Is it really important to 'make the grade?'

For generations, parents have been pushing children to get good grades. When I was a kid, many of my classmates got $10 for an "A" and $5 for a "B", but I received nothing because good grades were simply expected. Today, students continue to receive rewards candy, cash, iPods, even cars -- for good grades from parents and schools.

This obsession with grades comes from the belief that school success means more opportunities for higher paying jobs and a better life. Since grades are indicators of school success, good grades are seen as essential.

But are grades really a good predictor of success?

While good grades may indicate mastery of content, what they really demonstrate is that students have the skill set necessary to succeed in school. Success comes by not bucking the system, causing waves or creating something new or different. High achieving students are able to deliver what the teacher wants. So, grades, in fact, reflect whether teachers think students have mastered the content.

It is not grades that predict success in college. Rather, it is the accompanying skills, such as how to understand and navigate educational systems. High achieving students turn out to be solid citizens who become accountants, doctors, engineers and lawyers. By middle age, they are often happy, prosperous and community-minded. Yet, the very skills that help high achieving students mean that they tend not to be mold breaker types who need a different skill set.

Success in business, public service, research and beyond often requires creative thinkers driven by curiosity, an appetite for risk and an open mind. These skills are often in opposition to those necessary to succeed in school. Instead of simple compliance, these students will question the rules and challenge the teacher. They are not interested in delivering what the teacher wants and may appear bored, indifferent or defiant. These students will receive poor grades and not achieve school success.

Do poor grades spell doom?

Poor grades do close the doors of opportunity for some students. School performance has limited their opportunities and reinforced a message of inferiority. The conventional wisdom that more education means higher income seems to pan out. Yet, poor grades have little impact on mold-breakers.

From the realm of politics, Winston Churchill, former prime minister of Great Britain, was a horrible student at the bottom of his class at Harrow (an exclusive private school). Yet, he led Britain through World War II and is recognized as one of the great leaders of the 20th century. Back home, Sen. John McCain graduated 894th out of 899 in his class at the U.S. Naval Academy. This poor performance did not stop him from becoming a war hero, influential policy maker and presidential candidate. And, of course, George W. Bush was a solid "C" student at Yale Law School. His transcript did not impede his rise from governor to president. These poor students had the necessary skill set to succeed outside of school.

From the world of business, Richard Branson, CEO of the Virgin Corporation, was a high school drop out. Of course, he left high school to run the newspaper he started and parlayed this enterprise into a multinational conglomerate. And Bill Gates is Harvard University's most famous and successful drop-out. While Gates did well in private school, he decided school success was not necessary and left Harvard to build Microsoft into an industry giant.

Mold-breakers can be stubborn, impulsive and rebellious. They are determined, often displaying single-minded obsession, where perseverance and resiliency lead to success. They are able to see things most of us can't. These traits equip them for success, but drive teachers crazy.

Besides these traits, emotional intelligence is more important than IQ. Grades are less important than being able to manage your emotions and read other people's feelings. Emotional intelligence also includes the ability to develop relationships, work with a team and, most importantly, lead with vision.

There is an old axiom: "School is a place where former 'A' students teach mostly 'B' students to work for 'C' students."

Are good grades important? Yes, if school success and becoming solid, contributing citizens is the desired student outcome. However, poor grades may result from qualities and traits that lay the foundation for transformational activities.

Before parents and teachers panic over grades, remember that many successful people had poor grades because their success came from reinventing instead of working within the system.

Scott Key is a professor in the School of Education at Fresno Pacific University.

McCain seeks special 'fair use' copyright rules for VIPs

John McCain's presidential campaign has discovered the remix-unfriendly aspects of American copyright law, after several of the candidate's campaign videos were pulled from YouTube.

McCain has now discovered the rights holder friendly nature of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which forces remixers to fight an uphill battle to prove that their work is a "fair use."

However, instead of calling for an overhaul of the much hated law, McCain is calling for VIP treatment for the remixes made by political campaigns.

McCain's proposal: complaints about videos uploaded by a political campaign would be manually reviewed by a human YouTube employee before any possible removal of the remix. The process for complaints against videos uploaded by millions of other Americans would stay the same: instant removal by a computer program, and then possible reinstatement a week or two later after the video sharing site has received and manually processed a formal counter-notice.

With 11 homes and 13 cars, it's not terribly surprising that McCain is calling for special treatment for the YouTube videos of politicians. As for the "fair use" claims of the poor starving masses: Let them eat cake.

On Tuesday, the McCain campaign sent a formal letter to YouTube asking for this two-tier system for "fair use" complaints. Copyright-guru Larry Lessig called it a "fantastic letter", adding "bravo to the campaign" in a post to his blog. Since then, the technology press has been pretty supportive, although the focus of the coverage seems to mainly be along the lines of "McCain realizes that fair use claims are uphill battle." This is the wrong message to send, and as much as I respect Professor Lessig, I have to call him out here. He is wrong. McCain should be criticized for his attempt to get special treatment, and Google/YouTube need to treat all users the same way.

All claims of fair use are equal--yet some claims are more equal than others.

