The Difference between advising on a decision, and making a decision!

This is an article about presidential decisions but I assure you every business leader is faced with this each and every day.  There are always many people who will tell you what you should do or how they think things should be done, but like in politics those advisors come and go, and it is the leader who has to make and live with the final decision.  

One of the things employees want and need is a person with life experience, some gut feel, and the willingness to take risk on their behalf!  The leader is not always right, but he/she is always responsible and accountable for his/her decisions!  

Peter Wehner | @Peter_Wehner03.25.2013 - 12:00 PM

  MATERIAL DELETED . . . . ENDING PARAGEAPH HERE

When asked by ABC’s William Lawrence to look back over the first two years of his presidency, John Kennedy said this:

I would say that the problems are more difficult than I had imagined them to be. The responsibilities placed on the United States are greater than I imagined them to be, and there are greater limitations upon our ability to bring about a favorable result than I had imagined them to be. And I think that is probably true of anyone who becomes President, because there is such a difference between those who advise or speak or legislate, and between the man who must select from the various alternatives proposed and say that this shall be the policy of the United States. It is much easier to make the speeches than it is to finally make the judgments, because unfortunately your advisers are frequently divided. If you take the wrong course, and on occasion I have, the President bears the burden of the responsibility quite rightly. The advisers may move on to new advice.  

It is in the nature of things that in America, the leader is the individual who has to sort through competing counsel and decide which course of action to take. And then he or she must do all in his or her power to execute effectively and take responsibility for the decision.  

People want to be lead but they need leaders with experience, character and willingness to lead and adjust to accomplish well defined goals.  

Remember this when you are selecting some one to lead you, be they leaders of Companies, Countries, or Cities.  

People simply can't be American if they Can't Speak English . . Is that really necessary?

Bill Neinast


IN PERSPECTIVE

“Having pledged our allegiance to the Flag which protects our nation, we maintain our insist upon a 100 per cent Americanism, which includes speaking the English Language.”

This quote could be the rant of an ideologue frothing about any hint of amnesty for undocumented aliens in the country.  The thought, however, is much older than the current debate over the hordes of illegals doing the stoop labor in our vegetable fields, cleaning our hotel rooms, and roofing our homes in summer heat.

The words are almost 100 years old.  They were taken from a Ku Klux Klan proclamation posted on the doors of Ebenezer Lutheran Church in the Berlin community of Washington County, Texas, during WWI.  The threats in the proclamation were directed at the residents of German descent who were the backbone of the farming and business communities in the county.

Those threatened were first and second, and maybe even third, generation Americans who conversed more in German than in English.  The sermons and records in Ebenezer Lutheran and other Lutheran churches in the county were in German.  Some senior citizens remember that in the first two decades of the last century, German was the predominant language on the streets and in the businesses of the county.

Clinging to the language of the citizens’ ancestors, however, was not a sign of disloyalty.  Nonetheless, the hysteria against anything German back then was as widespread as that against those wading the Rio Grand today.

Consider, for example, this excerpt from a lengthy article on the web site of the Authentic History Center.

“As the [federal government’s] propaganda machine was cranked up, public rhetoric soon took on a distinctly anti-German-American tone. Literature began to directly attack German-American churches, schools, societies, and newspapers as agents of Imperial German conspiracy. Soon there were calls to throw out the German language and ‘all disloyal teachers.’  One publication read, ‘Any language which produces a people of ruthless conquistadors such as now exists in Germany, is not a fit language to teach clean and pure American boys and girls.’  The American Defense Society, an off-shoot of the National Security League, encouraged the public burning of German-language books and campaigned to change the names of cities, streets, parks, and schools in America to the names of Belgian and French communities destroyed in the war.  Germantown, Nebraska, became Garland after a local soldier who died in the war. East Germantown, Indiana, was changed to Pershing; Berlin, Iowa, became Lincoln.  Berlin, Michigan, became Marne (after the Second Battle of the Marne).  In June 1918, a Michigan congressman introduced a bill that would have required such name changes nationwide.

