Life

Picking Apart the Bill of Rights

16 May
by John, posted in Liberty, Life, Pursuit of Happiness   |  No Comments

The irony of the AP wiretapping scandal is listening to the Press cry apoplectic about the threat to the First Amendment after the Press lead the largest potential restriction of the Second Amendment in a generation.  There are certainly on a micro level very different issues.  But they fit the pattern of constant government assault on the Bill of Rights since 1980.

A forgotten part of the conservative agenda in 1980 was legal reform.  It is forgotten because it was so hugely successful it is now the mainstream thought of both the Left and the Right.  Conservatives believed the liberal Warren Supreme Court of the 1960s had expanded the Fourth and Fifth Amendment’s guarantees to the accused (Nixonian translation “criminals”) over society and victims.  As the War on Drugs accelerated the pendulum swung to law and order.

These Liberal/Conservative Supreme Court cutbacks, particularly in drug and national security cases, fit a pattern of an over grasping Federal Government diluting fundamental rights.  You do not have to be a paranoid conspiracy theorist to have concern.  It is precisely the concern the Founders had in writing the Bill of Rights.

So the Federal Government marches on in its collection of power.  Intimidating reporters, restricting gun rights, tolerating warrantless stop and frisk searches, listening to domestic phone and Internet conversations to overseas without a warrant, entering homes without a warrant, searching cars without a warrant …

We all have parts of the Constitution that we find more interesting, more relevant, more inspiring.  But in the end it is a unitary document.  We either all as voters band together to insist on preserving all of it or call a Constitutional Convention to change it.  Perhaps it is time after 225+ years.

But we as voters should express clearly and often that the Federal Government’s job is to protect the Bill of Rights and expand its relevance in the modern world, not cut it back under the guise of national security, “common sense” regulation,  or judicial “exceptional circumstances”.  If we as citizens want any changes, we will call that Constitutional Convention, then let our public servants know what changes we have wrought to the foundations of the Republic.

Lean Whatever – Professional Women’s Equality

13 Mar
by John, posted in competitiveness, innovation, leadership, Life, Policy   |  No Comments

Watching for months, threatening to become years, professional women debate equality of opportunity vs. equality has culminated in a rather obvious point. In America professionals cannot trust anyone else to give them balance.  Professionals have to make hard choices.  How you make those choices dictate in large measure your wealth or your willingness to live without it, therefore your flexibility in child-rearing and career.

I thought that was the whole point?  Men and society would no longer make decisions for women.  Women, individually, would be free to chose their own paths in life.

But instead an element of the conversation really seems to be less equality of opportunity, but equality in the French sense.  The idea that society’s collective sense of equality (fraternity) outweighs individual equality of opportunity.  It is as if one sliver of professional women are asking for égalité expressed in various forms of government policy imposing mandatory change and another is making the traditional American point that you are better to seize control of your life and live it your way.

What I was struck by in Anne-Marie Slaughter’s Atlantic piece was how uncomfortable she was with her decision to leave the White House.

My family moved with me to the DC area.  They hated it.  From that move huge opportunity arose that made my career.  Now we have balance in our lives.

It was only after  that I realized I did not want a grinding career marked by 10, 20, or even 30 year stints in an organization.  I realized that by year three I was bored even in the most dynamic of environments.  It was not so much the constant pounding of 80 hour work weeks, but the prospect of only doing that.

In other words, why not make public policy on my life experience versus Anne-Marie Slaughter’s, or anyone of the other three hundred million Americans regardless of gender?

At its core I think Sheryl Sandberg’s approach focusing on empowerment of women to succeed in the world  matches my experience. It is only when you succeed in your career that you can extract balance from it.  Waiting on the government to pass the right mix of subsidies and laws to empower your success is riskier than striking out.

And Sandberg is completely right about having to reach out for the baton.  I am a turnaround guy.  Nobody takes care of you, but you.

Now this can come across as critical of Anne-Marie Slaughter and traditional policy solutions such as flexible hours and workspace. I believe in all of those tools.  It makes good business sense in productivity, efficiency, and cost structure.

It is also a great way as a manager to motivate not just female employees, but any employee with a challenge.  A few hundred dollars of technology can enable any employee to work more hours from more places.  You have to manage employees to data driven metrics, but flexible work hours breed incredibly loyal, grateful, and hard working employees.

But there is no one size fits all.  Yahoo’s CEO, Marissa Mayer, has gone just the other way in banning telecommuting in some circumstances.  Remember she is in a long-shot turnaround at Yahoo that most likely will fail. If you have worked in a desperate turnaround where the customer rejects your product, the workforce is wracked with the results of multiple RIFs (reductions in force), your biggest daily challenge is shocking the culture.  It is literally a defibrillator to a prostrate body on the way to being a carcass.

It has nothing to do with égalité vs. equality of opportunity. It has to do with a turnaround.  Gender has nothing to do with it.

