Making Ripples: post-corporate adventures in Floyd County Virginia

If we reward non-production, we get freeloaders

Families which reward children for bad behavior or nonproduction raise young adults who are not trained to support themselves. Governments which reward non-production end up with freeloaders clogging ever-increasing welfare rolls.

We have all gone through tough times, some of us more than once, but we are encouraged to bring ourselves through our travails when we are rewarded for our efforts. If we are rewarded for not trying, then there is little reason ever to improve ourselves. We are encouraged to become freeloaders

What if we lost our job or house in a catastrophe? We would hope that friends and neighbors and the government would give us a helping hand until we got back on our feet financially.

We see that time and time again in rural communities where neighbors and the local churches pitch in and everyone comes together until the crisis is over. People find room in their homes for those who have lost theirs and life goes on.

Most people want to earn their way in the world and they take every opportunity to keep their exchange in with those who are supporting them. Those who choose to be freeloaders are actually criminals who want something for nothing.

But people can actually be coaxed into becoming criminal. If a situation is created where  rent money and food is provided for those who do nothing to help themselves, there is no reason for them to work for a living.

Here are three situations which illustrate how this can happen:

Where do you get reliable political information?

Barbara Kaye at the University of Tennessee-Knoxville has an interesting survey to examine the Internet's influence on the U.S. political process.

2008 Politics and the Internet: A Survey of Internet Use for Political Information

I took this survey and was surprised by what my answers revealed in terms of changes in my political awareness and awareness of reliable information sources. Take this survey and see if you have similar results.

Thanks to Glenn Reynolds for the link.

Political discourse and junk food

I have been sampling the recent blizzard of liberal and conservative discourse and I find most of it is too much like junk food in that it titillates my interest but offers little in the way of sustenance or real value.

Political news from the MSM and from many bloggers is heavily biased and pushes emotional hot buttons to hide inferior research and lack of logic. This is quite similar to the adding of chemicals to junk foods to make them seem appetizing and cover up the lack of real food value.

The MSM is so obviously partisan that it makes little sense to turn on the TV and expect to get news. FOX supports the McCain campaign while ABC, NBC and CBS are media extensions of the Obama campaign. These journalists fawn on their favored candidates while pouncing on the opposition candidates.

Very rarely does an event get reported as it happens. Professional journalists feel obliged to "shape" the news so that the audience gets the journalist's version of what just happened. Political bloggers have fallen into the same trap.

This "shaping" takes the form of leaving out words when quoting someone's answer or editing videos to change the meaning of what a candidate said.

There is so much blather being foisted off on us as news that many of us no longer respect the "talking heads" who once dominated TV news. Rathergate should have acted as a warning that "manufactured news" will no longer pass muster, but this presidential campaign has shown that professional journalists have no shame and less integrity. Many bloggers no longer offer a useful alternative.

Whether it involves spreading rumors of Obama's affair with a staff member or hyping the "ethics investigation" of Sarah Palin's actions regarding a rogue Trooper, it appears there is little investigation or factchecking before spewing half-baked ideas to all and sundry.

Statements by the candidates are ridiculed by those journalists and bloggers who have a vested interest in the success of another candidate. I have read so much negative reporting by bloggers and MSM journalists that I have tuned most of them out now. I think that others are doing the same.

Joe Biden's recent comment on the possibility of a post-election aggression from a foreign government was ridiculed by journalists and bloggers alike, but there is some basis for believing that an inexperienced President will be seen as an opportunity to be exploited by some foreign leaders. JFK was seen as a weak President by Nikita Khrushchev. Kennedy's eagerness to be reasonable and encourage understanding was no match for Khrushchev's determination to debate and out-argue the less experienced president.

I am tired of the political junk food I am being served. There is too much unsupported opinion and too many obfuscations offered up by well-meaning partisan hacks. The more I dig into actual transcripts and videos by the candidates, the better I understand where they are coming from and what their goals are.

None of the candidates are perfect and they all have made their share of mistakes. What I am looking for is the meat of the matter and that is a sense of what they will do in office based on their past experiences. Anyone can make promises, but a person's ability to deliver can be extrapolated from what they have already accomplished.

Leopards do not change their spots and politicians rarely change their pattern of behavior. Getting a true picture of a candidate's history will provide a good clue as to how they will perform in office. The MSM does not currently provide a true picture of any of the candidates.  Bloggers are more open about their allegiances and they generally provide links to original source material. It is easy to crosscheck one blogger against others and draw some useful conclusions.

The truth is out there, but it takes some digging.

The importance of monitoring medical care for your loved ones

You may think that because you have carefully selected the best hospital and the finest doctors to operate on you that you can leave the treatment in their hands. You may be in for a rude surprise.

