December 12, 2009

State of Healthcare

We are burdened by the notion that a life is "priceless." We are burdened by the concept that people should be kept alive "at all costs." We are burdened with the feeling that any health issue is "no holds barred."

On top of this, we are not willing to "deal with risk." We expect all our medicine to be "exact." We expect our doctors to be "miracle-makers." We expect every nurse to be "infallible." With this mentality, is it really a surprise that health costs are "climbing out of control?"

December 3, 2009

Risk in Everything (Still)

I mentioned risk in a previous blog. I focused on the negative side of risk, but there is a positive side. The positive side is that risk makes life interesting. It is the side of risk that puts the excitement in adventure. Risk is the uncertainty about the future. We risk that upcoming events might be worse than we fear or better than we expected. Where is the fun in everything turning out like we expected?

November 23, 2009

Responsibility is the source and solution, the beginning and end

Regarding the Nov 23, 2009 Wall Street Journal article, "Laying the Groundwork", Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services, was asked about child obesity. She spoke:

So we have a crisis. It's got to be solved in school cafeterias; putting physical education back in classrooms; making sure that we have greens available--in lots of neighborhoods you can't buy fruits or vegetables--and strategies that involve parents taking some responsibility and helping people get to that end goal. [stop]

On through 12 paragraphs of quotes, Sebelius makes many points about the state of the healthcare system and the rising costs. She says that 75 cents of every "health dollar" is related to weight reduction and smoking cessation. Only once in the all the words and paragraphs does she use the word "responsibility" or "responsible" or any synonym. When she does use it (i.e. "some responsibility"), it seems to be with hesitation.

Smoking and weight gain are issues of individual responsibility. I am not saying that it is easy to not gain weight or to avoid the lure of smoking, but that does not change the fact that those are both very clearly based on specific choices individuals made. In other words, lack of responsibility is what got us into this mess and is a significant (75% and arguably much higher) part of certain costs; yet, the only mention of responsibility in the discussion is for parents to have "some responsibility" for their obese kids. That's it? Who else can be more important stimuli?

BlameDrew.com and the book Why Not Blame Drew? provide discussions of individual responsibility. The book outlines that there is no such thing as "some" responsibility. You are either responsible or not responsible. If you ask for "some" responsibility, then you let it be one or the other. We need to require parents to be 100% responsible for their children. Is that too much to ask? Why is responsibility not prominently discussed by the person who should care the most? If the Secretary of Health and Human Services doesn't emphasize it, who will?

Eventually, we have to focus on individual responsibility when it comes to the health of the nation! Why not now?

November 18, 2009

Protesting Protesting

I created a design for a stamp through a promotion company. The little logo said, "Why Not Blame Drew? BlameDrew.com" to promote my new book. It was resoundingly rejected. It was diligently deemed "unacceptable" because its purpose was to "advocate or protest any particular religious, social, political, legal or moral agenda of any person or entity." (Funny, one can not even do a protest of oneself…)

I generally get that, but under the strictest form of that definition, no picture could ever be shown. A picture of a politician advocates that person (a political agenda) or their policies (numerous natures of agendas). Pictures of boys fishing advocates hunting (a moral agenda). Pictures of Iranian girls in school advocates education equality (a social agenda). Pictures of an old lady lost in contemplation advocates religion. A picture of Elvis promotes rock-n-roll music (a social agenda not even including all the agendas wrapped up under that picture) and the music industry. A picture of a kitten promotes welfare of kittens (a moral agenda). Eventually, everything is "advocating" or "protesting" something. All imagines represent biases for "any person or entity". Ironically, their rejecting my agenda is... a protest of its own.

November 8, 2009

Austin man accepts blame

Why not? I will accept blame for rising healthcare costs. This is
not an empty claim, though it sounds odd. Details are in Why Not
Blame Drew?
How all your problems originate from him. The same
Drew that has been offering you readers a different perspective
about life.

Healthcare will be publicly blamed on me at the Capitol today.

Details: Outside south gate of Texas State Capitol at 2:00pm.

October 31, 2009

Risk in Everything

We love guarantees and not risk. We are attracted to the feeling that something is "risk-free." A 90-day risk free trial is just what we want.

But, nothing is risk free. If you are riding in a car, there is a risk you will be in a collision. If you are walking down the street, there is a risk a tree limb will fall on you. If you are sitting in your house, there is a risk a gas line might rupture. If you travel or if you sit still, there is always a risk something will happen.

