Dems Offically Endorse Lynch and Berding

The recommendations were accepted by City Democrats for 6 additional candidates beyond the three incumbents: Jeff Berding, Damon Lynch, Eve Bolton, Samantha Herd, Cecil Thomas and Wendell Young.

Berding is causing grief among some, but to me Lynch is still a disappointment. At this point I would not even consider voting for the man. Could I change my mind? It would take a lot, but it would be possible. If Lynch publicly retracts his past statements on calling police rapists, if he retracts a call for an "afro-centric" curriculum in CPS, and if he says he does not support what was a boycott and declare once and for all that one does not exist. He does that AND his positions are reasonable AND he makes the effort to represent the entire city, then I may vote for him.

I expect some of this is part of his plan and is why the Dems are now supporting him, or at least enough Dems to get a deal to get the endorsement. What I do not expect is Lynch to meet the requirements needed for to vote for him. Because of that I think he is a big mistake to endorse, and gives a lot of fuel to the GOP and by default to Charter. The GOP will just be running against Lynch. Malone against Lynch will I think be how the TV commercials may go, subtly of course. This will pull away liberals like me into the Charter camp. Roxanne Qualls would be a great Charterite right about now, in my book.

Nate as more from the meeting. How much of it is true? Well, that depends on how much Nate spun it. It is worth a read if for nothing else than to see Nate defend Damon Lynch. I though Nate and Lynch were bitter enemies, have they made nice or is Nate just circling the race-based wagons?

Learning

How do you learn something? How long does it take you? Do you have learn by doing or can you translate instruction into action? What about observation?

Back in school I learned little or no information from the classroom, other than what the teacher was going to ask on the test had a direct relationship to the topics he or she covered in class.

I learn best by either following written directions, yes I actually read them when I buy a new bookcase at Target, or I learn by observation and then using imitation along with trial and error.

I do not learn well in teams. I personally don't function at my best in teams on most levels, unless I have no clue what is going on, or when I have people who know how to manage, which is often lacking. When I learn something new with a team it ends up that I get it, and then teach the rest by example or by a step-by-step walk through.

I would hate having someone over my shoulder telling what to type or which button to push. The funny part is that what I do for people all the time in my job.

Can anyone learn to do anything? Could I learn to perform surgery? Are there tasks that people just don't have the ability to grasp? It seems to me that if there are people who are able to document any process correctly, then I should be able to complete that process. It doesn't work that way, but conceptually if we had the directions, could we just make a nuclear bomb?

Questions for Summit Country Day School

If you are going to only allow "Catholics in public life" speak at your who school "whose positions run contrary to the church," then I guess you are going to not allow anyone gay, anyone divorced, anyone who has lied, anyone who has killed someone, anyone who supports the death penalty, or anyone who is not Roman Catholic to speak or for that matter work for your school. Those are the teachings of the Catholic Church, so then you are going to screen out everyone who has not broken those rules?

When will Summit Country Day issue a political test to its staff to determine where they stand on these issues? If they don't, are they simply going to ask who they voted for and then judge based on that? That would be an odd split. Which is more important, being anti-abortion or anti-death penalty?

Thin Skinned Cole

Laketa Cole needs to look past minor pranks. She now will be tagged as the person responsible for removing the barricade on 13th Street, all because she raise a ruckus over a flier. That pushed Enquirer reporter Greg Korte to write a news story and then make her the focus of what some view as opening back up the door to drug dealers.

She should win back her seat anyway, but she might loose a few moderate votes. This would not have been known if she would have just taken it and moved on, don't arm your opponents with your own anger.

Blue Collar, White Collar, & the Future

When I was in college I was trained a what I believe was and is one of the best public university undergraduate business programs in the country. We were taught how to be corporate soldiers. Whether it was accounting, management, marketing, or Finance, all of us learned the tools needed to run any corporation. What we didn't learn were the operations of what that corporation might do. We didn't learn how to build anything. We didn't learn to design much, beyond a few spreadsheets. Some of us can sell, but we didn't learn about what we are selling.

20 years ago it would take about 25 people to do what it takes 5 to do, in about half the time. The ratio in the future will likely increase in its efficiency. Where will that leave our workforce?

What plans are in the minds of our corporate leaders and political office holders? Are they thinking it will all just work out? Do some think that in 50 years we will not build or make anything and only provide services to the world? It appears that is the model we are heading towards. China, India, and South America will make everything, and we will sell it and buy it. The job skill sets in America are shrinking. There are fewer companies that doing fewer things. Will there be enough jobs to support our economy? How long can we make money when we are just trading sticks of butter, taking a cut in each transaction? Would it not be better to not only sell the butter, but make it too? Do we not in the long run make more money when we don't out source everything? At some point the market for outsourcing will crash, and companies will scramble to find people to answer the telephone, let alone find people to service their Servers or make their toothbrushes. What companies are looking beyond stock price? What are we going to do when consolidate everything as far as we can? Will CEO's ever care about anything other than share price?

One for 'Us,' and None For 'Them'

Abraham at Political Influentials brings up an interesting column about how Evangelical Christians are not Monolithic. This is a true statement, technically. When it comes to social issues I think it wrong. That is the point of the whole theocratic movement, to impose a social order on the society based on conservative Christian religious dogma. It will be "open" to variation, but only those where Christians can swallow it, so to speak. The reactionaries are not going to make everyone be Baptists or even be born-again, but what they don't seem to understand is that not everyone is Christian, and because they (me) are not, that should not be a reason to discriminate against them, nor should it a be license to use the government to try and either force or even just encourage religion or more likely a particular brand of religion on anyone.

I think history is missed on people. In the past the evangelical Christians oppressed Catholics in this country. The Catholics gave some back too, but catholic discrimination was not just common, it was the norm.

Today we have something relatively similar. The Evangelicals have evolved. They are tolerant of most other Christian variable, and to some degree to Jews and Muslims. Inside the evangelicals you still will get plenty of blood loss over whether you are a KJV fan or you push forward with NIV or some other heathen text. The tolerance level is far dicier and has we have seen lately in the new outright oppressive against other non-monotheists. Admitting this reality is a big debating point though.

I fully agree that the 'born-again' Christians are not going to view the same issues the same way. They do however have a slew of issues that they move in crisp step with far and above all other Christians. There is no middle ground on abortion or homosexuality or other social issues. Do they disagree on taxes? Sure they do. The political spectrum of view points in many churches though I think is shrinking.

In the column though one thing was really missing: debate on anti-gay stances. It is quite clear that evangelicals most often either out-right anti-homosexuals, or they compartmentalize the issues. Think of being against gay marriage, but not being anti-gay. I don't see a difference, they often nuance it. It is the same as the cliché: "hate the sin, not the sinner." Well, when you are not religious, you don't sin, it is not applicable as a concept, so again, it is failure to grasp that people live outside your frame of reference.

Abraham had a funny, which I don't think was intentional in his post:

Evangelicals Are Not A Monolith

I've seen quite a few references to theocracy lately. If you're interested in another point of view read this opinion article from an evangelical. He offers some insight on what they stand for.

The bold is mine. It is subtly funny. A better choice would have been "some of them” instead of "they," but I got the overall point of post.

Loss of Cinergy?

What will the effects be on the loss of Cinergy's HQ? The back office will surely lose jobs, but how much of the operation can be handled from NC?