The only way we will get an effective overhaul of copyright laws will be by forcing politicians to suffer along with the masses. The minute a special set of rules are made for those in Congress, the incentive to fix the system will disappear. To drive this point home, consider the following:

During the confirmation hearings for Judge Robert Bork, the Washington City Paper obtained a copy of the Republican nominee's video rental records. Alarmed at the possibility that their own rental histories would be revealed by the press, members of Congress jumped to pass comprehensive privacy legislation for the video rental records of all Americans. Up until the Bork fiasco, there had been no real incentive to fix anything, but once the risk to their own records was made clear, Congress acted. As a result, we are now all protected by the 1988 Video Privacy Protection Act.

Compare this to the horrible situation at airports. Americans are routinely harassed, prodded, poked and humiliated by employees of the Transportation Security Administration. While we stand in line like sheep, congressmen get to skip through the security lines, avoiding the entire process. Given the fact that they don't have to suffer at the hands of TSA, it's not terribly surprising that they have little incentive to fix the problems faced by the rest of us.

These two examples should make it clear--we cannot allow politicians to receive special treatment in copyright and fair use disputes. If anything, campaign videos should receive substandard treatment. McCain's videos deserve to rot in purgatory at the back of the DMCA queue, behind videos of toddlers, skateboarding dogs, Starwars Kid remixes, and the hundreds of clips of the dramatic chipmunk. Perhaps then, the senator will throw his weight behind comprehensive copyright reform that'll result in real benefits for the rest of the remix-population.

Originally posted at Surveillance State

Thank God! it's FOOTBALL season...

Well folks, like I tell my wife(Football Widow) in September," Love you sexy and I'll see you in December." My team looks good but we're very young, I'll have to work my butt off to teach them.
We have 4 goals this season:

1. Get better each week.
2. Win League.
3. Kick the BEARS ass. ( Rival )
4. Earn the right to WIN.......

Please before you go to bed each night pray for my team. May I suggest my prayer," God, if you can't help us, PLEASE don't help them."

In case you don't know what a Football widow is.....

A football widow is a term for those who have a relationship with a Football Coach who pays more attention to the game than to their partner during the sport's season of play. Football widows are usually, but not always, women. Usually the "widow" has little interest in the sport themselves.

Although it is widely tolerated and not considered a serious disruption by many, dedication to following the sport (such as watching game broadcasts on television) can disrupt home life and the relationship between the couple in question.

Dear Son,

When I was a teenager I wished, just as you do now, that my dad could be my best friend. However, it wasn’t until my time to be a father came up that I understood why my wish would never come true.

There is the big difference between a friend’s role and father’s role.

A father must provide his son constant love, economic subsistence, and an education. He must also protect and guide him, set a good example, and instill in him ethical and moral values so he may become a more responsible, self-sufficient, and compassionate human being.

A father who tries to be a best friend can’t be a real father. To be a friend is voluntary. It’s an option. To be a father is a privilege, but above all it’s a moral obligation.

My duty as a father is to give you what you need, not necessarily what you want.

When you were born, God gave me a blessing that has brought me great happiness. At the same time, he gave me a difficult mission – to be responsible for your moral development and well-being.

Some day you’ll understand the meaning of this letter. It will be one of the happiest days of your life -- when you hold your first child in your arms. From that moment on, you’ll understand that being a real father is much more important than being a friend.

The norms of business

Roy, a service rep, is told one of the salesmen forgot to send an order for window blinds to the factory and, as a result, they won’t be available for another ten days. Roy is asked to call Jenny, the customer, and tell her the blinds won’t be delivered on the date promised.

Roy has a decision to make: What should he tell the customer?

Telling Jenny the real reason will likely infuriate her and cause her to demand a refund or deep discount. This isn’t a good result, so he devises a plausible but false excuse that shifts the blame onto Jenny’s credit-card company. He even makes himself a hero by convincing her he did everything possible to solve the problem and, though his company wasn’t at fault, he convinced his manager to give Jenny a 10 percent discount for her inconvenience.

Jenny is angry at the credit-card company and upset about not getting her blinds, but she’s impressed with the professional way Roy handled the situation. Her loyalty to the company is actually strengthened.

Should Roy be praised or penalized?

The case for praise is that he took a lemon and made lemonade. He turned a bad situation into a good one, and no one was hurt (except, maybe, the credit-card company – and who cares about them?). His little white lie yielded great dividends and was well within the norms of business.

The case for reprimanding or firing Roy is that a good decision must be ethical as well as effective. He was dishonest and, whether his solution worked or not, a company that values trust should not permit dishonesty to be used as a problem-solving tactic.

If you were Roy’s boss, what would you do?

The Pond makeover

The before photo.

I love sitting by the pond listening to the sound of water, especially after work with my favorite distiled water and a nice cigar.

I laid all the brick and even built the picnic table, with my own 9 fingers.











Another before photo. I haven't remodeled the pond for about 6 years.









The after photo. I took out one pump and replaced one. It uses WAY less electricity. Don't really like how the blue hose shows but it will have to-do for now.






Added a new waterfall with UV light, should help keep the algae under control.














Gave the fisherman a new beer can and lifted the old waterfall.

This is my buddy "turdy" He spent the first 12 years of his life in a High School science class room. The science teacher, Mr. Ed knew I had a pond and asked if I would take him. He adds a lot fun to the pond and I never allow pencils in the back yard, I figure he has had enough for one turtles life.