Here is a guarantee for you: risk is part of life. Crime happens (risk). Mistakes happen (risk). Accidents happen (risk).

It is fair to minimize risks; but, we should never believe that anything is "risk-free." We can not live in fear nor should we live in denial (of risk).

October 14, 2009

Risk-Free is Not Free

To the great shock of many on Thursday, September 23, 2009, it was revealed that "free" and "risk-free" do not always go hand-in-hand. Google experienced some issues with their service which is free to millions of users who were not aware of any risk with the service. Users expressed frustration at how such a thing could happen and disturb their otherwise risk-free daily lives. While the risk of issue has been extremely low with the free service, it is not the first time there have been issues.

To avoid any risk whatsoever, disgruntled users can choose not-as-free options such as Outlook or a myriad of other email and contact management applications. I am sure with these non-free options, they will never risk an issue…

Risk comes for free and it comes with everything.

October 5, 2009

Sir, this is a corporation

Recently, I had the "pleasure" of speaking with a particular bank, which will remain nameless. Specifically, I was trying to get a written copy of what they were telling me. On recollection, I should have known the representatives are not authorized to give me anything in writing that supports what they are telling me on the phone. "Sir, this is a corporation, I can not send you that and sign it myself," a manager told me at one point.

Big words: "sir, this is a corporation." Liability is a key part of being a shielded corporation and I get that. Typically, I would be frustrated by this, but I was really more saddened by the way she said this. Isolating her tone, I noted the finality of "I do not have to help you because I do not need to. You can't do anything to 'us.'" In her words, she sounded very proud of their "status." Merrily standing behind her corporate wall, she was unwilling to she how she still could help.

Will she remember her words when she finds herself up against one of the multitude of corporations out there?

September 22, 2009

Friends Don't Let Friends Be Responsible?

Regarding a recent WSJ article, Friends Don't Let Friends Bring Up Health Care by Elizabeth Bernstein, the author highlights numerous situations where disagreements on Health Care reform have gotten ugly. Evidence is not lacking. Some situations resulted in fights and name-callings among friends and family. People in other situations have taken the "prudent" approach of avoiding the discussion all together. On that point, isn't there an unwritten rule not to discuss religion and politics?

Now, the unfortunate thing is that citizens absolutely need to be discussing religion and politics. Successful and effective democracy is dependent upon healthy conversations. In order to survive them, citizens need to be okay with being wrong. By having engaging dialogs, citizens can empower themselves and the country. Learning something new and seeing things from a different perspective are what we need most. Essentially, ignoring the discussion is as bad as yelling through it (and arguably worse).

September 18, 2009

Treat us fair

"Fair! Treat us fair! Share the road," the bicycle riders cry.

And then, I see two bikers in yellow jerseys ride through an intersection without considering the stop sign. This is not the first time I have seen that. "Fair" works both ways.

I realize that the two yellow jersey riders were likely not the same people who made the statement of "fairness"; however, they are part of the same group. I would also be willing to bet they support the belief. That group, like any group, speaks with the actions of its members. Through their actions, they are undermining the efforts of their fellow group members. Where is the respect?

Regular law or not, perhaps before blazing through that intersection, they should have considered the word "stop". Then, they could have taken that second to consider the word "fair".

September 5, 2009

Integrity embedded within actions

I have said before that actions, not words, testify who we are. Example: getting BBQ. Recently, I was in a BBQ restaurant. This man was explaining the virtues of healthy eating to an older couple. You guessed it, I could not help but notice that he ate his fatty beef and butter-laden sides. Neither of the older ladies said much during his long "lecture" on reading of nutrition labels, actual salt versus sugar intake, calories, the importance of exercise… I just hope that he had a big workout later that day like I did; of course, note that I am not immune from any criticism, since I was obviously there eating the same types of food.

August 22, 2009

Responsibility begins with I

Isn't it funny how we are trained to look to the government to help? By "funny", I do not mean funny - ha, ha. Pitiful, bizarre, sad, and unfortunate are more appropriate.

We act like Pavlov's dogs. Evidently, we are trained to run to the government - at the first sign of trouble. Occasionally, we may intervene, but we generally expect the authorities to do something. I can not say which is worse: that we expect so much from the government or that the government caters to us with laws, legislation, and a lot of fluster. Experience shows us that "fluster" usually makes little difference other than it makes us feel better.

