving your copy of our weekly Ezine.

Thank you in advance for becoming a member of our community seeking pragmatic solutions for our political problems by overcoming polarized politics.

Larry Bradley's Weekly Ezine #204 Preparing Children to Be Voters

Larry Bradley — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 22:18:52 GMT

1. What Would the Founders Do?

2. Preparing Children to Be Voters

1. What Would the Founders Do?

Since paragraph two today is about training young minds in the form of government our Founders conceived, one is reminded how often today we hear from voters (particularly Ron Paul supporters) that we need to get back to the basics of what the Founders envisioned.

I’m in the process of readying a new Preface to go with the coming re-release of my book as an eBook. Concerning the abuses of our political system, one of my reviewers asked the specific question, “What would our forefathers think?”

I replied as follows: Your comment about what our forefathers would think reminds me of a story about the Disney companies from many years ago. It was the 1970’s, Walt Disney himself had died and the kind of movie Disney made in the 50’s and 60’s wasn’t selling anymore. There was a meeting of the corporate executives and one of them asked, “If Walt were alive today, what would he say for us to do?” As a result of that meeting, the group decided to form Touchstone Pictures to make films with a more contemporary feel. The decision, as we know now, was a good one.

So, expanding on that answer a bit, what the Disney executives did was acknowledge the times and the tastes of the viewing public had changed. If they really considered the question about what Walt would say, then they had to know Walt was someone who not only wanted to be with the public’s times and tastes. Walt was someone who wanted to help determine what the times and tastes were. The executives therefore made a decision they needed to modify their product to satisfy those changing times and tastes. They implemented their decision in a very smart way. The general public was unaware Touchstone equaled Disney, so if something went awry the Disney Brand would not be tarnished.

So, yes, going back to the original thought, what would our forefathers tell us to do if they were alive today? Would they tell us to adapt to the current times using the knowledge and opportunities science and technology gives us today?

Or would the Founders tell us we need to bring back Slavery and rescind Women’s right to vote?

Probably some of the Founders would argue for both things. The question is who would we listen to?

2. Preparing Children to Be Voters

Retaining a healthy democracy means training its citizens in how their government works. Reading a recent newspaper article* about the knowledge displayed by American students regarding America’s history and government spoke to how poorly the task is being accomplished. The testing results quoted were jaw droppingly abysmal. Here are some of the statistics quoted.

Among 30,000 students tested in a prestigious national sample:

Fewer than one in four students scored proficient and student performance got worse with age.
Half of fourth-graders could not identify Abraham Lincoln from a photograph and give two reasons why he was important in history.
Only 22 percent of the nation’s 12^th-graders were able to identify China as North Korea’s ally during the Korean War.

The article went on to describe efforts to revise the curriculum for better results and the difficulty in the age of the Internet to sort out what to teach. Be sympathetic for the challenge to educators. Some time ago (at least ten years) a lecturer said the body of knowledge is now doubling every five years. Yet educators have children in their charge for the same fixed hours from ages 6 to 18 they have had children for the last century. If the time availability is fixed, but the potential knowledge for teaching is expanding exponentially, then something has to give. What is that something?

Apparently, one of the things “giving” is knowledge of history and government. Bellevue University, headquartered in Bellevue, Nebraska has commendably counter-acted the trend by establishing a Center for American Vision and Values. The University requires all its students to . . .

Once you have subscribed, we suggest you check your spam file in your email account to make sure you’re receiving your copy of our weekly Ezine.

Thank you in advance for becoming a member of our community seeking pragmatic solutions for our political problems by overcoming polarized politics.

Comment about Weekly Ezine #203 from JR Cassady

Larry Bradley — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 20:51:17 GMT

Here's a comment I received by email from JR Cassady.

Good comments. Don’t forget the “fear factor” in protracted wars. I remember patrolling into a friendly yard village in II corps where the villagers were keen on helping us with info about the NVA. We followed the info up and had a couple of short fire fights then circled the wagons and headed back to the SF camp. Later when going back through the same village they were very cool to us. We had no way or force to secure them. After we left the AO the NVA came back, tortured the chief in front of the people and abducted some young people as porters. We did try to rescue their kidnapped, but never could track them down. So, as you indicated, if you can’t secure the population from the cancer of the insurgents (radical Islamists) you are probably pissing in the wind.

I say we need a draft system. and the National will to fight a war to WIN it.

Keep up the good work.

