March 5, San Diego,

A recommendations for all is to read the news 1 – 2 days after it so-called happens. This knee-jerk exploding head reporting will just annoy, frustrate, or something to you if you do not let it simmer for a day or two. Each explosive event seems to mellow out or at least get enough form after a few days that sense can be made of it.

If that is not doable for you at least listen carefully to what is explicitly said and not said. In this latest discourse about wire-tapping Trump tower what Trump is saying and what Obama is saying are not mutually exclusive. They could both be technically right and they both could be technically wrong based only on what they are explicitly saying. Three cheers for political speech: one can appear to be saying something quite transcendent, but in fact while appearing to be saying ‘yes’ or ‘no’ are in fact only deflecting inquiry.

Feed back to my self

Here is week two of my renewed effort to write. I am in transit in Germany on my way back to San Diego after three plus weeks in the mid-East.

Being amongst, people from other countries during such a riotous times as a US Presidential election is eye opening. I was working with Irish joint venture and two French multinationals. People were from everywhere and then there was the one American. They all want to know what I think, feel, project, etc. I am always interested in the thoughts they have. Thoughts that usually come from their own language media and local TV, website news outlets. To hear their points of view is humbling and enlightening. Their points of view are most interesting if they are certain you will not go crazy if you disagree with them. Seems Americans have quite a reputation for being “in your face” if things are said that are disagreed with. Certainly to conversations leading up to Nov 8th did nothing to dissuade that perception.

My coaching. Enjoy life. Travel outside the US and hear and read others perceptions of our country: warts and all.

Getting my own “writing” act together.

Nov 5th fm Riyadh

Each week I have an entry to remind myself to come to this blog site and make an entry. The most recent entry prior to this one, June 22nd. That is a mere 19 consecutive times I have deleted the calendar entry and have not written anything here. Based on my last blog prior to this one, I need to decide for myself if writing is important. If it is important then I need to “show up” on this site and make a thoughtful entry. Or at least make an entry.

Lets see how this feedback to myself works.

Blessings to you all.

Integrity or drought

April 10, 2016 (San Diego) –

                1. I am confused. The conversation is that California is in a serious drought.

                2. The behaviors of those who can make a huge difference say otherwise.

                3. I guess we are more concerned about something other than solving the drought situation.

                4. I wonder what some want more than life, or what quality of life do they envision?


California is dumping a trillion gallons of fresh Water in the ocean. Only liberals would declare a water shortage disaster after spending years dumping good, fresh water into the ocean to protect a non-endangered bait fish.


Yet the Obama administration has decided to block a privately financed project that could supply water to 400,000 Californians, even though the project has been approved by an alphabet soup of state and local agencies. The result will be to trap vast amounts of a precious resource beneath the Mojave Desert. Is water the new fossil fuel?


Amid this regulatory hustle, a California state appellate court last month heard six challenges to the project, all of which had been rejected by a trial court two years ago. In 2012, the Santa Margarita Water District’s final environmental impact report noted that the project’s only significant effects would be temporary dust from construction and the hazard of population and employment growth from a larger water supply, which has driven opposition from green groups. While trumpeting the BLM’s decision in October, the Center for Biological Diversity complained that the Cadiz project would “increase urban sprawl in coastal Southern California.”

They are building the Carlsbad Desalination Project, which will convert as much as 56 million gallons of seawater each day into drinking water for San Diego County residents. The project, with a price tag of $1 billion, is emerging from the sand like an industrial miracle. In California’s highly regulated coastal zone, it took nearly 15 years to move from concept to construction, surviving 14 legal challenges along the way.             

Working across the “aisle”

December 20, 2015 (San Diego)

            Seems our politicians, save a few, are highlighting how well they “work across the aisle” to get things done. Over the last few months I have been studying a book with a half dozen men about a man who excelled at “working across the aisle”. The man was Daniel. He was the deputy chief of state, the second in command, to Nebuchadnezzar in the geographic area which is now known as Iraq. The time frame was around 600 – 560 BC.

Daniel was Jewish and a captive slave. However he excelled in learning the key concepts of a state leader at the time and became well versed in the theology of the land. He was a super student in comparison to all others including the local learners.

