Would You Want This Guy as Your Boss?

A major public corporation was in need of a new CEO. One candidate was a young executive who had been with the company less than 2 years and had never before served as chief executive of any company. However, the search committee and the Board of Directors found him quite charismatic and full of potential. He had excellent rapport with employees, too. The young exec wooed the Board with ideas for increasing employee morale and productivity, boosting sales, and making the firm a true industry leader. This was music to the ears of the Board as their corporation had recently experienced financial trouble and was seen by some in the public and press as out-dated and uncaring toward employees and other stakeholders.

The young exec was eventually appointed CEO and expectations from all quarters were high. The Board hoped that soon their stock price would rise and the company's image would improve as the energetic and eloquent CEO set out to promote the corporation. At a "town hall" meeting with employees, the new CEO stated his vision for the company but offered few details about what strategies would be implemented. He then told the workers that the company was making products that were of questionable quality and safety and that some employees were making too much money.

Next, at the CEO's first major appearance, at an industry conference, he used most of his speech to highlight what he considered the past mistakes of the company. He apologized for these and even indicated that his enterprise had too much market share. Then, rather than note some of the soon-to-launch products of the company, the CEO talked vaguely about products that had so far proven unpopular and unprofitable.

A while later, the CEO announced that the company would be acquiring several businesses in various industries completely unrelated to the corporation's core products. Moreover, these would be hostile takeovers, the existing managers at these firms would be fired, and the CEO and his deputies would take over strategic decision-making for them. This latest move was unnerving to investors because the CEO knew nothing about these new businesses.

Then, the CEO sent out a memo that some managers would be docked pay and denied promotions because the he simply didn't like the opinions they offered on a special task force under the old CEO.

At this point, if you were on the Board of this company, wouldn't you want to know what the hell the CEO was doing? Wouldn't you question what the CEO actually liked about the corporation and why he really wanted to be its leader? If you were an employee or manager, would you want this guy as your boss?

Mull this over and come back in a day or so for the rest of the story.

The Experts Agree

I'm not the only one who thinks that fundamentals are critical to success. Read the advice one well-respected teacher/blogger offers to another.

Fiction is Life

I know, I am behind on my Back to Fundamentals, America! pep blogging. Admittedly, I am still a little glum over the end of Battlestar Galactica on the SciFi channel. Not in the same way that Soprano fans were bummed by that series finale. Quite the opposite; I liked the BSG finale. And maybe that is why I feel a longing for more. Quite timely, fiction author Alexander McCall Smith publishes a piece on the "intense personal relationships readers form with characters". He intelligently observes:

Although we eventually learn to distinguish between the world of make-believe and the real world, I suspect that many of us continue to experience fictional characters and events as being, in some way, real. This is because the imaginative act of following a story involves a suspension of disbelief, as we enter into the world it creates. When Anthony Minghella showed me a moving scene that he had just filmed for the pilot of "The No. 1 Ladies' Detective Agency," I found myself weeping copiously, right there on the set. I felt rather embarrassed -- it was only a story, after all -- but he put a hand on my shoulder and said that was exactly what he had done over that particular scene.

A great story, whether fiction or not, touches us in personal ways that we might not fully understand or appreciate immediately.

Now, there was one element of the BSG finale that really tugged at me for some time after watching the episode ... the "life transition" of Kara "Starbuck" Thrace. As I watched Kara announce her time in this plane of existence had come to an end and then vanish I thought it a cinematographically beautiful shot and a fantastic decision by the director. But then my analytical brain kicked in. Wait, she's gone? Does that mean she really did die in the previous season? Is she an angel? I felt there was something unresolved about the character's plot line; moreover, I felt personally unfulfilled. As I spent perhaps a little too much time for a well-balanced person considering this, It slowly dawned on me that this was an appropriate end. It reflects the way people enter and exit our own lives, leaving us wanting more of them after they are gone, but happy for the time we had together. It provokes the question that we ask ourselves (and whatever god you believe in) what role that person plays/played in our own lives.