A Life in Sports

It has been many years since my first coaching job, and I have seen many student athletes come and go. Perhaps it is fitting that I pause for a moment and look back on those years and at the sea of faces that looked at me as I spoke and with whom I spent so much time, so many days.

Make no mistake, I remember them all. I remember the athletes who could not be held back; who shone like the stars; who made even the most complicated plays seem effortless; who picked up everything as easily as you or I would pick up an evening paper. I remember those to whom everything was an arduous task requiring hours and hours of grueling work for the simplest operations. I remember those who came expecting to find glory only to find mud, scratches, and sore muscles. I remember those who only wanted to give of themselves for the good of the team. I remember cases that lightened my heart and enriched my soul. I remember cases that broke my heart. Yes, I remember.

I remember one boy, let’s call him Tom, who came to me one afternoon and, with great fervor in his voice, told me that he wanted to be on the team. He was a handsome young, with twinkling eyes and a winning smile. He looked to be in good physical condition, obviously had the desire to play, and his right arm was missing just below the elbow.

I will tell you honestly that I had serious doubts. I have always believed in honesty with my athletes, and I told him of my reservations. He answered that he understood, but that all he wanted was a chance to try. I told him that I could provide that, at least.

Tom had a prosthesis, an artificial hand and forearm, that he used with amazing skill. He wanted to be a kicker, and when the ball was snapped to him, he would use that artificial limb to trap it, steady it, and then kick the ball with amazing skill and accuracy. It wasn’t easy for him, I don’t want you to get that idea, but when this boy got knocked down he picked himself up and got back to it with an even fiercer determination to try harder.

In short, he made the team, not because he lacked an arm, but because he had aggressiveness, fortitude, courage, and a great deal of talent.

It was shortly into the first game of the season that he got a chance to try that skill. Five minutes into the game, it was fourth down and from the sidelines I told him what to do, and he was off
Unfortunately, our line did not hold, and several of the opposing linesmen were all over Tom. He got the ball off, but found himself under a pile of bodies. As they were untwisting themselves, one of the opposing linesmen reached down and offered Tom a hand up. Tom, whether on purpose or without thinking, extended his artificial limb to the boy, and the lad took it and pulled.

There was a snap, and the opposing player was standing there with Tom’s hand clutched in his own while Tom, on the ground, shouted, “What have you done with my hand? Give it back!”
Whereupon, the linesman looked at Tom, looked at the object in his hand…and fainted dead away!
It took every official on the field, both coaches, and fifteen minutes of clamor and fast explaining before it finally got settled.

That was one of the times when we laughed until the tears filled our eyes, but not all the times were like that. There was, for instance, my first brush with the problem with drugs and drug abuse.

We’ll call the student Johnny. It was his second year on the team. During his first season, he has shown unqualified promise, and I was looking forward to this year and what he would accomplish with one season’s experience added to his vast array of skills. Frankly, I dreamed of what the boy could accomplish. I would never find out.
I remember with frightening clarity how we sat at a team meeting one day. As I was talking, explaining some play, I noticed Johnny out of the corner of my eye. His eyes were shut and he was weaving back and forth as he sat on the bench. “Excuse me, Sir,” I said in a light manner, “am I boring you with this material?” There was no answer from Johnny, although several of the other players giggled. “Johnny,” I said, “is something wrong?” Johnny collapsed. I barely caught him, and, as I lowered him to the floor, I became aware of his shallow breathing, his caked lips, the bluish tinge to his ashen pallor. The trainers and I were on him at once, the emergency squad was called, and Johnny did not die that day. We discovered that an overdose of barbiturates had caused this problem.
His friends spoke to him; his parents spoke to him; ministers, psychologists, and case workers spoke to him; and I spoke to him. I told him the future he had before him. I spoke to him of what he could accomplish, on his own, without the crutch of drugs. I told him how we would be happy to help him back to the team when he was well.

I saw him only once after that. It was five years and four days from the day in the locker room when he collapsed into my arms. I stood and looked at him as he lay in his coffin, dead of an overdose in some dark corner where no one could get to him in time.

But I would not for the world have you think that Johnny’s was a typical story. Far from it! Johnny was the exception to our fine young athletes; he was no the rule. The majority and I mean 99.9 percent, of the players I coach live lives of dedication and devotion to their skills that make me proud to be among them.

There was, for example, a student we’ll call Bill. Bill was easily the most talented player I ever coached. To say that he was an outstanding player is to do him a disservice. He had a brilliant mind; a strong, healthy and highly trained body; and an ability to think on his feet that you see few times in your life. You only had to see him play once to know that here was someone very special, indeed, and someone who was headed for a lifelong career in professional sports. Indeed, during his senior year, he was literally besieged by recruiters from major universities and some not so major. Quite frankly, he could have had his pick.

One late fall afternoon, he asked if he could speak to me after practice. I imagined that he was going to ask my advice concerning the offers he had received, and I had a thought or two on the subject that I wanted to share with him. I was not prepared for what he has to tell me.

He thanked me for my help, which I brushed off lightly, asking, in turn, if he had decided on a college. He told me that he had, and he mentioned the name of some place I had never heard of. I supposed my face may have registered surprise, for he added, “Don’t worry; they have a coach there that I’ve always wanted to play for.” “Oh,” I said, trying to make some sense out of what he was saying, “and who might this great coach be?” He looked at me squarely and said only one word—“God.”