Daniel demonstrated 3 key characteristics that would serve others who want to excel at “working across the aisle.”

Hope: Daniel had his focus and belief system built on transcendent factors way above, politically expedient or “what is good for me.” Daniel operated on transcendent truths of which even his jealous competitors could find “nothing wrong.” Imagine a politician in which nothing could be found wrong. His competitors were really good a finding error in others. One might say they excelled at it.

Humility: Daniel knew he was less than the transcendence factors of life and below king Nebuchadnezzar. Though Daniel had control of everything but the actions of the king alone, Daniel never took advantage of his power or position for self aggrandizement. He took care of the king and the country first and foremost: no corruption, no embezzlement, no lying, no sexual adventures, no complaining, and no blaming, just honoring the king and his God.

Wisdom: Daniel was smart enough to let his hope and humility run his life.

I would imagine only a few politicians will take up the Daniel way of life.

Maybe a few of us can do it though?

Maybe a few of us can bridge the gaps in society?

Hinges coming off of yesterday’s integrity?

November 29, 2015 (San Diego) – 

            I will muse for a bit here. When I was 5 Dwight Eisenhower was running for President. Obviously I did not catch much of the details then, but I have done some current reading. Seems like he had a few warts, but for the most part he was a leader with integrity and respect for others. Now I look at the Republican front runner, Donald Trump, and he seems to have neither integrity nor respect for others and, and it appears the “Trump-fans” are encouraging him forward on his current trajectory. Wow, the “most likely to vote” Republicans are indicating in the “polls” that his behavior is what they want in the President of the United States. From Eisenhower to Trump, wow we have fallen off a cliff of human relations here. Whatever was “right” and/or “honorable” in 1950 seems to be totally trashed in the minds of what 28% of the polled Republicans.

Do you want a President short on content but long on ripping others, threatening our neighbors, and saber rattling at the drop of the hat? As far as owning up to error he is nearly the Republican version of Hilary Clinton. As far as respect for others he demeans fellow Republicans with the same animus as Hilary does. Hard to see how that behavior best represent our country.

Oh, Inconvenient Reality

November 8, 2015 (Harrisonburg, Va.) –

            I guess the “green influencers” of my Oct 17th blog did not get fast enough action from Obama. Just 3 days ago it was published that the net ice pack of the Antarctic is positive. That is certainly inconvenient for the “green influencers” when so much of their conversation on sea water level rising and the evidence of global warming has been based on measurements on the Antarctic ice fields.

            The “green influencers” asked that “climate dissenters” be punished.  Since science is Learningan ongoing discovery; if we were to close down the conversation based on yesterday’s discovery then the “world is flat”, “the sun revolves around the earth”, “the universe is infinitely old”, and “the Antarctic ice field is net diminishing” since these four statement were all “yesterdays” reality at one time and their opposite statement were/are high politically inconvenient. If we were not to “allow” any politically inconvenient discoveries we would be just like yesterday’s intolerance which would be quite ironic in our ultra tolerant society.

If we were to close down politically inconvenient discovery and conversation we would be expressing incredible hubris. A hubris which indicates we have the final truth and freedom bellanything “new” is wrong and its publication would only confuse and trouble the existing “truth.” The “new” would not add any value at all because we have the final truth already. Of course if they were successful in slamming all new “voices” they would by faint acompli have the “final truth” because nothing “new” would be allowed into the conversation. Imagine the effort it would take to crush reality. Look at all the effort it has taken to demonstrate man’s existence without the need for God only to have the entire effort crushed over the last 20 years by atheists confirming many realities of the “big bang” theory. I guess the “big bang” theory would need to be crushed by the “green influencers” as the big bang theory puts God into the equation and thus makes God the final voice on good stewardship of the planet not the “green influencers.” That would certainly be inconvenient reality for people who claim they have the final word on husbandry of the planet earth.

Test that thought

September 5, 2015 (San Diego) – Orange Man Detective with Magnifying Glass

            Over my years of life I have often found that my most current thoughts often become “tested” to determine if I am merely “spouting off” or if I have learned my own thoughts.

