I see what you tried to do there, but I think you underestimate the subjects of your experiment if you thought folks wouldn’t (at the very least) know that GWB was Gov of Texas before becoming president. The important part about that meaning he had executive experience before being elected president. A Legislator’s job is to get people stuff so that they become popular and get re-elected. An Executive’s job is to come up with plans, execute them, oversee payroll, etc. Secretary of State =/= Texas Gov
And if the measure of a Secretary of State is how little waves are made while in office (as suggested by the MSNBC commentator), then I think that analysis fairs worse for Hillary than measuring accomplishments.
The Middle East went up in flames, with US relations with those countries being turned upside down under her watch.
The “Reset” button with Russia reset us back to Cold-War stance under her watch
1st American Ambassador killed since the Iranian revolution under her watch…
 May 20, 2015 at 8:39am
Yea, because the bikers set fire to the Twin Peaks, and other local establishments, because one biker thug stole another’s parking spot.
It’d be funny if the consequences weren’t so serious.
 May 19, 2015 at 9:28am
Yes, that’s the origin of the word. And for a time, the words “thug” and “gangster” were popularized by the mobster types, Al Capone and all that.
Fast forward to early 90s, the rap & hip-hop music industry took up the “thug” & “gangster” meme with pride. 2Pac, who holds divinity status for many fans of that kind of music, had “Thug Life” tattooed across his chest and often championed the gang code. There is a whole song by “Trick Daddy” called “Baby Cause I’m a Thug”…read the lyrics, it will blow your mind.
And to this day, most rap & hip-hop songs are just different ways of rappers talking about being 1 percenter rich, which was earned from illegal activities, shooting / beating people up for crossing them, and having sex with as many people as will let them
So for nearly 25 years a genre of music that makes up pop culture within a significant portion of the young black community has glorified the “thug” & “gangsta” life style and now people aren’t allowed to point that out?
And even if the point is conceded that this influence has been detrimental on the community, the reason the people are acting out in that way is because of internalized oppression?!?
You cede the language, you cede the argument.
 May 16, 2015 at 12:02pm
I’m not completely up to speed on this Holacracy, but essentially it sounds like an attempt to lower operating costs by promoting a self management / driven culture within individual employees, thereby reducing the need for middle management.
You could realize savings by taking a portion of what you were paying people to manage others and giving it straight to the workers, in effort to promote a culture where folks manage themselves.
Middle management is the first to get squeezed every economic downturn anyway… Things are going good…teams & functional groups get added under the traditional hierarchical management system, then the economy dips, teams & functional groups get rationalized and the middle managers get fired. Rinse – Repeat
Instead of having to go through that process every so often, just change the system that requires the middle management in the first place.
Not saying there aren’t trade-offs with that management style, or if it’s even truly effective….but the industry changing innovations typically come from businesses willing to try something completely different.
Governments at all levels could benefit from the "no need for middle management" idea
there is a theory of management that if there is more than one individual between the CEO and the worker bees that you have too much wasted bureaucracy.
And you missed the underlying ideology here. -- As in "according to their needs". For your premise to work. You would have to ask a few questions.
1. Does the more productive person or "organ" get rewarded? Or more for their extra production.
2. Does the less productive worker get less money? Or do they get the same as the more productive worker. The reason this is important is. The entire work force, or patient could be held to speed or production of the slowest and least efficient, least dependable worker. Just lie a cancer. The patient or company life could be at stack at some point.
So, some form of evaluation or reporting will be necessary. No different than going to a doctor and having a checkup. - Since they are using this premise.
The false assumption here is the idea that all humans have the same standards, the same motivations, etc. And are motivated and care about the same things. And have the same goals, etc. --
A "Free Rule System" doesn't work. Mark my words. You may think you are getting rid of middle management. But what you will see is a informal middle management, or team coordinators being created. But not getting paid for it. Hence the company is getting benefits without payment. And employees will have to pick up the extra work.
Just watch a group of people trying to accomplish a goal. At some point. There will be a "POC", or team leaders, etc. They even may rotate them. But coordination requires it.
Maybe so.. Especially if there is to many layers. Just like the Gv.
But it is physically and technically impractical for 'everyone' to deal with 'everyone', on 'every little thing'. Hence the smaller the section or team. The more impactive it would be deal with 'every little thing', while not focusing on the job. Hence someone will have to handle day to day issues. Hence the reason for team/section leader that can handle goals that are similar and also unique to the individuals or smaller teams.
If not. People will be required to do more work than they are getting payed for. The false assumption here is that the salary or reward will increase based on the individuals productively. While others thank just don't care, or lazy can still get rewarded.
May 11, 2015 at 8:54am
I’d just like to point out that there are groups out there that say the same things, as posted in this thread, about Jesus & Christians (well except for Jeninfl’s post)
People can believe what they want to believe, until laws are broken & the constitution violated.