I guess a lot of people are now wondering, "who should we look to?" Recognize how this question is at the heart of my point.

Look inward. Everyone should not be looking anywhere else. Now, more than ever, individuals need to look to themselves. By taking their own balanced actions and seeking fair solutions, individuals begin to become responsible.

Legitimate government assistance has its place, but that comes long after all other efforts have failed. Sadly, I dare say most individuals have not even tried those efforts before running to the government. So, why not take responsibility? Let's make a difference. Why not make a difference?

August 10, 2009

Notice the Sound

Notice the saying, "sound of body, sound of mind." Have you heard this before?

The mind always is a dependent of body. A healthier body generates better blood flow, efficient access to oxygen, the right balance of chemicals for the brain, and the list goes on. Does this imply that a healthy mind is dependent on a healthy body? Does it also imply that a sound mind is dependent on a sound body?

"Sound" is the core part in integrity and its definition. Is there a link between a healthy body and having integrity?

July 20, 2009

Blame Drew

What problems do you see in the world today?
Ever consider who to hold accountable?
Are people around you escaping blame?
Do you wonder why?

TON YHW see the world from a different perspective? Check out my new book,
"Why Not Blame Drew? How all your problems originate from him"

While others defend themselves from guilt, I argue that I am responsible for
every problem. My fault. The next time you witness a terrible situation, you will
recognize my role. You will never see the world the same after getting it. I,
Drew, reveal a unique view of events that will help you move forward in your life.

Now you will know who to blame; blame Drew. Why not?

July 15, 2009

Just a little bit--makes a lot

R-E-S-P-E-C-T… Find out what it means to me. The other day, I heard myself say something which sounded contradictory. A slightly more complicated version of what I said would be "In respect to that woman of respect for whom I have no respect, I respect all her opinions."

The problem is how can I respect and also, simultaneously, not respect? Of course, the ultimate answer is there are different levels of meaning.

At the fundamental level, respect is recognition that every thing is due a sense of worth. It is an acceptance that everything has a God-given right to exist-everything. This form of respect is appreciation for the people, places, and (I contend) ideas around us. Our opinions about the specific thing does not matter at this level.

The other forms of respect are more superficial or relative. A "person of respect" is someone society has deemed in a position that you and I should hold in high esteem or honor. Political figures, parents, and community leaders are often given this title; although, it is sometimes far from fitting. The statement "I respect her" is often dependent on the actions of a person in a given situation. We "respect" actions that are consistent with actions we like. We "do not respect " actions that are not acceptable to us. Of course, what we choose to like and what we find acceptable are very relative. When we were in High School, we may have respected someone who dared to speak up against adults. As an adult, we may all find less respect in any such behavior from children. These forms of respect, though valid, are relative. Your definition of respectful behavior could differ from how I define respect.

The first definition of respect is fundamental and, for all things that ever even existed, unfaltering. So, all things in existence should be the object of respect. When I use the term "respect," I mean respect in this fundamental way, particularly when I am also discussing actions of "integrity" and "responsibility."

General understanding of these levels by others can make a difference in the world. Why not make a difference?

June 28, 2009

Counting our blessings

I woke up at four past seven this morning and heard three squirrels scurrying, five excited birds and numerous leaves blowing in a slight breeze. I almost missed all this.

Upon waking, I was inundated with tasks I needed to execute that day. I counted six concerns and eight follow-up tasks requiring my attention. I even wasted nine uncomfortable seconds worrying about something before I remembered it had been resolved. Essentially, I was ignoring the world around me because of the lists in my head.

Those ten lovely minutes hearing the world provided one rather positive impact on my day. Not appreciating our environment is easy. Why not take a moment and respect the world around us?

June 1, 2009

Rope Made in China

Responding to accusations against China for the financial crisis in 2009, Economist Nicholas Lardy stated “The Chinese gave us the rope, but we didn't have to hang ourselves.”

On that point, I could not agree mORE Profoundly. It is almost impossible to believe, but here is the argument of some:

Production-crazy China sold goods to the US (who chose to buy them). China saved the money it earned (like we choose not to do). Then, China invested that money in what it considered a wise investment - the US (which we choose to sell to them). Consequently, we had more money than we knew what to do with. So, we were influenced to spend it on bad investments (bad mortgages). Thus, it is all China's fault. They are ResPOnsiblE for our problems.

Economist Lardy and I see irony here. Are we the only ones who see it? Where is the sense of US being ResPOnsiblE? Did China force US to sell that as well?