After that, there was no argument. He went to that school and became a minister. He realized his dream, and he played on God’s team. From all accounts, he was as marvelous on that field as he had ever been on mine. Someone once said to me concerning Bill, “Look at all he gave up!” To which I answered, “No. Think of all that he found.” Indeed, whenever this world gets me down, I find that memory of Bill helps me to view things in a slightly different, slightly happier perspective.

I suppose that it is natural, considering the fact that I work so closely with young people, that I am often asked my opinion about the future of this world and of mankind in general. I suppose people figure that because I get to know the young people who will make up that future, I am in position to know. Well, I guess I am, after all. I work with these boys, and I get to know them intimately. I get to see into their minds and hearts, I watch them as they strive and work, I am there as they battle and work together for common goals. Yes, I know them.

With that knowledge as my guide, I have no hesitation in telling you that the future is bright indeed, Yes, certainly there are the Johnnys who throw away their lives and futures, but there are also the Toms who refuse to be held back by any handicap and who will give countless hours of effort to overcome whatever stumbling blocks are placed in their way, material rewards of this world to work for the greater good of all mankind.

I am sorry for the Johnnys of this world, but I have pride, love and hope in the Toms and Bills who abound and flourish, and who will make our future, the future of all mankind, something bright, shining, and fine. That I have shared their lives; that I have had a part, however small, in the shaping of those lives; that I live in a world, the future of which will be shaped by them—this fills me with the happiness as it should fill each and every one of you with hope and a vision of tomorrow of which we may all be justly proud!

Get the pit ready we're cooking Cornell chicken

Cornell chicken was invented for a specific reason by one man, Bob Baker, who as the person earlier stated is a retired Professor at Cornell University. The sauce was invented for a specific goal which had nothing to do with BBQ. The occasion was a dinner held in 1946 for Pennsylvania governor Edward Martin. At that time Dr. Baker was a young professor at the University of Pennsylvania. He was asked to come up with something unusual to serve at the function. Baker's goal was to get people to eat more chicken. See, back in the 1930's and 40's chicken were raised primarily for their eggs, not for eating. Apparently everyone loved his chicken recipe and when Dr. Baker joined Cornell University in 1949 he brought his chicken recipe with him. Two years later his recipe appeared in a university publication and became known as Cornell chicken...and that my friends, is where Cornell chicken sauce originated from...

Original Cornell Chicken Sauce

1 Large Egg (Not for flavor, to hold ingredients together)
1 C. Vegetable Oil
2 C. Cider Vinegar
3 Tbs. Coarse Salt (Kosher or Sea)
1 Tbs. Poultry Seasoning
1/2 Tsp. Freshly Ground Black Pepper

My personal opinion is not to marinade your chicken for more than one hour as it will take on a strong vinegar taste. Let the other ingredients flavor the chicken by dipping the chicken every time you turn it on the grill.

We have found other variations of Dr. Baker's Cornell sauce that are also delicious...

Cornell Chicken with Mustard Baste

1 Large Egg
1/2 C. Extra Virgin Olive Oil
1/2 C. Mustard Oil, or more Olive Oil
1/4 C. Dijon Mustard
2 C. Distilled White Vinegar
3 Tbs. Coarse Salt (Kosher or Sea)
1 Tbs. Mustard Seeds
2 Cloves Garlic, Minced
1/2 Tsp. Freshly Ground Black Pepper


Cornell Chicken with Curry Orange Baste

1 Large Egg
1 C. Vegetable Oil
1 C. Fresh Lime Juice or Distilled White Vinegar
1 C. Fresh Orange Juice
3 Tbs. Coarse Salt (Kosher or Sea)
2 Tbs. Curry Powder
2 Cloves Garlic, Minced
1/2 Tsp. Freshly Ground Black Pepper

If you would like to sample Dr. Baker's chicken, such as President's have, visit Baker's Chicken Coop at the New York State Fair in Syracuse, NY. If you are unable to visit the great New York State Fair, you can also find him at the Tea Room at Baker's Acres just outside of Ithaca, N.Y.

This is the Curry recipe getting ready for the pit!!!

people labeled as “enemy combatants”

I found this story in my morning read and had to share...

In a split decision, the Supreme Court recently ruled that people labeled as “enemy combatants” confined at the military base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, must be given limited access to federal courts. Before I talk about the ethical issues involved, it’s helpful to review another major detention situation.

In 1941, a surprise attack by the Japanese government at Pearl Harbor brought our country into war and engulfed the nation in fear and hatred. In response, President Franklin D. Roosevelt, asserting special war powers, issued an Executive Order requiring all persons of Japanese ancestry living on the Pacific Coast of the United States to be forcibly confined in hastily constructed “War Relocation Camps.”

Ultimately, about 110,000 men, women, and children of all backgrounds were indiscriminately imprisoned in facilities that often lacked plumbing and heating. The Order applied to all residents who were at least 1/16th Japanese. Detainees were confined without the benefit of any process to determine whether they were actually a threat to national security.

Three years later, though the war was still raging, a Supreme Court ruling induced the President to release all the detainees. They were each given $25 and a train ticket home.

