My Musings


Met a Marine in Central Florida

Stills taken from a video cam.

My thoughts on watching a simultaneous moon set and sun rise from the leather of a
motorcycle seat.

The Afghanistan Argument
Written Oct 20, 2009

There is nothing in Afghanistan that is in our national interest.  Certainly not enough to warrant the death and bleeding of our young men and women and the expenditure of hundreds of billions of dollars yearly.  History tells us it's impossible.  What on earth would cause us to ignore history and dive into this morass.

Here are some reason I have read warrant our stay in Afghanistan.

1.  Oil.  First, Afghanistan does not have any oil.  Its only real export is the drug trade.  Control of Afghanistan is required to ensure the flow of oil from the middle east.  Even if this were true, which it is not, consider the following data taken from  "Amount of U.S. oil consumption that comes from U.S. production: 7.3 mbd, or 42 percent. We produce fifty percent more oil than Iraq and Kuwait, almost as much oil as Saudi Arabia and the Emirates. Nevertheless, we import more than half the oil we use.
Amount of U.S. oil consumption that comes from the Middle East: 2 mbd -- 12 percent, only three percent from Iraq and Kuwait. The rest of our imported oil comes from places like Canada, Venezuela, Mexico, Nigeria, Algeria, Ecuador, and England."
There is something dreadfully wrong with this story.  Oil is not the reason we are there.  There might have been a 9/11 reason, but that seems to have been lost over the years.  What is it?  What are we doing?
2.  If we pull out, the Taliban and Al Qaeda will have easy access to space for training camps that would produce jihadist whose goal would be to attack the US on its home soil.  The problem with this argument is that the vast areas of the northern half of Africa are already available and hospitable to Al Qaeda.  (See the article near by on the policy shift on dealing with Sudan.) Space for camps is a red herring.  In addition, my "guess" would be that more information on how to be a terrorist is contained on the WWW than you can get from an Al Qaeda agent in a desert camp.  If you are not convinced yet, remember that the final training for the 9/11 bombers was accomplished right here in the US.  The CIA and FBI both know that there are training cells in the US.  So what are we doing in Afghanistan?

3.  If we pull out, the Taliban may destabilize the Pakistani government and thusly open the door for Taliban/Al Qaeda access to nuclear weapons.  Yep, that might happen. Now what?  The Pakistanis and Indians may find a dumb excuse to exchange nuclear weapons on each other.  Other than the radioactive fall out, what has this to do with us?  We lose all the call centers for Dell, Apple, Microsoft, etc.?  What would the international community, less the US, do?  Nothing, they never do.  What would the UN do?  Nothing, they never do.  This is especially true if the US did not participate.  Some where out there, there is an Ivy League graduate who will draw you a dominos chart that outlines what will happen if Afghanistan goes to Al Qaeda.  These same guys/gals did the same for Vietnam and they were wrong.  Dead wrong.  I may have my history wrong, but has there ever been an event where a known member of the Taliban has done harm to a US citizen or US property outside of Afghanistan?  They help to kill our troops and other US citizens because were are in the lands of their ancestors and are impious infidels.  These tribal people of Afghanistan are happily ignorant and illiterate to the ways of modernity and should be left to worship their medieval rock gods as they have done for centuries.  If we leave their country, they have little reason to care about the global jihad that their buddies, al Qaeda, want to impose on the US and the west.

4.  Now for the hard sell.  What happens if our departure from Afghanistan results in the physical attack on the US by Al Qaeda with a WMD.  Here is where all of us in the US get into the game, not just our troops.  If attacked by a Muslim jihadist  group or individual we respond the same day by creating a smoking hole in any Al Qaeda supported country.  Pick one, any one.  We follow the rules of war and apply maximum force to a focused target with the intent of destroying the enemy's will to resist. There is no consideration of a proportional response.

Thousands die.  Many who have nothing directly to do with this ideological conflict.  But, they tolerate their governments who do.