So, yes, I want more of Kara Thrace. Her exit deprives me of the opportunity to continue the storyline on my own, as Mr. Smith states we consumers of fiction are apt to do. (Of course, in science fiction, anything is possibly, and Starbuck could return - again - but if you are familiar with the BSG universe you know that would not fit with its style.) Yet, at the same time, Starbuck's absence redirects me to focus on the importance of real life family, friends, and acquaintences and what they mean to me. That's good fiction informing real life. As Starbuck's dear friend Lee says upon her sudden and unexpected vanishing, "You will not be forgotten." So it should be with all of us.


Entirely divergent, it seems to me that Ron Moore and the BSG writers are Ozzy Osbourne fans, based on the final scenes of Kara and her husband together in the CIC. Don't know what I'm talking about? Watch the series, starting at the beginning. It's well worth your time. In the meantime, listen to Ozzy.

My New Neighbor

Cute, isn't he?

You Need to See This

This is why we need to return to our foundational principles, truly take responsibility for our own lives, and hold our elected representatives accountable. We simply cannot afford not to. More than anyone else, this is a problem for the youngest generations. Hey kids, you're right... your parents are out of touch with reality.

(Of course, so are you.)

Click here to find out how We The People are taking a stand for our future.

Where to Start

When I took a look back at my posts on the government, politics, etc., I found that my tone was a bit... well... angry. Now, I suppose I am angry at Washington. But I am not an angry person generally and do not like being angry, and anger only takes a person (or a group) so far. Moreover, I want this blog to reflect my more lighthearted side. How, or why did I become angry at our government to begin with? Some would say "unfairness". It's unfair that we responsible individuals should be taxed extra to pay for the extravagances of the irresponsible among us. It's unfair that no one in Washington will accept responsibility for any of the structural problems in the economy. And so on. Yet what is unfairness?

At this point, let me digress for a moment. A common retort to the criticism leveled at Congress and the Obama Administration on their economic policies is basically, "Well, what's your plan then?" Good question. If the plan is not to spend trillions upon trillions of taxpayer dollars (borrowed without asking from future generations) on projects of questionable long-term value, then what should our national policy on the economy, or America in general, be? Another question being bandied about is, "How did we get into this mess?" Also legitimate to ask. In many ways the debate over what we do now as a country reminds me of all those movies about sports teams that start as the worst duds ever but end up as the champs. What always happens in these movies, whether it's the Mighty Ducks or Miracle or Major League? The coach and the team go back to the fundamentals of the game and practice those until they are too tired to stand and so bruised they look like a rotten piece of fruit. Only then does the team move ahead to the more complex and challenging plays. We love these types of stories for a variety of reasons, but in large part because they present the truth: in all things, you need to crawl before you can walk and you need to individually know your position before you can function effectively as a team.

In short, that is what I believe we as a nation need to do. Return to the fundamentals.

Now, back to my anger and the notion of fair/unfair. Essentially, we think of something as unfair if we perceive it to violate one or more of our principles or values. Principles and values are our fundamentals, just like being able to skate well or throw and catch a baseball are foundational in sports. So, I'm pissed because Congress, Obama, the Fed, almost all the way down to Smokey Bear have acted in ways that I think violate basic principles of American society and government. I cannot underscore this enough - I truly think that our Republic is in grave danger; that the America that is the beacon of hope and liberty for the world might just fade away. Therefore, rather than be angry and simply rant, I will propose solutions based upon the principles and values that built this country and that I believe we can (almost) all agree upon. Returning to our fundamentals means, first, knowing what they are, and so that is where I will begin. I think that once we have our principles and values out in clear view, the answers to our national problems and the mistakes that have led to them, as well as the courses of action we should not take, will all become much more evident. And, regarding the actions we should take, even preferable and easier to implement. You'll notice that the title of this post is not a question - it is a statment. We know where to start. Please join me again soon and we'll start together.