We should do everything possible to encourage young women to succeed on their terms. We should pursue public policy, continuing to focus on all forms of discrimination, that emulates that cultural encouragement.  But in the end not every man or woman wants the same thing, will sacrifice the same,  and the society is too complex to relegate women’s future to a binary “balance” discussion.

You can have it all, or part of it, or none it.  It comes with degrees of cost.  The choice is what makes us American.

 

Minimum Wage – That Is Your Growth Plan?

14 Feb
by John, posted in leadership, Life, Policy, President, Rural, South, Texas, Urban Policy, West   |  3 Comments

I really do admire and respect the President, but raising the minimum wage as a growth strategy does not line up with memories of my Jimmy Carter era high school economics class.  I favor a minimum wage as a floor to exploitation, but nobody I know argues it results in more jobs and more hiring.   President Obama is just not a fan of private enterprise expansion.

Actions are louder than words.  The more expensive labor costs, the more corporate executives retard budgeted and unbudgeted hiring.  That is true in my personal experience throughout the US, Canada, the UK, France, the Netherlands, Germany, and Denmark where I ran or had some executive responsibility for various manufacturing and high tech businesses.

But all my early jobs were in small businesses.  Our son, Jack, is sixteen and looking for his first summer job.  My first job beyond the family was at age 15.  I was the junior guy in a delicatessen in Highland Park Plaza in Dallas.  The owners were two Jewish guys, but they were not equal partners.  It made for an unusual hierarchal management style worthy in my view of a TV sitcom.

I cleaned out the grease trap and once a bathroom that had the appearance of a ritual killing site, scrubbed floors and dishes, and did every dirty job in the book for $2.50 an hour plus lunch.  It was the first time I had an African-American as a peer in anything, who was also a mid-twenties single woman.  An altogether great cultural and fantastic culinary experience.

Minimum wage was actually $2.65 an hour.  In my first hard ball negotiation with one of the owners I asked for $2.65.  He told me to take $2.50 or he offered me his hand.  Dad confirmed for me there was some sort of exemption for him to hire me into the job.

Now you can say I was exploited.  But, I hope Jack has half as positive an experience as I had that four months.  And raising the minimum wage in Colorado and huge parts of the country is not going to make finding that summer job any easier.  It is an opportunity killer.

Mr. President, please remember that there is still almost 8% unemployment.  Strip out college graduates and the picture is scandalous.   Please, focus.

 

New York City Travel Trip

14 Nov
by John, posted in Airlines, leadership, Life, Pursuit of Happiness   |  No Comments

I admit to an unhealthy fascination with Winston Churchill.  It is perhaps refreshing to root for a conservative who was a liberal.  By liberal I mean the English variety circa 1885 – a rich aristocrat who actually visited the horrible conditions in the farming villages or the factories within his holdings, then determined to improve conditions through empowerment.

Churchill, the archetype Tory (the nickname of the Conservative Party in Britain) now, was in fact considered for most of his career an unstable volcano.  From the disaster at Gallipoli, the bungled Norwegian operation in 1940, to the unforgivable sin of crossing the floor in the House of Commons to join the opposition Liberals  from 1906 to 1922 he was to many Tories a “rank adventurer”.  But all of this history obscures much of the most interesting parts of Churchill.

And you do not have to book a flight to Blighty to immerse yourself in his lifestyle and conversation.  On E52nd in the arcade of the Park Avenue Plaza Building between Madison and Park is Chartwell Booksellers named after Churchill’s famous country house in Kent.  The bookstore is loaded with Churchill displays of hats, walking sticks, ties, decanters, signed pictures, slippers with a W, Churchill’s landscape paintings, and a famous red siren suit.   And as Churchill spilled out across the drawing rooms of London Chartwell Booksellers spills out into the halls of the Park Avenue’s arcade with more displays.

Val and I were in New York and Chartwell in September.  I try when I am there never to buy or even look at a regular Churchill book.  There are first editions of his fiction, essays, and history.  There are hard to find biographies and very narrow studies of Churchill and the events around him that would never drive a large printing.

The first book I bought served a distinct purpose for me – something to read in the twenty minutes on the plane I cannot use my IPad when taking off and landing.  The Definitive Wit of Winston Churchill is literally a two hundred page rendition of Churchill zingers spoken across two centuries.  Talk about changing my entire mood about air travel:

I remember when I was a child, being taken to the celebrated Barnum’s circus, which contained an exhibition of freaks and monstrosities, but the exhibit … which I most desired to see was the one described as “The Boneless Wonder”.  My parents judged that that spectacle would be too revolting and demoralizing for my youthful eyes, and I have waited fifty years to see the Boneless Wonder [Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald] sitting on the Treasury Bench.

The laugh from that one caused the flight attendant to repeat the no electronic device warning.