This action would be decried by every nation on the planet.  But believe me, every nation and especially all the non-nations and Islamic fighters would understand that the US would not tolerate an attack on its shores and that it was committed to survival of its way of life.  This is problematic, because many of you do not believe that our way of life is worth this effort to protect it. 

If an Arab, Pashtun or Persian is willing to blow him/herself up for a cause/entry into paradise and take as many impious infidels and Muslims with them as they can, we should not be afraid to give them a chance to do so in very large numbers.  Even if the application of such force is unsuccessful in convincing the "moderate" Muslims to control the jihadist, it should delay the next attack on the US.  All Islam has to do is tolerate the beliefs of all non-Muslims.  How hard would that be to deter the destruction of another Muslim city.

If you do not believe that we are in an ideological war, you are part of the problem.  The rules of war outlined in the Geneva Convention do not apply in this contest because these jihadist did not sign up to the convention and mock us for our weakness in allowing them to fight by their rules while we turn the other cheek.  Right or wrong, these fighting Muslims hate us and want us dead or subjugated.  Some will say, this kind of action will bring down the wrath of the billions of Muslims on the US.  The enmity of Muslims to infidels who invade their sacred lands exist today.  A major portion already believe it is the mission of the west to destroy Islam. An act of war would do little to modify this enmity.

I understand that the application of paragraph four has the same chance as Thomas Friedman believing that global warming is a hoax.  I do believe that most US citizens think we are submitting to think tank logic when the reality of our war with terrorist is dirty, ugly, violent and is a no holds barred conflict we are losing.  One last thought.  I find it disingenuous to the max for our leaders and the press to refer to our enemies as terrorist and not include the words Jihadist, Muslim or Islamic to modify the noun.  Unless I am misinformed, we are not fighting any Christian, Hindu, Shinto, Zoroastrian, or Buddhist zealots.  So... the terrorist are by definition Islamic, or Muslim or Jihadist.  Let's call this what it is.  If you are Muslim and find this insulting, stand up and say so but watch out if you chose to apply violence to your argument or force your beliefs on those who chose not to sign up.  I acknowledge your right to shake your fist in my face as you make a point, but you lose all your rights when your fist comes in contact with my face.

Get us out of Afghanistan, Iraq, Japan, Korea, Okinawa and the UN and NATO,  Allow the rest of the world to work out their differences with diplomacy or force as they deem appropriate.  Unless it manifestly impacts our national interest, we should stay out.  This is not isolationism, its minding our own business which is almost always a good idea.  I would add to this position of minding our own business the practice of US sponsored international aid.  There is not a place on the planet were we give aid that we are not publicly abused and hated for these efforts.  There are probably few people who believe that the world effort to assist Haiti after the earthquake is anything other than a humanitarian effort to assist a poor and desperate population.  I would agree.  But wait.  As time passes, there will more and more nations who will find fault with what the US has done in Haiti.  The French ambassador has already accused the US of having imperialistic designs on Haiti because of the number of troops we have placed on the ground.

Nuclear Arms Reductions
Written Sept 8, 2010

It occurs to me that the philosophy of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) worked and is working because the concerned parties believe that their own personal survival is paramount.  For most species this is so.  But for the Islamic species it is not.  Or...for some number of Muslims it is not.  In fact, their greatest glory is to martyr themselves in some diseased belief that death in a Jihad is their ticket Valhalla.  For this group, MAD is moot.

Even is this was not true, how does an arms limitation treaty advance the interest of the US.  Our arms limitation diplomats have had zero success with using this issue to change the behavior of any existing or wannabe nuclear power.  Perhaps the most disgusting example of my point is America's dealings with North Korea.  I say dealings because this 4th world country has stuck it to America's politicians and diplomats at every turn.  It is way past embarrassing!

Are we to believe that our representatives are making secret trade, immigration, military and corruption deals with...Russia, France, China, Great Britain, Iran, Pakistan and India in an effort to reduce the number on nukes on the planet?  We are saying that stuff we want to happen for our citizens is dependent on nuke numbers?  Well if we are, there is nothing here for the citizens of the US.  Secret or not.