Where'd My Wallet Go?

So, I couldn't find my wallet this morning. Looked everywhere for it. Yesterday's pair of pants, under the bed, in the car, on the kitchen counter... Then, while searching, I glanced at a newspaper:

House passes 90% tax on AIG bonuses. (Disregards unconstitutionality of the bill.)

Philly mayor proposes 36% property tax hike, new sales tax in $3.84 billion budget.

Illinois governor wants to raise income tax by 50%.

Budget deficit reaches $1.8 TRILLION.

And my favorite...

Federal government debt greater than the combined income of the the whole world!

After seeing all this I noticed my wallet lying on the floor by the back door. It was empty, except for a business card from my congressman, with the handwritten note, "Sorry I missed you, but thanks for your support." And this in tiny print, "Paid for with taxpayer dollars."

Robbin' Hoods

It is a common misconception that Robin Hood stole from the rich to give to the poor. In point of fact, Robin Hood retrieved from the corrupt and greed Sheriff of Nottingham what the latter had illegitimately expropriated from the hard-working common folk and returned the ill gotten wealth to same. In other words, Robin Hood took back from the tyrannical state what that government had improperly and immorally taken from the people. The citizenry was only poor because the state seized what wealth they had.

With this historical tidbit in mind, let me direct you to the latest snarlings of Congress and others in various levels of government. Some are "upset" about the fact that AIG, the insurance giant-turned ward of the feds, has paid $165 million in bonuses. Much of the money went to the financial unit behind the disastrous credit default swaps. While this might seem horribly unfair on the surface, the deeper truth is that AIG was contractually obligated to pay this money out, and did so with the full knowledge and at least tacit approval of the all the bigwigs overseeing TARP and the bailouts. That would mainly be Treasury Sec. Tim Geithner (who failed to pay income taxes for several years). So now the majority party in Congress, the loonies who has passed the bailout legislation, are hopping mad and want that money back. Listen to Sen. Schumer...



First, this is so disingenuous because Congress had the opportunity to limit how bailout money could be spend, but they didn't. In fact, Sen. Chris Dodd, head of the Banking Committee, specifically added an amendment that did away with limits on bonuses and compensation. Further, Congress and the Administration used AIG to, effectively, launder money. Federal tax dollars went to AIG, which was then directed to send that money to hedge funds, investment banks, and foreign financial groups who otherwise wouldn't have gotten TARP money.

Second, we can plainly see that those in power in Washington obviously believe that what the government giveth, the government can taketh away, and will do so by use of coercive force. Yeah, I really want these people in charge of my healthcare, business, energy sources, and everything else involved with my daily life. Today it's executives at AIG, tomorrow it could be "stimulus" dollars used for projects that Congress or Obama doesn't like. Maybe then they will decide that you didn't spend your own income properly or that your profession is making too much money. Now I direct you back to the story of Robin Hood and ask you to consider just whose money and wealth we're talking about here, and just who the greedy and morally-bankrupt players are. I think you'll see who the real 'hoods are and who's really being robbed.

Them Bones

Before Tony Soprano and before Orson Wells landed Martians there, New Jersey was famous for something more in the realm of hard science. In 1858 an amateur fossil hunter unearthed the most complete prehistoric skeleton at the time in rural Haddonfield, NJ. That fossil, Hadrosaurus foulkii, then became the first mounted dinosaur displayed to the public thanks to the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia.

Of course, today hundreds of skeletons are exhibited around the world to the amazement and wonder of millions of children and adults. But imagine what a spectacle such an exhibit must have been to the people in 1868 (when the fossil was revealed). Sea monsters and dragons were still considered more fact than myth and science was largely the province of the wealthy and well-bred. Probably the only contemporary comparison would be if the skeleton of E.T. was put on display.

Visit the Academy's web site for more on Hadrosaurus foulkii and the current exhibit in commemoration of its discovery 150 years ago.