You do not have to be into politicians or wars to enjoy Chartwell.  It is really more about Churchill’s art of living.  Churchill Style captures all it.  His routine was unique –  slept late, worked in bed with a whiskey till late morning, bathed as a child in a tub with toys, ate, worked, sipped more whiskey, till an afternoon nap, followed by champagne, dinner, and more work until late into the night.   Churchill liked polo, whiskey, cigars, the English country house, painting, building, and an extravagant wardrobe.  But he was more than a toff lording over his village.  He liked gardening, bricklaying, irrigation, and creating things through his own physical effort.  It is a story of the art of being Churchill and that art’s intimate impact on history.

My last purchase is pretty rough on Americans.  Churchill’s Generals makes the point I so often struggle to write about effectively.  The United States is indispensable to the victory of freedom and democracy, but it is not exceptional.  Having led Britain through the two years that America slept through World War II, Churchill relentlessly promoted, demoted, fired, and reassigned his generals until they got it right.  And from that vantage point of merit over form, Churchill was able to shine a light on American failings.  It is a reminder that the United States is only exceptional as part of an alliance of credible competents.  Perhaps a fading dream given NATO’s decline.

If you get an hour in Mid-Town, check out Chartwell Booksellers.  And if your partner wants a different kind of style check out the world’s coolest costume jewelry store, Gale Grant, just back down Madison toward 51st on the east side of the street.

 

The Coming War or Not

21 Oct
by John, posted in leadership, Liberty, Life, Middle East   |  1 Comments

Over the course of my adult life we have moved from the successful post-Vietnam bipartisan foreign policy of a reluctance to intervene to a failed foreign policy of “American exceptionalism”.  While I have taken dead aim from time to time at Senator McCain on Twitter and in my blog, it would be grossly unfair not to mention Democratic support for much of the change.  While President Obama spoke out against the Iraq war, almost the entire Democratic party went blithely along with our war to replace a Sunni dictator with a Shiite dictator.

How little Iraq has changed with Russia winning a recent large arms sale and Shiites now busily consolidating power under an iron fist.  And yet, Senator McCain and much of his party continues to argue that American military leadership and the pumping of vast amounts of weapons including manpads (heat seeking missiles designed to shoot down planes and helicopters) into Syria is a preferable policy.  To not learn the lessons of history is to turn to a policy of overreach that hastened the decline of Rome, 18th and 19th century France, and 20th century Britain.

What is happening in Syria is that the regime and its backers are losing.  We are now at a stage where they cannot win.  It may indeed take another year or two of horrendous carnage, but the regime is done.  When it falls, Iran will be completely isolated.

If we can simply resist the people who say, “see there is a humanitarian disaster, we must intervene regardless of whether we can be effective”, then the Syrian opposition will achieve on their own what we desire.  Or we can become involved, take casualties when the manpads are turned on our airlines, and cause further resentment in a part of the world that except for its dependent elites does not want us.

Pictures of suffering humans are not an American national interest, because if they were the US military would be entering Honduras.  In Honduras we have an impending disaster of much greater importance right near our borders.  Yet the press is not highlighting this problem, because of the bipartisan fascination with the least important part of the world – the Middle East.

Honduras has drifted back into a military dictatorship established in a coupe with a horrendous human rights record.  It is a burgeoning center for narcotics shipments from South America into the United States.  We are now on a bipartisan basis pouring weapons and military aid into Honduras to bolster our failed drug war and to provide a counter-weight to perceived threats from Cuba, Venezuela, and Bolivia.  And the cost of this is we are once again failing to support democracy in our backyard.

Why?

The United States has focused for several decades on the wrong parts of the world.  Instead of engaging in Latin America, sub-Saharan Africa, and Asia, we have continued to fight the Cold War against Russia and our old proxy wars in the Middle East.

And it is not just Honduras where we have drifted backwards, but throughout Latin America.  Both parties have seen the rise of leftist government in Latin America through the lens of the Cold War.  News flash – there is no Soviet Union backing these governments.  There is zero need to oppose democracy of the left, center, or right.

Further, they are not monolithically bad.  No one can argue that the stupidity in Venezuela (country of my birth), Bolivia, and Nicaragua is leading to the eventual destruction of these countries’ economies, but that has nothing to do with Brazil.  The leftist government in Brazil is not anti-American and it has worked.  Brazil is growing at astonishing rate and that growth is creating a burgeoning middle-class and democracy.

And of course, we have not even begun to focus on Asia which is creating much of the world’s wealth.  We are no longer 50% of the world economy.  Why?  Not because we are in decline, but because our way of life is ascendant.

What result did we think the spreading of capitalism and democracy would yield?  We have got to begin to turn away from the irrelevant parts of the world and to the growing parts.  We need to focus our attention in Latin America, Asia, and sub-Saharan Africa on the burgeoning capitalist and democratic countries.  Because if we can assist them through trade, stability, and the absence of war we can assure that our way of life continues well into the next century.

Or we can like Britain engage in a 1914-1918 style elective war and meaningless brush wars chasing American exceptionalism and lose the flower of the next American generation.  And that will yield decline and bankruptcy.