Over the last two weeks I had been experiencing a lot of “under communications” with a potential client/project worth about 6% of planned budget for the year. Though the project seemed to be “on” and I had invested about $600 in Visas and support work at the last minute a total turn of the agreement showed up in my “in box.”

Wow, what to do?understanding 2     Here it was 7 days before I was to start the project and the reversal of the agreement was huge. I could capitulate, go with the reversal, and wonder if there would be any further reversals when I came to final payment for the project. OR….. I could reference the original understanding, no contract, and see what would happen.

To be high performing for yourself one needs to be willing to stand one’s ground and agreed standards even it there appears to be a loss coming.

I wrote back upon receiving the reversal in “terms” with the cut and paste lines of the original understanding. That was a week ago. Not a “peep” from the prospect.

I stood by the standards agreed upon and only received silence. Wow, how might this have proceeded if I had agreed to the reversal of terms? Would more reversals be forth coming? Who knows?

Be true to standards is important in high performing companies. If managers rewrite the rules as and when it suits them there will be underperformance from the employees. Guaranteed.


Justice – Erosion of the Foundation

April 14, 2015 (San Diego) –

            I think all people of this country should be concerned about the erosion of the decision making process away from justice and towards capriciousness. In a democracy leadership decisions must be made with the “greater good” in mind. Doing what seems “right to me” is narrow and not sustainable when others begin to follow that role.

The most current example before my eyes is the former Secretary of State deciding to keep all her email on a private unprotected server “for convenience.” Convenience is not a “good for all” decision process, but a “good for me” process. What should alarm many is that some 47% believe the use of the private server was “no big deal.” Whether the use of the server was a big deal or not, though I personally believe it to be a huge deal, the decision to do so, a decision supported by those all around her is nightmarish. The thinking must go like this, if the Secretary of State can make up her rules when she wants then I can also. The foundation for the decisions is personal and not necessarily based on justice.

The way justice factors into this is when the “for me” decision making is directly and purposefully aimed at another party.

Who is to say that the decision making at the IRS, reportedly by Lois Learner, was not an extrapolation of the central thinking of, making your own rules. That focus “disenfranchised” several political action groups even to this day and put fear in the hearts of others that the same may happen to them. A variant of this was exercised by the Attorney General of the State of Wisconsin. This time aimed at the supporters of Gov. Walker, when running for reelection last year.

How many decisions by the DOJ were extrapolations of this same decision making? Will the next awful decision be built on the same, “I can do what I want to do!” Who can stop me? When the top of power seems to model such behavior then the water bursts forth from the dam. Justice becomes corrupted and the people are abused.

Of course therein is the syllogism: if the top of power supports breaking disliked rules, and such and such a rule or peoples is/are disliked: ip so facto – the rule can be broken. One does not need direct permission to act, the syllogism acts on its own momentum.

freedom bell

I would bet this reality is not only practiced by the current Washington power brokers, but by any power brokers who do not seek transcendent justice as the foundation of their decisions. Since our country is a democracy then the transcendent base of decision making must be what is good for the majority.

Democracy is built on the rule of law not the rule of “what seems good to me.”

Justice and Hope

April 5, 2015 (San Diego) –

            I was outside church this morning, I saw these two words side by side: justice and hope.  As I began to think about the linkage between the words my thoughts went in this direction: when justice fades, hope for fairness between people erodes. When hope for fairness erodes then the probability of the growth of “every person for themselves” thinking grows. There will be a tipping point when the fading justice creates chaos of an irreversible magnitude.

Does hope need to fade as justice fades? Probably not. A person could double down and push, extol, for greater justice. However a paradox is here. To extol for greater justice one needs to stand on the existing foundation of justice and the law; the very foundation for which the “fading justice group” is pushing away from. It would appear that a power struggle would ensue:

  1. Those who are pushing some agenda that erodes justice and
  2. Those that are pushing for an agenda the holds up law and the present system of justice.
  3. Of course this is the very dilemma that existed in the 1760’s here in America.

The best I can do is to be a “light” of justice to all practical extent. I know I will be tested as I am also within and influenced by the ongoing effect of eroding justice. Thus I am affected by the tendency of wanting to watch out for #1 at the expense of justice. I know though tested I also have the “way of escape” to overcome and prevail in the test.