Spending Our Way to Ruin

Okay, I've had enough. I withheld posting on politics during the election cycle, but now the fools and tools in Congress and our Chief Executive of Hope and Change are about to commit highway robbery of unprecedented proportions. First the House passes a bill that is estimated to cost the American taxpayers $820 Billion. I might point out that only Democrats voted for this, with 11 D's crossing over to vote 'nay'. Now the Senate - at least the Dems and a couple spend-happy Republicans - seems poised to agree to about $800 Billion.

Let's be clear here. This is not "economic stimulus". It is government spending, pure and simple. Obama said so. (Sorry about the Canadian thing, but this was the best version I could find quickly.) What is the difference you ask. Well, stimulus implies that you get some sort of positive ripple effect through the economy or boost in total value (GDP). Supposedly, we will see more jobs, better incomes, and such. This spending will not achieve this goal because it is no different than the typical congressional appropriation. These bills just buy stuff for government - federal, state, and local. There is no real investment of the sort that individuals and businesses make to create added value. Think of it this way. The feds are going to pay a lot of people to build federal offices, install computers, pave roads, etc. So beyond the paychecks of these select, lucky people there will be no value added to the national economy. At the same time, a massive amount of money will be taken out of private hands, which means that when creative and innovative folks come along saying, "Hey, I have a great idea for a better mousetrap", there will be no money for them to do it. So the jobs that would have otherwise been created at the new mousetrap factory, jobs that would last more than the time it takes to install a faucet in a national park outhouse, will never materialize. Here's an even simplier analogy: Could you ever afford to buy the things you really want or repair your car or house, or save for retirement, if you were constantly giving your hard-earned money to your wacky neighbor who only used your cash to add more garden gnomes and floodlights to his yard?

The other important fact is that Congress has to borrow or print all this money, or both. None of those are good options for our nation. First borrowing. We all agree that the root of our economic problems is the reck-loose borrowing and spending of consumers and businesses. Now we are being asked, in a most insulting way, to believe that the way out of our debt is to take on more debt for things we don't really need. Second, printing cash. Inflation. INFLATION. INFLATION! Click here if you don't know why inflation is a bad, bad, bad thing for America.

Speaking of debt... Think you are a fiscally responsible person, with a handle on credit card and consumer debt? Think debt isn't a problem in your life. Oh, aren't you a cute little deluded American. The recently-retired Comptroller of the Currency, the guy who is basically the head bookkeeper for the US, estimates that each American (not just taxpayer, each American) owes $184,000 on the national debt. And that figure keeps rising. Sooner or later, that bill will come due in the form of much higher taxes on everyone.

Back to this spending spree package. What's in it? Good question. The bill from the House is almost 200 pages long and sheds little light on what we taxpayers are actually spending money on. However, here are a few choice porkers:

• $2.825 Billion for broadband internet for rural communities.
• $650 Million for coupons for analog-to-digital television converters
• $140 Million for "climate modeling" (I thought the science was settled on that one?)
• $7.7 Billion for the Federal Buildings Fund
• $150 Million for the Smithsonian
• $50 Million for the National Endowment of the Arts

It just goes on and on, the wasteful, special interest-payback, vote-buying spending. In many cases, such as spending for the Dept. of Education, the appropriation in this emergency "stimulus" bill is twice the normal annual budget amount! The extra shame is that all this pork will inevitably be added to the federal baseline, meaning that it will be used to calculate next year's budgets. So, in a few strokes of the pen, government will have ballooned in size, power, and thirst for our money, all under the disguise of helping the little guy and gal.

All is not lost - yet. The Senate has not voted and the president hasn't signed anything into law. Take this opportunity to call, fax, email and generally pester your elected representatives into stopping this raid on our wallets and liberty. Because that's what this is all about - making everyone a recipient of government welfare. And that's just another way of saying losing your freedom. WE THE PEOPLE deserve much better. We deserve to be respected and listened to by our government. But only if we speak up. Go now and give them your opinion.