This is not a rant about the state of medical care in the 21st Century. It is a careful assessment of the realities of making sure that you or your loved one comes through a major operation with as few difficulties as possible.

No system is infallible and people forget to write things down or to send vital records or to install vital equipment properly.

The patient and those accompanying the patient need to take responsibility for being informed. You must ask questions about anything that doesn't make sense to you.

So, even if your operation is done perfectly, the anesthesiologist may not have duplicated what the surgeon requested, your nurses may not have received the information needed to administer the proper drugs and medication, the incredibly complex and effective drug administering system may not have been plugged in to the electrical outlets, and the chilling system for your injured area may not have been connected properly.

I have seen all of this and more in this past week in the best hospital I have ever seen. The staff was friendly, the hospital was first rate, the procedures had more checks and balances than I have ever seen before, but things did drop through the cracks and I was able to bring them to someone's attention before things got too far out of hand because I knew what to watch for.

Continue reading after the jump for some of the errors I have seen in five different hospitals:

Messages converge - trust becomes the major issue

In the third Presidential Debate at Hofstra, both candidates did a more effective job of articulating their ideas, but their messages are converging. Public trust in the candidates will be the differentiating factor.

Their proposed solutions are becoming more aligned as the day draws closer when one of them will be elected and have to lead all Americans, not just their supporters. They have different philosophies, but it seems that both recognize the practical realities of life in 2008 and are sincerely trying to propose workable solutions to those problems.

It comes down to a matter of trust now. If two groups propose similar results through different approaches, who do you trust to achieve a meaningful result?

Take education for example: Both candidates agree that our school systems are not producing the results needed to give America a prosperous and secure future. One candidate thinks lack of money is the answer. The other thinks the school systems need to be improved by introducing competitive offerings, such as charter schools and vouchers so that parents can choose the schools that provide the education they want for their children.

Your choice will be determined by your trust in the person proposing a particular solution as much as the desirability of the solution. If you have real experience with the problem being addressed, it will make it easier to recognize real solutions.

Becoming informed on the issues that matter to you will help you decide what candidate to vote for. All candidates have strong points and weaknesses. Each has a balance of style versus substance. You can't know everything about each candidate, so you choose the candidate you feel you can trust. In that way, you will probably be able to live with whatever that candidate brings to the table.

Will we know any more when tomorrow's debate is over?

That depends on whether we watch the debate or let someone else explain it to us. Journalists and bloggers of all political persuasions are so polarized at this point that their "facts" are almost buried in baseless opinions.

The American political process is moving into full scale Halloween mode. Skeletons are dragged out of closets and tens of thousands of dead people are registered to vote.

The candidates are so consistently viewed as caricatures that their basic humanity is lost to view. Opponents are demonized and the worst side of human emotion is put on view.

With the Internet at your fingertips and channels like PBS and C-Span, that doesn't have to happen.

If you are interested in getting information from the candidates themselves, tune in tomorrow to the General Election Presidential Debate. My personal opinion is that C-Span coverage gives you more candidate time and less commentator snarkiness.

John McCain (R), United States Senator (AZ) and
Barack Obama (D), United States Senator (IL)

Date: October 15, 2008
Location: Hofstra University
City: Hempstead, NY

Time: 9:00 - 10:30 p.m. Eastern

Sponsor:  Commission on Presidential Debates
Moderator: Bob Schieffer, CBS

Topic:  The Economy and Domestic Policy

Format:  90-minute debate with candidates seated at table with moderator. Candidates questioned in turn with two-minute responses, followed by five minutes of open discussion for each question.

Transcripts are available on http://debates.org

Photo credit: SFWEEKLY.COM

Click on "zombie voters" for more information on this international phenomenon.

Floyd artists are still creating - in spite of everything

Wall Street is melting down and the Presidential campaigns are sowing discord, but here in Floyd County new and old artists are still creating art that touches the heart and imagination. The Jacksonville Center in Floyd County, Virginia, held an Artists Reception for the "Mountain Color" Exhibit at the Hayloft Gallery on Saturday October 11.

Karen Sewell's tryptich was titled "Color Beyond Belief" and has already been snapped up by a fortunate buyer.

Fred First's trio of photographic images elicited a lot of favorable comment, both for the subject matter and composition and for the stunning frames created by local artist Ron Campbell.

Ron Campbell also submitted this marvelous creation in wood and stained glass titled, "Scooter and Wedge"

Gretchen St Lawrence's pastel drawing, "Mountain Sunset" attracted a lot of attention.

My personal favorite was her still life "Floyd Peaches".