In 1988, President Ronald Reagan signed legislation that apologized for the internment, stating that the action was based on “race prejudice, war hysteria, and a failure of political leadership.” Surviving detainees were awarded $1.2 billion dollars in reparations. In 1992, President George H. W. Bush issued another formal apology from the U.S. government and added $400 million in reparations.

There are parallels to that Executive Order and our reaction after the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Looking back, who was right – President Roosevelt or Presidents Reagan and Bush?

Is there anything we can learn from this chapter of our history?

Some Comments -------

Two points that were not mentioned:
One, the Japanese-Americans were forced to sell or abandon their property. They were literally stripped of everything, including their Constitutional rights. When they were released and allowed to return home, most had nothing to go back to.

Two, Executive Order 1066 was literally state-mandated racism. It was no better than the German persecution of the Jews. Interestingly enough, the Jewish community did not speak out against this action.

Was FDR correct? Only if you consider the taking of property for political and economic reasons to be correct. There had already been much animosity against the Japanese-American community for the inroads they had made into the agricultural industry. Many people were actually upset that the Japanese-Americans were able to turn the desert land of the camps into flourishing gardens. FDR caved in to the demands of corrupt politicians and businessmen by taking advantage of the wartime hysteria. Why were no German or Italian-American citizens rounded up into camps? And don’t tell me it was because Japan was the only country to attack American soil. Don’t forget there were German U-boats off the Northeast coastline.

Is there anything we can learn from this? Yes, but sadly, we most likely will not. The issue of reparations split the Japanese-American community. Some said the only way America would recognize its fault was to have it cost them money. Others said it was dishonorable to accept payment. Still others wished to just forget the incident that scarred their lives. I thought the reparation money should have been directed into required teaching of this event in all American schools so it would never be repeated. So here we are, 20 years later, and we apparently have learned nothing. We scream that China should not host the Olympics because of their treatment of Tibetans, but in the next breath support the immoral imprisonment and racist treatment of Muslims in America. We are the greatest nation on Earth; it’s time we started acting like it instead of some two-bit dictatorship. But, as with WWII, the leaders who so desperately need to come forward are conspicuous by their absence.

The government establishing the former campsites as historical landmarks is a welcome step toward educating the public. However, as they were purposely located in remote areas, they do not get many visitors. And can you guess who actually visits? You got it…Japanese-Americans! Kind of like preaching to the choir.

You Make Your Own Luck

Some individuals seem to have an inexplicable abundance of good fortune. They are successful in matters of love, in their careers, in their finances, and in leading happy and meaningful lives. Yet these people don't seem to work particularly hard, nor do they posses extraordinary intelligence or other gifts. Of course there are also the natural opposites of the superfortunate; people who repeatedly fail despite their efforts and talents.

As is true with so many human problems, people tend deal with this difficult-to-quantify inequality by giving it a name– "luck"– and then disclaiming any responsibility for how much of it they are apportioned. Luck is considered by many to be a force of nature, coming and going as inevitably as the tide. But Richard Wiseman, a professor at Britain's University of Hertfordshire, has conducted some experiments which indicate to him that we have a lot more influence on our own good fortune than we realize.

Professor Wiseman executed a ten-year study to determine the nature of luck, and published his findings in a book called The Luck Factor: The Scientific Study of the Lucky Mind. Among other things, he experimentally studied the lottery winnings from people who count themselves as "lucky" and compared them to those who are self-described as "unlucky," and found that one's perception of their own luck before a lottery has no bearing on their likelihood of winning. Naturally this outcome was no surprise, because lotteries are driven purely by random chance. But in another test, the good professor asked participants to count the number of photographs in a sample newspaper, and subjects who has described themselves as "lucky" were much more likely to notice a message on page two, disguised as a half-page advertisement with large block letters: STOP COUNTING–THERE ARE 43 PHOTOGRAPHS IN THIS NEWSPAPER.

Obviously some measure of luck is based on chance, but this experiment and many others have led Wiseman to conclude that a significant portion of one's good fortune is not random, but rather due to one's state of mind and behaviors. He concludes that luck is an artifact of psychology, where a person is lucky not because of cosmic accidents, but because one achieves a particular mindset which precipitates and amplifies "lucky" events. While this observation may seem obvious, there are many interesting particulars in his findings.

Professor Wiseman's newspaper test illustrated that people who feel lucky do indeed differ from those who do not, but not due to to some outside force. The lucky individuals were paying more attention to their surroundings, which made them more likely to notice the message in the newspaper. During his long study on the nature of luck, he has found that "lucky" individuals usually posses many intersecting qualities, including extroverted personalities, a lack of anxiety, open-mindedness, and optimism. Each of these play an important role in one's luck production.

The essence of luck is opportunity, so it follows that the more opportunities one encounters and the more receptive one is to those opportunities, the "luckier" one is. Wiseman has found that lucky people smile twice as often as others, and engage in more eye contact than unlucky people do. Such outgoing, extroverted behavior exposes a person to more opportunities due to the increased social interaction. Similarly, open-mindedness allows one to encounter a greater number of unique prospects, and makes one more apt to embrace new opportunities.

Professor Wiseman has outlined four principles to help one increase their good fortune:

Principle One: Maximise Chance Opportunities
Lucky people are skilled at creating, noticing and acting upon chance opportunities. They do this in various ways, including networking, adopting a relaxed attitude to life and by being open to new experiences.