Also, censorship never works out the way you intend. Better to have things out in the open and people educated on instead of hiding it away. It removes perspective & lessons learned.
 May 8, 2015 at 1:28pm
What that mom said is exactly the issue here….. The woman likely didn’t realize the irony in what she said, or thinks its hypocritical in retrospect.
Why? Because there is a fundamental misunderstanding of what real tolerance is, what it means to coexist with people you don’t agree with, and the true value of diversity.
Those concepts have been co-opted to further a specific agenda…and now that the agenda has become more widely accepted and mainstreamed…..those principles are no longer of use, because they could potentially allow for an acceptance of alternate points of view that challenges what has become accepted doctrine.
The mask is off and it’s clear to see it never really was about free speech, free thought & tolerance.
Glad to see the people of the blaze advocating for and being so tolerant. Accepting other people for who they are seems like something people on the blaze are exceptionally known for.
why yes Mr. Oxy-moron, we are known for that...
well all of us other than the Socialist Trolls that roam the boards or the Neo-Nazi "blame the Jews" types...well those would also be Socialist Trolls I guess even though they usually claim to be libertarian minded..
most of us here are ACTUALLY libertarian minded Constitutional Conservatives and we just want the government the F out of our private lives and what we do behind closed doors as long as it is honest and doesn't harm another or cost them a penny and is between legal aged conscenting adults
what we don't like is being told to behave, eat, act, or think a certain way simply because how we do those things might offend someone....
 May 8, 2015 at 1:21pm
I agree Ratiocinative….
It’s kind of bewildering to see how far down the wrong road we are at this point. Everything that I was taught growing up (being a highschool student in the 90s) would suggest that the principle brought the Chick-fil-a shirt wearing kids, and the “offended” LGBT kids into a large room and explained the merits of civil debate & tolerance. This could have been a teachable moment.
Instead, LGBT supporters that took to twiter get slapped with a suspension….kids saying hateful crap to people they don’t agree with don’t learn a lesson, Chick-fil-a kids get social backlash because you know the supporters of the kids that got suspended will put the blame on on them..now making this not a free speech issue but a personal vendetta issue. ACLU jumps in and uses their lawyers to strong arm the principle anyway.
Finally….I agree with your statement about different ideas & beliefs promoting tolerance & understanding….but ONLY if the people with the different ideas & beliefs are open minded, humble in their understanding of the world we live in, and are willing to live & let live.
Different Ideas & beliefs in a society that thinks it’s “their way or the highway”, and that tolerance, free speech, and coexistence only exist if they personally see fit amounts to witch hunts, scarlet letters & boycotts.
 May 8, 2015 at 8:38am
Sounds like more projection…
Funny how assumptions work eh?
And for being an event that was NOT about free speech, but all about antagonizing Muslims, the winner of the art contest sure seemed like a political free speech statement to me. If you haven’t seen it, it’s a picture of Muhammad saying “You can’t draw me!”, with another chat bubble belonging to an artist saying “That is exactly why I’m drawing you”.
If this were all about tee-ing off some jihadis…..wouldn’t the winner of the contest have been one of the other more inflammatory pieces? I don’t know….something on par with the Charlie Hebdo drawings (you know, the pictures of Muhammad engaged in anal sex….those pictures people across the world stood up and defended in the name of “free speech”)
May 7, 2015 at 1:53pm
I agree with most of what you said…except for the part about men not getting a say in the matter. If a hypersensitive person turns a non-sexist message / event into a sexist message / event, and blames men for it….men deserve the chance to at least argue the point.
Same goes for the black vs white thing. There are lots of black (and white) folks that measure the plight of the black population, determine it’s because of white people…and tell white people they don’t have a right to enter that conversation or at least debate the point.
All stakeholders in a situation deserve a seat at the table….let the merits of the argument made by each side determine who’s right, who’s wrong, and what the corrective action is.
May 7, 2015 at 1:48pm
Context doesn’t matter anymore. IF a message can possibly be construed as a slight to (insert minority social construct), the meaning of that message MUST be about discrimination to that person who belongs to a minority social construct.
Couple that with the fact that someone, somewhere, will always be offended at just about anything…you have a great recipe for censorship of speech. When the liberals are the ones who get to determine what is & isn’t offensive….you have a great recipe for censorship of any speech that opposes liberal ideology.
See how that works?
 May 6, 2015 at 5:31pm
But what the heck is hate speech? If “hate speech” = “fighting words”, as defined in what you quoted, then who gets to determine if said speech is of “slight” social value and where or not the benefit from the social value is outweighed by social interest in order & morality?
How are covering Christian artifacts that symbolize two of the most key figures in Christianity in human & elephant excrement (pee & poop) art and not hate speech, but a drawing contest of one of Islam’s most important figure, some of which are lewd & distasteful, considered hate speech?