Cass

Larry Bradley's Weekly Ezine #203 Which Business Are We Talking About?

Larry Bradley — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 23:17:25 GMT

1. Discussing Some Military Matters

2. Which Business Are We Talking About?

1. Discussing Some Military Matters

Here are some thoughts for you about recent military topics in the news.

First there is the sad business of the Marines urinating on the bodies of dead Taliban fighters. Some have defended the Marines on the premise of “Look what they do to us that’s even worse!” That argument misses the point.

When nations engage in what as known as symmetric or conventional warfare, the means to victory is destroying the other nation state’s ability to wage war. This means destroying both their military and their ability to produce and provide equipment and supplies to wage war. In conventional war, once one nation state is no longer able to conduct military operations, the war is basically over.

In unconventional (also known as asymmetric or guerilla) warfare the means to victory is to secure the population from an insurgent force and to do things which will keep the general population from joining the insurgent movement. If these things can be achieved, then the insurgency can be defeated. As I’ve written here before, defeating an insurgency takes a lot of troops and America and its allies have not ever come close to providing the required number of boots on the ground.

That said, when the other side commits atrocities we are galvanized to pursue victory. The same thing is true for the other side when we commit atrocities. The general population becomes sympathetic to the insurgency and the time required for victory is lengthened. The actions of the Marines, therefore is inexcusable not only because it is an atrocity beneath them, but also because those actions are a detriment to achieving victory.

Second topic: the reduction in the size of the military due to personnel costs was announced as part of the budget this week. The reduction is deemed necessary because personnel costs are up. Personnel costs are especially up in medical care. Medical care costs are up because we recruit married people, often with children, and the military supports them, as well as the service member. Were we to go back to the lottery draft I have advocated for some time, then we would be better afford to maintain the size force we really need. 18 and 19 year olds are much less likely to have families and we could afford to be much more selective about which ones that do we take in the military. There was once a saying in the Army that, “If the Army wanted you to have a wife, they would have issued you one.” Perhaps we need to return to that philosophy.

Third: Kudos once again to the Navy Seals who rescued the hostages in Somalia. Two thoughts about this event are worthy of your consideration. The event illustrates again the fact Special Operations success depends on good intelligence. The results we’re getting now against Al Qaeda and other ne’er do wells like Somali Pirates indicates we’ve broken the code on getting the intelligence we need. That’s good news. The other thought is how once again Somalia illustrates how a nation free of organized, effective government is scarcely the utopia some in this country think it would be and want to convert this country to. Those of you who think these thoughts are welcome to go to Somalia and try it out for yourself. Hope you’ve got lots of cash for ransoms. We know you wouldn’t want any government money being spent on rescuing you.

2. Which Business Are We Talking About?

So many arguments about national issues seem to lack clarity because of a lack of general factual data and appreciation for proportions. This certainly applies to discussions about how to get the American economy moving again. The argument now over the worth of Venture Capitalism vs. Vulture Capitalism is a case in point. As a man in the street commentator said recently in a newscast, “I’m not as concerned about Capitalism vs. Socialism or Fascism as I am about a return to Feudalism.”

Consider what you find when you Google, “How many businesses are there in the US?” A Census Bureau report from 2008* gives these numbers.

There were 27, 756,676 firms, or to use a shorthand there are over 27.7 M (for million) firms.

Of those firms, there are over 21.7M firms without a payroll, leaving a little over 6M with a payroll.

Of those firms with a payroll, 3.6M had 1-4 employees.

Of the entire payroll paying firms only 18, 469 (That’s eighteen thousand) had over 500 employees. Of those 18,469, only 981 (Nine Hundred Eighty One) had over 10,000 employees.

This is what these numbers mean to you. The . . .

To be able to read the rest of the Ezine, please email customerservice@KindredMindsEnt.com and subscribe to our free weekly Ezine by providing your first and last name, an email address and your zip code. We will forward a copy of the complete text of this Ezine to you and you will receive all future editions in your in-box. We do not share our list of subscribers for any reason, You may unsubscribe at any time (as noted in the Administrative Instructions included with each Ezine) by replying to the Ezine with the word UNSUBSCRIBE anywhere in the subject line.

Once you have subscribed, we suggest you check your spam file in your email account to make sure you’re receiving your copy of our weekly Ezine.

Thank you in advance for becoming a member of our community seeking pragmatic solutions for our political problems by overcoming polarized politics.