Principle Two: Listening to Lucky Hunches
Lucky people make effective decisions by listening to their intuition and gut feelings. In addition, they take steps to actively boost their intuitive abilities by, for example, meditating and clearing their mind of other thoughts.

Principle Three: Expect Good Fortune
Lucky people are certain that the future is going to be full of good fortune. These expectations become self-fulfilling prophecies by helping lucky people persist in the face of failure, and shape their interactions with others in a positive way.

Principle Four: Turn Bad Luck to Good
Lucky people employ various psychological techniques to cope with, and often even thrive upon, the ill fortune that comes their way. For example, they spontaneously imagine how things could have been worse, do not dwell on the ill fortune, and take control of the situation.

Unsurprisingly, optimism plays a key role in luckiness, since it strongly affects luck production and luck perception. Wiseman's study shows that a lucky, optimistic person is far more satisfied with all areas of their lives than an unlucky, pessimistic person. An optimist feels lucky for spotting a silver lining, however gray the cloud… yet a pessimist will curse their luck even in the face of good fortune, because they can't see past the green grass on the other side of the fence.

Fortunately, one's mindset is entirely within one's control. An unlucky person who resolves to change their luck can become more social; they can make a conscious effort to be optimistic and make the best of any situation; and they can be more open to new ideas and experiences. In short, if you go looking for luck, you'll probably find it… or so says the professor. With any luck, he's right.

Makes you think ?

frustration

I have been watching and reading with interest reports about an impending crisis in the world. The crisis is starvation, caused by a limited availability of wheat and rice.

It upsets me as I take in these stories that I don't care more, that I don't feel more compassion.

Instead I feel anger and frustration. People are starving, and yet environmental extremists, "world" organizations and rich spoiled countries (including our own) seem to want American agriculture to be less productive and less competitive.

For instance, this year in California, an additional 600,000 acre feet of water will be dumped out into the ocean in an environmental "take" rather than used for farming. That is 600,000 acre-feet!

People are starving and 600,000 acre-feet of water could grow at least 300,000 acres of wheat.

At three tons to the acre, that equals 900,000 tons of grain. There are almost 40 bushels to a ton, so that's about 36 million bushels. And you can make at least 90 one-pound loaves of bread from a bushel, which adds up to 3.2 billion loaves of bread.

Please check my math -- it will make you sick to think of all the food that could be produced from that one source of wasted water!

It's madness that in our rush to "save" the world from ourselves, we lose the concept of reason.

I think it is truthful to admit, however, that even in this crisis of starvation, we still must not be very hungry!

I'm BAAACK!.....Sort of,,,,,,,

Sorry to be away so long but work has really kept me busy. I am happy to report to all the tax payers out there, You are getting your monies worth out of this public parasite!
The students made their deadline for the yearbook and it looks good, just wish it had a bit more writing. The WASC review of the school also went well, WE KICKED ASS! We don't know how long of an accreditation we will receive from WASC, we just know it will more than 2 years.

I need to get back to work, so I leave you with "A different Kind of Drug Problem"
(Original Author Unknown)

The other day, someone at a store in our town read that a met amphetamine lab had been found in an old farm house in the adjoining county and he asked me a rhetorical question, ”Why didn’t we have a drug problem when you and I were growing up?”

I replied: ”But I did have a drug problem when I wuz a kid growing up on the farm.” I had a drug problem when I was young: I was drug to church on Sunday morning. I was drug to church for
weddings and funerals. I was drug to family reunions and community socials no matter the weather.

I was drug by my ears when I was disrespectful to adults. I was also drug to the woodshed when I disobeyed my parents, told a lie, brought home a bad report card, did not speak with respect, spoke ill of the teacher or the preacher. Or if I didn’t put forth my best effort in everything that was asked of me. I was drug to the kitchen sink to have my mouth washed out with soap if I uttered a profane four letter word. I was drug out to pull weeds in mom’s garden and flower beds and cockleburs
out of dad’s fields.

I was drug to the homes of family, friends, and neighbors to help out some poor soul who had no one to mow the yard, repair the clothesline or chop some fire wood. And if my mother had ever known that I took a single dime as a tip for this kindness, she would have drug me back to the wood shed.

Those drugs are still in my veins; and they affect my behavior in everything I do, say, and think. They are stronger than cocaine, crack, or heroin, and if today’s children had this kind of drug problem, America might be a better place today.

My Blog Will Have to Wait.

Due to my work schedule, my blogging will have to take a backseat for a couple of weeks. My yearbook class has a major deadline approaching in two weeks, during Spring break! So anything not done before break means I'll be working instead of relaxing!
I also started a new phase in my diet, the weight room. Going very well and it feels nice to rejoin my old friend IRON and PAIN. I'm finding it hard to "go easy" and paying dearly for it!!! My muscles are so damn sore, wiping my ass even hurts. Even with sore muscles I'm enjoying the journey back to where I should be and miss being. Since starting my diet in Mid-January, I've lost 18lbs and have 76lbs to go to be at the weight of my wedding day.

StoogeBrothers Production

My boys put their first Stop-Motion video on YouTube. They came up with the name "Stoogebrothers Production" as their film name, I love it! I guess those early morning Spike T.V. stooge marathons made a lasting impression.
If you get a chance, leave them a note on You-Tube.

What exactly is a cool parent?