May 29, 2009

Seeing What Matters

It is easy to forget what matters in all our daily lives. I do a good job at remembering what is important in my life. For many people, this illuminating revelation comes after the sudden death of close companions. Yet, even after that, those thoughts are quickly lost in the noise of day to day life. I am proud to say I can see this truth without any such extreme events. Although I do, often enough, forget to remember this, it is not long.

I have recently returned to an old practice (which is not hard to follow) of looking up at the numerous stars most nights. It humbles me by pointing out how my life is insignificant relative to the vast universe which surrounds us. There is another side of that coin which sheds different light. The millions of tiny stars help me to gain a new perspective by revealing the distinct honor of being part of it.

I, as one insignificant creature, have a wish to play my part right. I am going to make a footprint in this world in any case; Why not make a positive footprint in life? Why not make a difference? Why not?

May 19, 2009

The Sound of Integrity

We all have heard the concept that honesty is a sign of integrity. I believe that, but they are not as closely linked as all you may believe. Honesty is not the same thing as integrity. For one thing, we have all displayed honesty without integrity or at least seen it displayed without integrity.

All honesty is just a symptom of integrity; it is not the core of it. Look at the definition of integrity from your favorite source. You could define "integrity" by not even using the word "honesty" at all. Without "honesty", "integrity" still has meaning. While you may see the word "honesty" somewhere in there, the definition is rooted in words like "sound" or "whole".

Integrity is not easy to maintain in our noisy culture. Make sure you are not lying to yourself the next time you are all displaying honesty. Someone who has all integrity is so much more that someone who speaks the truth.

April 24, 2009

Oh Twitter, how I do not like thee

Here I go not making friends - especially not on Twitter.

I know many people are enamored with Twitter. For that reason, I do not want to burst bubbles, but consider the following:

If you Twitter while someone is speaking, are you actively listening? Seriously, are you giving due respect to the speaker?

"Multi-tasking" really is not the same as efficiency. You're paying for getting more things done at the cost of quality. Your attention is spread too thin. Are you being "efficient" when you "multi-task" with Twitter? Or, are you just getting more things done poorly?

Start tracking what percent of time the Twitter matters to you. Did what you read give you anything of value? If I asked you to pay a nickel for that information, would you pay it? I am asking you, "Did they respect your time and did you respect your own time?"

Surely, saying something and communicating meaning are not always the same. When you received your last Twitter, did you hear what the person truly intended to convey? We are quick to assume that all comments are properly conveyed. Between showing you words and speaking to you in person, don't you think meaning can be lost? Telling me can have more value than letting me figure it out, right? Is respect being given to others when you glance over their comments?

On that next time when you send out a Tweet, what percent of your audience will care? What is the percentage who will be wasting their time reading your message? If very few of them care, isn't that what we classify as "spam" for email? How much of their time is your message worth? You appreciated the value of spam filters, right? Why doesn't anyone seem care in this case? Is respect being paid for their time?

We pay for the advantages of Twitter by adding "noise". Are you just creating more noise in society? Think back to all the Tweets you have done. So, with all those actions, are you respecting the time of other people in the world?

Yes, it’s a neat tool, but are you are you using Twitter because it provides a function that you have long needed? Or - own up, now - are you using it just because it is a neat tool? That type of reason can be dangerous.

I, of course, am not for Twitter if it will be used to disrespect people's time. The rewards of showing respect outweigh the value I would gleam from Tweeting. I thank you for considering respect for others the next time you Tweet.

If you have comments, feel free to email me at suggestions@yellowkayak.org.

April 9, 2009

Let me count the why's

[This is the final installment to my recent "Pond-Kayaking Trilogy" - you knew it would eventually end. ]

I had a discussion with a long-lost friend about picking up trash in public places. I mentioned my tendency for gathering and tossing other people's rubbish. He respected me for doing it, but debated whether it made a difference. After all, there was so much X*$!! x%!@@ junk everywhere that what I affected was an insignificant exercise.

Eventually, I dumped a ton of answers on him. I started with this one: The next time I visit that place, there will be that much less garbage to spoil my view. Here is a sample of the other answers:

• Like the story of the man throwing marooned starfish back into the sea, every little bit helps even when it does not necessarily solve the entire problem.
• Doing so created an apt opportunity to discuss the subject with my friend. Awareness is always the first step to any topic. It elicits events to change behavior.
• While I am out there, other people will see that "Krazy Kayaker cleaning up". It might bring awareness to others.
• If my friend (or those people who see me) actively attempts throwing garbage out the window, he may think of me; (certainly, if he did not like me, this could work in the wrong direction…)
• The next time my observers see garbage , they might make attempts to pick up the junk themselves - or at least think about it.