“Super patriotism soon reached ridiculous levels. The names of German food were purged from restaurant menus; sauerkraut became liberty cabbage, hamburger became liberty steak.  Even German measles was renamed liberty measles by a Massachusetts physician.  Super patriots felt the need to protect the American public from contamination via disloyal music by pushing to eliminate classic German composers such as Beethoven, Bach, and Mozart from the programs of community orchestras. Some states banned the teaching of the German language in private and public schools alike. In July 1918, South Dakota prohibited the use of German over the telephone, and in public assemblies of three or more persons.”

Speaking a language other than English was the excuse for much of the senseless violence locally and nation wide.  That seems one of the lynch pins for the knee jerk objections to any compromise on the current illegal visitor conundrum.

Oddly, not everyone complying with the law and applying for U.S. citizenship have to speak English and sample questions and answers are published by the USCIS in English, Spanish, Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, and Azerbaijani.

So here’s the perspective.

The English language is the principle ingredient in the mix of factors that meld many cultures into the unique republic of 50 independent states. “Speak English,” however, is a red herring that misleads or detracts from the actual issue of solving the illegal immigrant problem.

One who is not fluent in English may not be able to participate fully in the American experience.  A lack of fluency in a language foreign to an applicant, however, should not bar his or her realization of the dream to become a legal, productive citizen.

Becoming fluent in a foreign language is not easy.  Learning English is particularly difficult with some quirky spelling and pronunciation anomalies. Consider, for example, chair and choir; to, too, and two; duck and ducks, but goose and geese and on and on.

So before becoming entrenched in the speak English only mantra, remember how long it took our non-English ancestors to learn the language.

I am an American!

Texas A&M - There is s Spirit that can ne'er be told . . .

I don't know this couple, this photo was taken today (March 24, 2013) by the President of Texas A&M and posted on his Twitter account.  The tree however is the Century Oak on the Campus of Texas A&M and has seen many proposals and family photos throughout the years.

I know I am prejudiced beyond reason but there simply is no other place like Texas A&M!

Gig Em!

Marcus J. Lockard '72

BTW according to President Loftin, she said yes!

What is a liberal?

A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money! - G. Gordon Liddy

You might live in a Country run by idiots if . . .

If the only school curriculum allowed to explain how we got here is evolution, but the government stops a $15 million construction project to keep a rare spider from evolving to extinction . . . you might live in a country founded by geniuses but run by idiots!

Wasserman-Schultz: My Aides on Brink of Starvation

WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: MY AIDES CAN'T AFFORD GOOD MEALS

By MIKE FLYNN  | Breitbart.com

On Tuesday, FL Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and her colleague VA Rep. Jim Moran openly whined about the impacts of spending cuts on their personal office budgets. Moran fretted that, with the looming sequester cuts, he may have to cut one staffer from his office. Wasserman Schultz upped his ante, however. She, almost literally, suggested that her staff were on the brink of starvation, due to the cuts. 

Speaking at a hearing of the House Legislative Branch Appropriations Subcommittee, Wasserman Schultz worried that prices of meals in House restaurants are getting so high that aides are being "priced out" of a good meal.

At the carry-out cafe in the Cannon Office Building, where Wasserman Schultz has her office, you can get an 8oz bowl of Ham and Bean soup for $2. You can buy gourmet sandwiches and wraps for around $5. Both of these are cheaper than I can get at delis down the street from my house. 

Her aides could walk across the street to the Longworth Building, which has a large sit-down cafeteria. Today, it is featuring a roasted stuffed Chicken, with asparagus and mashed potatoes, for around $7. Or, one could opt for a heaping 12oz bowl of Chicken Chili for $3. 

There is also the tried and true method enjoyed by millions of workers around the country: a brown-bag lunch. 

Wasserman Schultz's top aide earns around $160k a year. She pays two additional aides around $120k a year. She has five additional aides who earn between $60-100k a year...

Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/rep-debbie-wasserman-schultz/2013/03/22/wasserman-schultz-my-aides-brink-starvation#ixzz2OLkbQebR

And it is worth pointing out that none of these looming sequester cuts (reductions in spending increases) has even hit yet. 

Is it any wonder why Americans simply don't believe what Congress tells them?