I think in most cases it would be one who doesn’t care what time you get home, thinks that homework is unimportant, and is willing to let the rules be more like guidelines. Sometimes it is easy to forget that these rules apply to parents too, not just the kids. As much as we like to think parents are the end alls of authority, they aren’t. When it comes to federal and state laws, even parents are not exempt.

When in high school, it was not uncommon for there to be parties with a fair supply of alcohol. In most cases, this alcohol was purchased by a “cool dad” or older sibling. With alcohol so readily available to minors, it is easy for parents to think that they are looking out for their kids’ best interest by providing a safe venue for these activities. Many parents think that if kids are going to drink anyway, it is better for them to drink in the house. To a certain extent, this may be true. It probably is safer for minors to drink in the safety of the home than out in an empty parking lot. However, making the situation safer does not make it more legal.

In June, Elisa Kelly, a mother of two, was sentenced to two years in jail after hosting a party for her sons and their underaged friends. They had asked her to buy them beer, and she agreed on the condition that they would drink in the house after everyone surrendered their car keys and promised to stay the night. While she might have had the best of intentions, she was still breaking the law. Distributing to your high school offspring is still distributing, especially when it involves 20 of their buddies. There are exceptions in some states that allow parents to provide alcohol to their own children, but they do not allow for providing alcohol to other people’s children.

Each state differs when it comes to conditions of parental consent and alcohol use, so it is best to look up your state to be sure. Specifics on each state can be found at the Alcohol Policy Information’s website. The emerging trend is to make adults responsible for any consumption of alcohol on their property, whether or not they are aware of it. This law applies not only to parents, but to any host. That means college kids hosting parties can be held responsible for any of their underage keg-standing friends.

Allowing alcohol to be consumed by minors on your watch could cost you even more than your “cool mom” label. Heavy fines and imprisonment are serious consequences for serious crimes. So when in doubt, check IDs at the door.

This will make you think!

I'm working with my boys to make stop motion animation films, we have made three so far! I'm having a blast working with them and showing them what I teach.
In the process of looking up new idea's I came across blunty3000, this guy not only knows how to do stop motion but has some great insight on censorship. I couldn't keep it to myself and had to share.

Who would you hire?

A company founder needed to choose his successor. He studied resumes and talked to references, but he asked only one question during the final interview: "How much is 2 + 2?"

Ann, the first candidate, worried that there was a trick but answered straightforwardly. "There’s only one correct answer: four."

Terry, who had an engineering background, was more creative. "Depending on whether you’re dealing with positive or negative numbers," he said, "the answer could be plus four, zero, or minus four."

Chuck, the last candidate, looked the questioner in the eye and whispered, "How much do you want it to be?"

While Ann and Terry took different approaches, they both provided an honest answer. Chuck, on the other hand, wanted the questioner to know he was willing to say or do whatever it took to succeed. Some employers may find this combination of creativity and moral flexibility highly attractive. I’d show him the door.

You see, Chuck is a manipulator and rationalizer, and they don’t make good employees. They search for excuses rather than solutions and are more concerned with looking good than doing things right.

People like Chuck who are adept at inventing justifications that sound good but aren’t true are simply clever liars. Eventually they will be found out. Remember, an employee who will lie for you will lie to you.

Without conscience, there is no credibility. Without credibility, there is no trust. And without trust, there is no future.

Showing our LOVE!

For Valentines Day this year, the boys and I decided to show our love by making Mom a gift with love and our hands. To add a bit of testosterone we used the wood burner...

Youngest son age 8 burning some love!

Daddy age OLD, carving some love!

Oldest son age 11, sanding some love!

All done! Will she like it?

Valentines Day and she loved it! Still waiting for Wife to blow some love......

Love is in the AIR !

You Can Call me LOVABLE AL !!

Shrider column: Word ban in schools? It could happen here.

Every now and then it's a good idea for us Americans to poke our heads up and have a look at how folks in other parts of the world do things.

Especially when we're about to do some of those same things.

One of them is the implementation of SB 777, the public school indoctrination act that mandates only positive portrayals and comments of homosexual, bisexual and transsexual lifestyle choices in public schools.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed the bill in October. Liberal politicos and pundits have been rolling their eyes ever since, dismissing the "hysterical hand-wringing" of conservative parents and faith groups who rightly wonder exactly what words will no longer be tolerated in schools.

Critics of the law suggest some of those words could include "mom" and "dad" or "husband" and "wife" or even have boys and girls sharing the same bathrooms.

Such concerns are utter nonsense, according to state Sen. Sheila Kuehl of Santa Monica, chief sponsor of the law. But one only has to peep across the pond to England to grasp that some of these concerns may not be so farfetched after all.

The Department for Children, Schools and Families, England's version of our Department of Education, just introduced an online cyberbullying campaign and a "new guidance" for teachers, ostensibly to "tackle homophobic bullying" in public schools, according to its Web site.

I found no mention of sharing bathrooms, but among the many helpful tips included in the guidance is the recommendation that teachers not assume their pupils have "mums and dads" and that "parents" is a more inclusive, sensitive and appropriate alternative.

The guidance also suggests teachers should not tell boys to "be a man" or accuse them of acting like a "bunch of women" or little girls, because such comments "leads to bullying of those who do not conform to fixed ideas about gender."