So let me propose, notwithstanding the unsolicited strategic posture proclaimed recently by some flag officer in the Pentagon, there is no upside to reducing our strategic nuclear stockpile. None.  That is, of course, unless you are a member of a growing group of "come on fuzzy feeling" citizens who believe that making unilateral reductions in our nuclear arms is the "right" or "moral" thing to do.  Clearly the use of nuclear weapons on the towns and cities of another nation is an amoral act in itself.  So, using one weapon on a city is no more amoral that scattering a hundred warheads over a nation.  There is no distinction in your heaven that separates vaporizing 100,000 souls or 100,000,000.  Don't forget, that Jihadist out there with a similar weapon would gladly kill this many and would be supported by 2B of his fellow worshipers.

In this environment, reducing our weapons numbers, other than to modernize is crazy, perhaps criminal in some minds.

The US furthers none of its national interest by entering into an arms agreement.  The crazies are going to do crazy things no matter what we do.  So...immediately withdraw from any and all nuclear limitation treaties and in the same breath, publicly announce that the US is returning to a policy whereby the nation reserves the right to use preemptive nuclear strikes when it is being threatened.  This will become a core posture in all international treaties and diplomatic agreements.  This may not deter the crazies, but it might influence those who harbor the crazies to reconsider their options.  If there are diplomatic negatives in ongoing negotiations, so be it.  That's why the professional diplomatic corps gets paid.

The Bakken Oil Fields
Created 6 Feb, 2010

Here's an interesting read, important and verifiable information:  I did not write this.

About 6 months ago, the writer was watching a news program on oil and
one of the Forbes Bros. was the guest. The host said to Forbes, "I am going to ask you a direct question and I would like a direct answer; how much oil  does the U.S. have in the ground?" Forbes did not miss a beat, he said, "more than all the Middle East put together." Please read below.

The U. S. Geological Service issued a report in April 2008 that only
scientists and oil men knew was coming, but man was it big. It was a
revised report (hadn't been updated since 1995) on how much oil was in
this area of the western 2/3 of North Dakota , western South Dakota , and extreme eastern Montana ..... check THIS out:

The Bakken is the largest domestic oil discovery since Alaska 's Prudhoe Bay, and has the potential to eliminate all American dependence on foreign oil. The Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates it at 503 billion barrels. Even if just 10% of the oil is recoverable... at $107 a barrel, we're looking at a resource base worth more than $5.3 trillion.

"When I first briefed legislators on this, you could practically see
their jaws hit the floor. They had no idea.." says Terry Johnson, the Montana Legislature's financial analyst.

"This sizable find is now the highest-producing onshore oil field found
in the past 56 years," reports The Pittsburgh Post Gazette. It's a
formation known as the Williston Basin , but is more commonly referred to as the 'Bakken.' It stretches from Northern Montana, through North Dakota and into Canada . For years, U. S. oil exploration has been considered a dead end. Even the 'Big Oil' companies gave up searching for major oil wells decades ago. However, a recent technological breakthrough has opened up the Bakken's massive reserves.... and we now have access of up to 500 billion barrels. And because this is light, sweet oil, those billions of barrels will cost Americans just $16 PER BARREL!

That's enough crude to fully fuel the American economy for 2041 years
straight. And if THAT didn't throw you on the floor, then this next one
should - because it's from 2006!

U. S. Oil Discovery- Largest Reserve in the World

Stansberry Report Online - 4/20/2006

Hidden 1,000 feet beneath the surface of the Rocky Mountains lies the
largest untapped oil reserve in the world. It is more than 2 TRILLION
barrels. On August 8, 2005 President Bush mandated its extraction. In
three and a half years of high oil prices none has been extracted. With this motherload of oil why are we still fighting over off-shore drilling?

They reported this stunning news: We have more oil inside our borders,
than all the other proven reserves on earth. Here are the official estimates:

- 8-times as much oil as Saudi Arabia

- 18-times as much oil as Iraq

- 21-times as much oil as Kuwait

- 22-times as much oil as Iran

- 500-times as much oil as Yemen

- and it's all right here in the Western United States .