I can be a leader by example. I can be a leader even whilst I paddle around in my yellow kayak.

April 1, 2009

In need of organization

I was recently kayaking on a small pond. I was dismayed at the volume of trash I saw. I was so frustrated that I began asking myself, "Why would they do this? How can people let this happen?"

Then, after a few minutes of asking about the nature of people, the course of my thoughts changed. I began to ask, "Why doesn't anyone clean this up? Someone should organize a clean-up event. Perhaps I should organize a clean up event. Why not make a difference?"

Given this new inspiration, I began the arduous process of thinking through the steps I would take for organizing the cleanup. There was finding a right day, getting boats for people, getting the word out, soliciting volunteers, having recognition for the volunteers…. Whoa. It was getting complicated. Oh, dear!

It hit me as my kayak rocked on the edge of that pond.

The thing was, it was not complicated. I already had a large plastic bag in my truck. I paddled back to my truck to retrieve it; then, I set off on my own personal, individual, one-man clean up event. I found the right day - that day! I got the word out to the volunteer. I had an impromptu clean up day. In about an hour, I had made significant progress. At some point during my self-made clean-up day, I began to ponder a new question, "why do we feel the need to have an organized event to do the right thing? Why not do them ourselves, today?"

March 10, 2009

5 year rule

Remember the 5 second rule? It might have been even 10 seconds for some. The "rule" allowed for safe eating of food that dropped on the floor if it was retrieved within the specified time. The point is that particular food is "contaminated" within 5-10 seconds of coming in contact with the "dirty" floor.

My question is whether or not the same type of rule applies for fish? If a poor fisherman notices that his Styrofoam bait container or their bobber gets away from him in the pond, how long before they are considered "dirty" garbage? How long before the stocked fish are contaminated? How long before an individual can not take fish out of the pond anymore?

I ask this question because I was recently kayaking on a lake. An unhealthy percentage of its trash derived from fishermen; Of course, I can't let fisherwomen off the hook, either. I caught my own individual 8-pounder that day; about 8 pounds of trash, that is. I dare say that you would find at least two pounds and 30% of the volume was from people who had been fishing in the lake.

What are all those men and women thinking? Do they not see a connection? Of all the people to pollute a lake, why the people seeking fish? Why do they pollute the very source of their food? The logic to this evades me. Is there some "5-year rule" (or more) that they follow? Where is their common sense - let alone sense of responsibility?

March 1, 2009

Ask not or don't ask?

President Kennedy is often quoted for saying, "Ask not what your country can do for you -- ask what you can do for your country." Many may hear these words, but how many see the absolute absence of follow-through?

As often as I hear this key knowledge come from the mouths of political leaders, I have not heard the other important part. Everyone expects to hear about actions - specific actions - we can do.

Quite the opposite. Yes, "personal responsibility" was discussed during President Obama's inspirational inaugural address; yet, all his actions to date have been government actions. I have heard, "we intend to bring federally funded health care to you" and "we intend to bring jobs to your town" and "we intend to finally formalize regulation for you…". They have even enabled specific action plans for these intentions- not always good ones, mind you. What I have not heard are realistic responses about what individuals can do to help (other than to spend more, which is another issue altogether).

After the extreme events of 9/11, President Bush took actions to show how government could handle things. Instead of asking for personal responsibility, he did the exact opposite. He took actions which said, "don't worry, we've got it all covered." The nation notified us when to worry and when not to worry (as much) with the green, orange, and red threat levels. They "helped" us with more scrutiny at the airport. Never once did the government ask for help from citizens - certainly not in any major way.

Think of the irony of this. One plane eventually ended in Pennsylvania. It did not crash into a building on 9/11. Why was that? Was it because of the government? No. It was a group of informed passengers who had helped save many others. Who attempted to warn people about the internal problems with Enron. Was it a government agency? No. It was a few individuals. Who revealed the Madhoff scheme this past year? You guessed correctly - Individuals (his sons). Who saved a plane full of passengers of the US Airways plane that crashed in the Hudson? Was it the SWAT team? No. It was well-trained flight crew members and numerous private boaters.