It's a good thing they don't have football over there -- the coaches would be tongue-tied.

When teachers talk about marriage, the guidance goes on to say, they should also talk about "civil partnerships and adoption rights for gay people." And when it comes to gay and lesbian staff members, "school culture and ethos determines how open staff are about their private lives, and you should therefore seek advice and guidance from your head (principal)."

The guidance was developed by the DCSF in partnership with the homosexual activist groups Stonewall and Educational Action Challenging Homophobia, though any accusations of a not-so-subtle gay agenda would no doubt be vigorously denied.

Ed Balls, the department's secretary of state, said in a statement launching the program, he "rejects any notion that addressing homophobic bullying is political correctness for its own sake -- even casual use of homophobic language in schools can create an atmosphere that isolates young people."

So there you have it. A vote against indoctrination, is a vote in support of fear, bullying and homophobia.

California already had laws in place to protect all our children from fear and bullying in schools, but Schwarzenegger signed the new law anyway.

No ban on the words "mom and dad?" It's already happening.

And there's no reason to believe it can't happen here.

So what do you think Blog world? Good idea ?

"Excuse me, but that’s my cart."

I was at our local Albertsons crowded as usual! with a shortage of shopping carts. A prosperous-looking fellow and his wife were pushing a cart when another man stopped them. "Excuse me," the second man said, "but that’s my cart."

The first guy looked annoyed and, instead of apologizing, protested, "But someone took my cart." His wife glared at him, and he reluctantly relinquished his ill-gotten gain.

He had ignored the age-old wisdom: "Two wrongs don’t make a right" in favor of a distorted version of the Golden Rule: "Do unto others as others have done unto you."

Then there are the folks who change their mind about buying an item and put it on the nearest shelf, rationalizing that the store hires people to put misplaced things back. Schools employ custodians to clean the halls, but does that mean it’s okay for kids to throw their candy wrappers on the floor?

Finally, there are the express-line cheaters who enter the "10 items or less" line with 14 items because they’re in a hurry or they love having a competitive edge. They count on the fact that no one will call them on such a moral misdemeanor. And if someone does, they’re ready to play lawyer: "It depends on what you call an item. These melons are part of the fruit group so I count them as one."

Being considerate, playing by the rules, and setting a good example are important, even in the grocery store.

Judged by the content of their character

The dictionary defines a hero as "a person noted for feats of courage or nobility of purpose, especially one who has risked or sacrificed his or her life." A personal hero is someone we hold in especially high esteem. For me, Dr. King is both a national and personal hero. I have no illusions that he was a flawless man. I simply have the conviction that his virtues far outweighed his faults and that this nation is a better place because of him. When I read his speeches and weigh them in the context of his time – considering his ability and courage to pursue his aggressive but nonviolent humanitarian principles despite enormous pressures from those who thought he was going too far and those who thought he wasn’t going far enough – I conclude that he was an extraordinary inspirational leader with uncommon vision and strength. Dr. King didn’t simply talk about his dreams. He went to the battle lines time and time again to fight for them. Before he was finally murdered at the age of 39, his home had been bombed. He knew he was continuously putting his life at risk to advocate social justice, human dignity, and an end to racism and bigotry. We have not yet fully reached Dr. King’s promised land where all people will be judged by the content of their character, but we’re certainly closer to it because of him.

Quotations From Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

1. A genuine leader is not a searcher for consensus but a molder of consensus.

2. I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.

3. He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it.

4. It may be true that the law cannot make a man love me, but it can keep him from lynching me, and I think that’s pretty important.

5. I have decided to stick with love. Hate is too great a burden to bear.

6. Human progress is neither automatic nor inevitable. No social advance rolls in on the wheels of inevitability. Every step requires sacrifice, suffering, and struggle – the tireless exertions and passionate concern of dedicated individuals.

7. Nonviolence is a powerful and just weapon. It cuts without wounding and ennobles the man who wields it. It is a sword that heals.

8. We will never have peace in the world until men everywhere recognize that ends are not cut off from the means because the means represent the end in process, and ultimately you cannot reach good ends through evil means because the means represent the seed and the end represents the tree.

9. An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity.

10. An individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law.

11. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.

12. If we are to go forward, we must go back and rediscover those precious values: that all reality hinges on moral foundations and that all reality has spiritual control.

13. Nonviolence means avoiding not only external physical violence but internal violence of spirit. You not only refuse to shoot a man, but you refuse to hate him.

14. Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men.

15. That old law about “an eye for an eye” leaves everybody blind. The time is always right to do the right thing.

16. Life’s most persistent and urgent question is, “What are you doing for others?”

17. The first question that the priest and the Levite asked was: "If I stop to help this man, what will happen to me?" But...the good Samaritan reversed the question: "If I do not stop to help this man, what will happen to him?"

18. Intelligence plus character – that is the goal of true education.

19. If physical death is the price I must pay to free my white brothers and sisters from a permanent death of the spirit, then nothing can be more redemptive.

20. We’ve got some difficult days ahead. But it really doesn’t matter with me now because I’ve been to the mountaintop. Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. But I’m not concerned about that now. I just want to do God’s will. And He’s allowed me to go up to the mountain, and . . . I’ve seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight that we, as people, will get to the Promised Land. And I’m happy tonight. I’m not fearing any man. (Spoken shortly before his death.)