HOW can this BE? HOW can we NOT BE extracting this? Because the
environmentalists and others have blocked all efforts to help America
become independent of foreign oil! Again, we are letting a small group of
people dictate our lives and our economy.....WHY?

James Bartis, lead researcher with the study says we've got more oil in
this very compact area than the entire Middle East -more than 2 TRILLION barrels untapped. That's more than all the proven oil reserves of crude oil in the world today, reports The Denver Post.

Don't think 'OPEC' will drop its price - even with this find? Think
again!  It's all about the competitive marketplace, - it has to. Think OPEC just might be funding the environmentalists?

Black Americans

Written January 7, 2012

Black Americans are victims?

Black Americans are always about race?

Black Americans are always about slavery?

Black Americans are liberals?

Black Americans are Democrats?

Black Americans are happy with their representatives?

Young (15-29) Black men have the highest death rate, the highest death rate by homicide and HIV, the highest rate of unemployment, the highest number incarcerated in prisons and the lowest levels of education.  I have no facts to support my belief that a large majority of these same black males come from families with no fathers.  They are a product of generations of dependency on social welfare programs that have destroyed a proud history and replaced it with a culture of the street that embraces ignorance.

For Black Americans, how is this Democratic, liberal, victim of race and slavery thing working for you so far?

A Proposed Black Museum
Written Jan 23, 2011

What part of American history will be contained in this museum that is not already part of the Smithsonian's organization of museums?

If you are one who believes that race remains a deterrent to equality in America, then how can a formal Federally funded edifice that is a constant reminder of slavery and Jim Crow laws do anything but stoke these fires of hatred and resentment among the black population of this country.  There is no "healing" in such a place, only the continuation of a culture that views itself in the ever blinding light of victimization.

The article mentions a system that would be able to track American black family's back to their origins.  Would this search engine include the members of their families who were complicit with black Muslim slavers who "harvested" their fellow black neighbors for the purposes of profit by their sale to whites for service in the colonies.  What would the museum say about a comparison of the living standards of your average black family in the US with the same measurement of any group of black families in Africa.  What would that say, not about the immorality of slavery, but about the results of slavery in the US.

According to the US Census, blacks make up just under 13% of the population in 2009.  Hispanics and Latinos, make up just over 15% of the population.  Where is the funding for a Museum of Hispanic culture and history?  Should every minority in the US have its own federally funded museum on the Mall?  Based on these numbers, the answer would be yes.

These institutions, regardless of their propaganda, perpetuate the division amongst us and prove that diversity is a national chore whose cost in national angst and resources make a mockery of the thought that ..."in diversity there is strength".  This angst and cost of diversity may be worth the effort, but it is extremely expensive and inefficient and we should not pretend otherwise.

America's strengths reside in it's Declaration of Independence, it's Constitution and the concept of a republican form of government where capitalism is the business model.  There is nothing to be gained by creating organizations whose goal is to create a continuum of hyphenated Americans.

Civil Unrest in the US
Written Feb 20, 2013 to members of the S.C. General Assembly
Can you believe it...No responses.

The sites below document, as well as some news blogs can, some of my comments nearby. 

I understand that the business of you guys is to represent citizens in your districts in the SC General Assembly, but I have many concerns about what is happening in DC and thought I would share them with you.  It is my honest hope that this is not the first time you have heard this discussion.

There are a handful of my friends, mostly veterans, but not all, who write each other regarding the politics of the day.

In a response to a discussion by Richard Reich on increased spending on "investments" like infrastructure and education, I made the following comments: Most of this is a stream consciousness and may seem a little jerky at times.  For that I apologize. 

For the concept of government control over its citizens, I make no apologies and hope that someone out there gives two hoots about the threat to our Constitutional Liberties.  What are you doing?