Is it because Muslims have made it well known that anyone that blasphemes their religion is in violation of Islamic law and is punishable by death, making the “social interest in order & morality” greater than the social value gained?
If so, that’s a heck of a precedent to set. Don’t like how someone is characterizing your religion? Organize a death squad that threatens “social order” such that it’s greater than the social value gained by said offense.
The winner of the contest featured a picture of Mohammad with a chat bubble that says “You can’t draw me”, with a pair of cartoon hands and a pencil, with a chat bubble that reads “that’s why I draw you”.
If that is not a political statement, I don’t know what is.
 May 6, 2015 at 10:30am
How could the media be so craven? Because the mission of the media has changed. I suppose there has always been some level of conflicted interest as politicians attempt to co-opt media, and as media attempt to co-opt politicians….but it seems as if it’s currently at a critical mass.
There is a difference between reporters, or media organizations, taking a passive role by focusing more or less on what’s going on in Washington and taking an active role by darn near fabricating information to support political agendas.
The spirit of what is being taught at J-School seems to be different than maybe what use to be…shifting from the role of a balancing power & watchdog for the public to something more of a social justice warrior and advocate for a specific political ideology.
I’ve heard several interviews given by journalists on what motivated them to go into their profession, and almost all talk about the opportunity to give voice to and help influence social justice, etc. You hardly hear any of them talk about being a source of record for the public, or being a part of the checks & balances as originally intended.
That is exactly what is at stake here. Folks that are like minded to Megan’s guest are trying to change expectations around free speech to the point where it’s not universally up held, but only when it’s appropriate. Of course, someone will need to determine what is, and isn’t, appropriate….which is the goal in all of this.
This is consistent with how the Left views most things…we are right, based on this logic….but only when the logic supports preferred ends. (See use of parliamentary rules by Democrat legislators when in & out of majority status)
 May 6, 2015 at 8:51am
True…what once accounted for the most extreme 20-25 percent of the Democrat party is now in control and accounts for the DNC’s mission statement.
Libertarian candidates used to be registered Democrats, under the principles of free speech, free thought, getting government out of personal lives.
The fact that you now have to go to the Republican party to vote for a Libertarian speaks volumes about the “progress” the Democrat party (LEFT) has made.
The centrist blue dog democrats have been muscled out by the Marxists.
 May 5, 2015 at 11:32am
To add…..not only are they conditioned to be hyper sensitive to every and anything, the appropriate reaction to said transgressions is for “justice” to be served immediately, and to their liking (law & constitution be damned)
It’s one thing for someone to be very introspective, and sensitive to words & symbols….but it’s another to feel that people who offended their sensibilities need to be excommunicated from society, put in prison, or shot dead.
 May 4, 2015 at 9:24am
I think it’s summed up in your first statement…..”common” sense is lost.
As our society sheds whatever resemblance to a melting pot society, and takes up a multicultural approach…less is focused on what we have in “common” so that everyone can wave their flag & champion differences.
Look at where societies are in parts of the world where tribes rule the political scene….chaos, loss of life & liberty over seemingly trivial differences.
Look at where societies are in parts of the world where tolerance & a common sense of belonging are at the roots of the political scene….unity, sharing of best practices from a diverse group of cultures.
 May 4, 2015 at 9:03am
Good points. It takes some perspective & critical thought, but it’s clear to see once you get there.
Government wants to grow it’s size & influence. Because we do not live in a dictatorship, the government can’t completely inject itself in an area without “cause”. We know that treating symptoms not only does not address the root cause, but often creates new symptoms. So it’s easy to understand why government has a tendency to never tackle the (often unpopular) issue at it’s core, but instead goes after the Band-Aid. It allows them to continue whatever program that demands whatever budget, that gives some department additional power, all while creating a new problem that will demand some new program, that will demand a higher budget, which will give some department even more power. And since the “fix” usually involves throwing more money at it, the politicians & people are “bought off” in the process.
The REAL fix is cultural, and requires everyone’s participation…of all cultures, races & creeds.
 May 4, 2015 at 8:49am
Seriously? Kill or castrate the political activists? To which political affiliation do you belong to?
Yes, the professional democrat political machine has successfully pushed highschool level politics on a largely uneducated / naïve base. That’s no grounds to “remove them from the gene pool”.
Another way to fix stupid is make sure people aren’t uneducated or naïve.
Shame on anyone that up-voted this crap!
April 30, 2015 at 1:11pm
Depends on how you define racism. You hear lefties say “Correlation does not equal causation” to defend anecdotal evidence / experiences that support an argument made from the other side of the political isle, but they sure do like to assume causation when looking at those stats above.
In other words, they assume that because those numbers you quoted are significantly higher than people of other races, it must mean that racism is the root cause (while ignoring other potential factors that do not support their argument that racism is the root cause)