Individuals have a proven track record of helping to make a difference. They make a difference when they are empowered to make a difference. The government should not need to cater to citizens like the spoiled children we have become. There are other options. The government should be empowering individuals to take personal responsibility. Individuals can do it, yes they can.

February 24, 2009

I intend to hurt the economy

I am not a malicious individual. No one knows this better than my friends.

That said, each of my actions of late demonstrate a person who does not want the economy to rebound. Government can not count on me to be a big spender. Realize that our current economy is dependent upon consumers. It is dependent upon people buying and buying. The economy thrives on people accumulating more stuff - You and I are asked to buy more stuff than we need. I am not responding to that call - not now nor in the future.

Electing to buy more than I need is not my intention. A lot of stuff will not make my life complete. Certain things are necessary for me to survive; However, a large number of purchases never need to be made. No one needs some of the things I see in stores. Do not get me wrong, even as I say this, virtually all my possessions are debatable on this point. Economic cars, roomier homes and another kitchen gadget could slightly improve my life. You have to ask, "is the value really worth the cost? "

Now, do not confuse "price" with the "cost". I mean the cost of everything about the product. Visit the site www.thestoryofstuff.com and you will get a good description of this topic. It helps you see our consumer society from a new, different perspective.

Ultimately, all my purchases will be more planned and measured. Less stuff will flow through my hands as I use what I have more efficiently and for longer periods. Admittedly, consumer economies will suffer by my selfish actions. Thus, I will not be helping the economy by my actions. Of course, no one knows better than I that my actions are what reveal my true intentions.

February 14, 2009

In Praise of Irresponsible Behavior

Recently, a Wall Street article "In Praise of Transgressions" (Feb 14, 2009) suggested that "everyone should lighten up" on accusations of public figures with notable failings. The article leaves out any discussion of responsibility, which is at the heart of the matter. We want someone to hold responsible; however, in more "vague and amorphous" situations, there is diffusion of responsibility.

Each of the big issues addressed in the article - such as drugs in baseball, issues in Gaza, stock market drops, and stimulus packages - are complex. They involve numerous people. There is no one specific individual to hold responsible for them.

Society does not hold anyone responsible unless it can point to one person. We still gnash our teeth at the complex situations, but we do not point fingers at any specific person.

People such as Mr. Rodriguez, Mr. Phelps, Mr. Dashle, and Ms. Simpson can each be held responsible for their specific failings. It is difficult to hold Mr. Rodriguez responsible for all the drugs in baseball. Countless numbers of people make the game "filthy", but we can hold him responsible for his specific part. Likewise, it is difficult to hold Mr. Dashle responsible for actions of Congress. There are so many fingers in the Congressional pot that we can not hold him responsible, but we can pinpoint him for not paying his taxes.

Each of the specific failings are at the "human scale", as the article aptly suggests. We grasp the concepts of a person doing drugs, not paying taxes, or gaining weight. More importantly, though, is that responsibility is clear in these situations. We know who is responsible for those actions. Responsibility has not been diffused.

Contrast those individual actions to actions of corporations, the economy, and governments. It is difficult to determine the specific individual responsible for those actions. We can not find only one person to hold responsible. Responsibility is diffused.

The heart of this matter is responsibility. The real question, then, is "should we lower the bar on what we consider "responsible behavior"?"

February 13, 2009

Why do we love to blame inanimate things?

Blame the economy! Blame the banks! Blame executives! Why do we love to blame inanimate things?

Let's suppose there is an element of politeness here. We were taught not to point at people in public. We were also taught that if you can not say something nice about a person, then say nothing at all. We do not want to single any person out.

Although that sounds nice, I do not think we are being polite. I see people point in public. I hear things said about individuals that should not have been said. Yet, it is rare that a specific individual gets blamed for anything - except perhaps the President of the US.

Maybe I do not get out enough, but I do not see people saying "Blame Tony - the guy who lives the next block over who is a bank executive". I have not heard the likes of "Blame Leslie! She told me that she has cut down on here spending this year." They are the executives and the people that are hurting spending in the economy. Why are we blaming a group rather than specific people?

Everyone likes to blame generic things rather than specific individuals. Why?

Me. Blame me. I throw my hat in the ring. I am the one responsible. If you need to blame something, blame me!

January 27, 2009

Welcome

This is a blog devoted to individuals being role models for integrity, responsibility, and respect.