The Devil is in the details. Spending on infrastructure may be, perhaps, the largest pile of porcine scatology next to military spending.  Senators and Congressmen have been infamous and proud of the ways that they have "porked" the US Treasury on behalf of their constituents.    These bills that fund education and infrastructure are huge complex omnibus monsters that have so many topics in them not related to the subject of the bill, it  makes tracking these Pork projects problematic. My friend says that I will beat a horse after it has been laid to rest in the ground.  True.  Speaking of that, lets go back to the 10Amendments for a moment. One of the Articles of the 10Amendments is: "Section 1. All bills, orders, or resolutions passed by the Congress shall be limited to a single topic."  No more subsidies for ethanol or wind power included in the Farm Bill.  

Or, perhaps the worst and possibly most dangerous example is the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 2012 in which the following was a huge issue that I never heard of until two days ago.  I may not read enough. Thank you Wikipedia.

"The most controversial provisions to receive wide attention were contained in Title X, Subtitle D, entitled "Counter-Terrorism." In particular, sub-sections 1021 and 1022, which deal with detention of persons the government suspects of involvement in terrorism. The controversy was to their legal meaning and potential implications for abuse of Presidential authority. Although the White House[12] and Senate sponsors[13] maintain that the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) already grants presidential authority for indefinite detention, the Act states that Congress "affirms" this authority and makes specific provisions as to the exercise of that authority.[14][15] The detention provisions of the Act have received critical attention by, among others, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, and some media sources which are concerned about the scope of the President's authority, including contentions that those whom they claim may be held indefinitely could include U.S. citizens arrested on American soil, including arrests by members of the Armed Forces.[16][17][18][19][20] The detention powers currently face legal challenge.  

In his signing statement for this bill, the President "Promised to never use this aspect of the Bill".  Signing statements have no stature in law.  In 1942, the greatest Democratic president in American history incarcerated and stole the belongings of 80,000 American citizens who just happened to be members of the Japanese race/culture.  So we have a Congress and President who have prepared the ground and created a law to detain, without due process, American citizens.  In one motion, they have by passed our liberties of posse comitatus ( and habeas corpus. Based on existing law, the four of you could be detained, probably in Guantanamo, for being members of the elected government of S. C., a known hot bed of secessionist and home grown American terrorist.   South Carolina, the home of the Rebellion and of Jim DeMint and Lindsey Graham.  Two thorns in the side of this administration for years. Do you think an administration of this stripe will give two hoots in hell about a legal challenge.  Does this bother you?  Do you believe what I am saying is false or the ranting’s of an aged veteran who sees the boogy man behind every bush?

On 2 July of 2008 at a speech in Colorado, the President, then candidate, was recorded deviating from his teleprompted text and saying the following,

 "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded." (emphasis added)

This year, The Department of Home Land Security ordered 1+ BILLION rounds of ammunition to include .223, .308 sniper rounds and 40 cal. hollow points. You may recall that hollow points, some times called Dum Dums, are specifically prohibited from use in combat by the Geneva Convention. The US Weather Service ordered tens of thousands of rounds, NOAA the same.  Just to put that number into perspective, the total average rounds expended each year in the mid east is approximately 70 MILLION rounds.  DHS' purchase represents 20 years of annual defense department combat in the Mid East, in the continental US where the only enemies of the State are its citizens.  DHS is also purchasing multiple thousands of Drones for use in the US. Why is this happening??  Are you or am I misinformed?  Does it matter that this level of ammunition is enough to put five rounds in the body of every man, woman and child in the US.  I believe, but do not know, that TSA employees are probably the largest force of personnel under the direct "command" of the DHS.  Can you imagine the quality of TSA agents in our airports today being given weapons to suppress civil unrest in this nation?  The concept is so out to lunch it is almost comical. So, why does the DHS need this quantity of people killing ammunition.  You do not practice you marksmanship with expensive hollow points.  Do you know why all this is happening?

I digress only slightly.  We spend twice as much per student on education than any country in the world and we get piss poor results for our money.  As long as public service employees are allowed to have unions, this will NEVER change no matter how much money you throw at it.  Then there is Infrastructure spending.  As long as it is used for vote acquisition it will NEVER achieve the lofty goals we mentally set for it.  One can only imagine the corruption that will accompany such an effort. 10Amendments...term limits.