A new artist to me was Barbara Gillespie whose painting, "God's Hand in Light" lit up one end of the gallery.

Pat Bonsignore's paintings have a classical feel and her "Sunlight and Shadow" captivated viewers.

Charlotte Lou Atkins pastel, "Mushrooming" captures the spirit of bygone times and blazing fall colors.

Catherine Pauley, one of Floyd's art legends, displayed several pieces that were a complete departure from her usual style. This silkscreen print called "Father's Day" demonstrates her ability to touch our emotions regardless of what media she work in.

This will be the last exhibit of 2008 and will be open through November 30. If you tour the Blue Ridge Parkway this Fall, make sure you take time to visit Floyd and the Jacksonville Center.

Hard times can bring out the best in people

Falling stock markets and bank closings cast long and ominous shadows over the business landscape. Layoffs and budget cuts at the state level send tremors through the entire state infrastructure. Is this a disaster or a wake up call?

It is probably a bit of both. We are in for some hard times again, but we will probably come out stronger if we can learn from this experience.

On a personal level, our family is cutting back on all non-essential expenditures and we are reaching out to others to see if we can help each other through these coming months. We don't have any idea of how far this will go before there is a turnaround, but we are doing our best to keep our morale up and do the same for others.

I grew up during the Great Depression of the late 1930s and early 1940s. Times were hard and there was a constant worry about where to find income and how to make ends meet. The main thing I remember was that my father and his brother and every able bodied member of the family found odd jobs to bring in income and feed the family. They taught themselves to hang wall paper and to do carpentry and whatever people needed and would pay for.

I also remember that the extended family would gather together almost every weekend for potluck dinners. There was a lot of sharing resources and even housing when someone was unable to find work. We lived in the rural parts of western Massachusetts, a couple of hours away from the nearest city.

Now we live in Floyd, Virginia, a rural community near the Blue Ridge Parkway, where most of the inhabitants have a wide range of skills and often have two or more jobs, even in the best of times. A severe recession can cut tourist traffic to a trickle thus accentuating the economic pinch on local businesses as local consumer confidence  and income ebbs.

The businesses and individuals that survive economic downturns are those that keep their wits and continue to find what people need and want and work out a fair exchange for those things.

Making people feel appreciated and delivering excellent quality goods and services is always good advice. In an economic downturn, it can mean the difference between surviving or going out of business.

Think of it this way, if you cannot contribute to someone financially, you might at least consider giving them a hand if needed or encouraging them so that they continue working and supporting their families. It will probably pay dividends all around.

When we stay connected and we work to stay positive, everybody benefits.

Move along, nothing to see here...

According to Tom Brokaw, William Ayers who is shown here desecrating the American flag is just a school reformer in Illinois, nothing more.

He used to be a domestic terrorist. Now he is an educator. What do you think his idea of a curriculum for children is?

The picture was taken in 2001 when this man was on the Board of the Woods Foundation.

Why we need to watch tonight's Presidential debate

Those who would lead us out of our current difficulties are not paragons of virtue. They are as flawed as the rest of us, but they have managed to convince many others to support them in their quest for control of the Executive Branch of our government.

Our role in this election is to choose wisely enough so that the next four years will be better for us and our families and our communities than the last four years.

How do we do this when the air is full of accusations and recriminations? Who do we believe when every candidate has failings that will affect the way they think and act?

It is not as hard as it seems. We must listen and observe the candidates as they speak about and to each other. Listening to what O'Reilly or Blitzer or Gibson or Limbaugh say is far less important than doing our own listening and our own research. We can often find transcripts of speeches and unedited videos by using Google or other search engines. We can even find public documents if we are thorough.

The side with the fewest blemishes on their character is probably the sanest, but you will have to make up your own mind as to what you are going to rely on and who you will choose. The important thing is to become informed and to vote as your conscience dictates.

Some of us may find that we are inclined to vote across party lines and choose the individuals at local and national levels who are most aligned with our needs regardless of party affiliation. Others may vote a straight party line. Whatever we do, it is important that we get out and vote and that we support honest elections so that we can live with the final results.

We may not have a perfect system for electing our future leaders, but we do have the responsibility to vote and influence the outcome of this next election.

Listening to the Presidential Debates is a necessary part of being informed. It is not always what people say that reveals their character. The action of speaking under pressure shows a side of the person that is not usually on display. We have another chance to see the candidates in action tonight.

Barack Obama and John McCain will have another chance to show how they handle difficult questions. It should be quite informative. I wonder if there will be any surprises?

If you miss the live broadcast, the transcripts will be available within days. The transcripts are also helpful to confirm if you heard what the candidates actually said.