Addressing education and infrastructure seems intellectually comical and perverse when the Government appears to be preparing for a level of civil unrest that would approach a civil war.  Do you think our Government is looking at the films of the riots in Greece and saying to themselves...if our fiscal house of cards falls, the dollar falls, unemployment doubles or triples, the value of peoples life long savings in both dollars and investments in stocks, bonds, land, gold, you name it falls like a stone, will the citizens be coming after us?  Think of the hordes of citizens who no longer get their monthly checks from the government and need food and shelter as well as drugs.  Where will they turn?

This is not a conspiracy theory.  The ammo and drones are real.  The desire of the administration for a civilian army to equal the US Armed forces is documented and real.  The debt and deficit are real. The ability to Federalize all transportation, communications, food distribution, medical care and now incarceration of its citizens without due process is real and documented as law in the Patriot Act, executive orders given by Bush and formally adopted by Obama and the NDAA of 2012.

What do you think is going on?  What are you doing about it?  At what point do we admit that there is something really wrong in our Country and we are impotent to deal with the problem .  Finally, what in the name of the cosmic void are our Congressmen doing about this.  Have you yawned yet?  If so, we know what the problem is.

Like Paul Krugman, Riech is too much of a political animal to be an intellectual economist any more.

Letter to Senators Graham and DeMint
Written June 19, 2010

Senator: If you would like for me to support an issue with money and volunteering to make phone calls, here it is.

Start, if not already started, a move to hold a Constitutional Convention called by the several state's legislatures.  As I am sure you are aware, it takes two thirds of the legislatures to call a convention and three fourths of the legislatures to approve amendments to the Constitution.  Go here to see what needs to be considered at a Constitutional Convention.

Although I hold you in the highest regard, it is not clear whether you or any of the other elected officials in Washington  have the commitment to country to give up your office for the sake of the country.  I am referring to term limits.  This is one of the amendments you will find listed at the above link.  No one, and I mean no one believes three fourths of the Congress will vote to do away with their jobs.

Think of it!  Your first day as a Senator and its the first day of your one and only term.  If I were King, (this is not what the proposed amendment states, this is my idea) it would be six years for Senators and Congressmen.  You could care less about lobbyist because you now have no requirement to raise money for your next election because there won't be one.  You could always vote your conscience even if it ran against your constituents.  If you wanted to serve on a special committee but a Harry Reid kind of guy was never going to allow it, just wait. Because, the Harry Reid kind of guy will not always be there in perpetuity. You have taken a risk to serve the country because you will not be able to work for any company that does business directly or indirectly with the Federal Government for a period of three years after you depart Federal Service.  Unless you served in the Federal Government in some other capacity, the US Military or GS, you will depart the Senate with no pension and no health care other than that which is available to every citizen.  You will not be eligible for any pay increase that you vote for during your term.

You, Senator DeMint, in particular, are the closest we have in the Senate to the ideas most Americans hold dear.  Not all but most.  But even you, you who have taken the hard stand against pork, after two or more terms in the Senate will begin to fall into the power hungry posture that now dominates our Congress.  I, like many, do not believe that having a Byrd, Stennis, Thurman, Kennedy or DeMint as permanent fixtures in the Congress is good for our country.  We may not get the best and brightest as Congressmen with this plan, but look what the best and brightest have done to our country.  I want amateur Congressmen that know they only have one shot at doing good for their neighbors, our culture and our nation.  Mr. Smith Goes To Washington?  Perhaps.  But under my plan, Mr. Smith is not competing with Nancy Pelosi but is in bed with guys and gals just like him.

So, Senator:  Will you ever read this?  Will a member of your staff snigger and say what a fool, this guy does not know how the system works and smartly blitz off a form response and consider the matter dead.  I think I do understand how the system works, but that is not important.  How it works now is broken.  How and if you and your staff chose to intentionally fall on your respective swords in the hope that you can start a new day where how the system works is turned upside down is the question.  Its a lot to ask.  But it is no harder for me to ask you give up your potential careers than it is for you to ask a 19 year old Lance Corporal to die for the likes of a mafia tribal chief named Hamid Karzi.  What I ask of you the Lance Corporal has already delivered.  See if you guys can muster the same commitment to country that the Lance Corporal did for us.  You may take my word for it, there is nothing more satisfying than giving up your personal desires so that your organization can succeed and then let that success wash over all of you.

Finally, blessedly, I am attending a 40th reunion of my squadrons deployment to Vietnam in 1969 at the Marine Corps Museum in Triangle, VA this month.  One of our members recently passed away form a long illness, but he had given me a Zippo lighter when we were in country and on it was inscribed the following: "For those that will fight for it...FREEDOM...has a flavor the protected shall never know" 

L/Cpl Edwin L. "Tim" Craft
1968 Khe Sanh Combat Base  

The fight is not always on the battle field of physical violence.

Warmest regards

Gus Fitch



Gus Fitch

Written Jan 3, 2011

C. Edwards Deming postulated the 14 points of his Total Quality Management (TQM) system (  This system has lost some of its following in recent years here in the US but is still going strong in Europe.
For anyone who has been through the pain and rigors of transitioning a company to the concepts of TQM, you are aware that the word "process" defines every thing.  Simply put, individual initiative is suppressed and replaced with a process that defines how a given task will be preformed  always.  TQM demands consensus.  All decisions are made by committees and consequently there is no accountability for ineptitude or failure.
I would submit that all management tools that obtain their legacy from Deming's TQM are the antithesis of diversity.
So which is it to be?  I would submit neither!  The point I am trying to make is diversity demands consideration of all sixteen or seventeen diverse classifications contained in the definition above within a single organization.  TQM attempts to do away with all those kinds of considerations for the purpose of efficiency.
I have tried, unsuccessfully, to determine who was the first person to use the expression, "...there is strength in diversity".  I can report, however, the expression has been publicly repeated thousands of times subsequent to its first usage.  Google the expression to see who, when and why.

The Death of Black Culture
Written 25 July 2013

Here is my case:  This is a response to comment writer from the NYTs.

Based on the reply comments to Tom's comment, it would seem that there are some who still believe that decades of African-American rule in the cities was not responsible for their bankruptcy but white rule prior to black rule is the cause of it all.  Is there no black person who is anything but a victim of white oppression.  Is there no one in the black community that will step up and say that we screwed the pooch, it's our fault?  Are American Blacks this weak in their character that they can tolerate no failure, no criticism, accept no responsibility for what happens in their cities, communities, schools and the rest of a city's services.  No.  African-Americans should man up, accept the fact that, as a race, they have failed.  They must turn around their culture so that education and parental responsibility, not basketball, incarceration, victimhood and single parenthood are the way to the future.  If the race does not take this high road, they will be sentenced by their own actions to a culture of ignorance, poverty and darkness.

No amount of fawning and pawing about past slavery and Jim Crow laws will change the direction of black culture in this country if they do not get off the dole and establish pride for scholasticism, shame for pregnancy out of wedlock and ostracism for those who break the non-God six commandments.

  Although perverse, there is a good case to make that slavery may have been the best thing that ever happened to black Americans.  The shame of slavery can not be completely washed away, but blaming its injustices for every slight, real or imagined in todays world is either insanity or loss of sight to the obvious.  Given decades of pain and suffering, some may find it naive and blasphemous that I utter such a statement and paint me as a racist and ignorant.  I promise you, I am neither.  Ask any black person in the US would they swap places with any of their black brothers in the Congo, Sierra Leone, Ivory Coast, Mali or any country of Mediterranean north Africa.  It may have taken more time than it should have, but the wait was worth it.  The poorest of our poor is still orders of magnitude wealthier than the village African who is still hunted by his fellow black Muslims for slaves.

No comments:

Post a Comment