More Vorlon Management

During our week of leadership training I was introduced to the idea of finding one's True North and in my reading of Bill George's wonderful book True North: Discover Your Authentic Leadership I have started a "deep dive" into the topics we skimmed in class. One of the techniques to find your True North is that of using a life time-line to tell your story, to view the events that shaped you and motivate you. We did a shortened version of this in class but I have been working on a longer one and have hit upon something that I recognize as a source of my desire to lead (part of my answer to the Vorlon question of "Who am I?"). My vision of leadership is to provide an environment where people are free to work, to remove obstacles to their ability to work as they best can. Using the technique I saw some things that showed me where at least in part this passion comes from and why for me leadership is a moral issue and not simply a matter for business.

When I was growing up my parents ran several very small businesses in an extremely poor part of the country (hence we were poor too, just a little different level of poor). They constantly had to battle the government with its nit-picky rules just to survive, often feeling frustrated over having to invest what was for us large amounts of our meager funds just to stay up to code even on things that really were not important to our businesses. When they would turn to their elected government officials for help they were far more often than not turned away. I can recall many times when just trying to comply kept us on the edge of going under financially and my folks would take outsides jobs from time-to-time just to stay afloat because it seemed no one was on their side who had any authority to help. Yet, through all of that, I also saw my parents go far out of their way to help those even less fortunate. My mother spent many hours filling out state and federal papers for our customers who were functionally illiterate just so they could get the assistance that was due them according to the existing laws and statutes (interesting for a bunch of Republicans, eh?). My dad would help pitch in when local millers and farmers had problems. When other people came on hard times their past-due notes to us suddenly became not so past due. These events helped shape my view of leadership, the view that people who lead are also servants, ready to help those around then.

This is part of my life story, part of my attempt to answer the Vorlon question and hopefully become a stronger leader.

Randy Pausch - Rest In Peach

Obit

"We don't beat the reaper by living longer, we beat the reaper by living well and living fully,"
- Randy Pausch

Truth (Again) From Steve Breen

Vorlon Leadership

I was honored by being selected as one of a small number employees identified as having the potential to become a true leader within my company and last week was sent to a leadership intensive held at company HQ. One of the early focal points was the concept of authentic leadership whose central idea is that of self-awareness. After a brief introduction to the concept I raised my hand and said "So you're siding with the Vorlons?" Dead silence in the room. I then explained that the main arc from a sci-fi series named Babylon 5 was a war of philosophy between (essentially) the Vorlons and the Shadows. Glossing over a lot of detail, the Vorlons believed the prime question a being should answer is "Who are you?" while the Shadows focused on that of "What do you want?" Authentic leadership has at its core (like the Vorlons) the idea that to be a leader you have to first understand yourself, your own principles, your motivations, your values, before you can become a credible leader. I happen to agree. This is not to negate the Shadow question, but without answering the Vorlon question first trying to answer the Shadow question leads to disharmony and discordant requests that will only confuse those who answer to you. In short, I spent last week learning I am a Vorlon... now if I can just glow in the dark and fly :-)

Oh Those Jibjab Boys...

Two-Way Biological Metacrisis (Dr. Who Spoilers)

*** SPOILER ALERT ***






OK, I have to say, for all the holes in them the last two episodes of Doctor Who Series 4 (The Stolen Earth and Journey's End) were great to watch... action filled, good special effects (for the BBC), nice writing, conclusion of a large story arc, and very bittersweet. I will miss Catherine Tate as companion Donna Noble. So far of all of the new companions Donna truly represented the "everyman" (or "everyperson") literary character. Donna began as a vacuous, loud, somewhat lazy, somewhat obnoxious person (why, almost American) who becomes the tether to The Doctor's high-flying antics. Donna is the companion who speaks for the viewer, who in the face of The Doctor's "we can't meddle about with time" tells The Doctor that they must do something, that just because they can't save everyone they can at least save someone (see for example the episode The Fires of Pompeii). Like many of us, Donna doesn't see herself as special, doesn't think she has anything of value to contribute, scream out at the universe because she thinks no one will listen to her. And yet, the "best temp in Chiswick", grounded in everyday human experience, shows her worth. Donna like many of us fall prey to what the existentialists warned against... defining yourself by what you do. People think of themselves as important based on what they do, their job, their standing in a community, how other perceive them. In truth that is not what makes you special. You are special because, simply, you are. You should not define yourself simply as the things you do, yet when you meet someone new isn't the first question (certainly one of the first three) "What do you do?" A better question might be to ask "Who are you?" If you are a sci-fi fan as I am you will see this as a twist on the Shadow question ("What do you want?") as opposed to the Vorlon question ("Who are you?") from Babylon 5 (there are actually four questions eventually asked. I'll save the other two for a future post).

At the finale of Journey's End Donna learns that she really is unique, that it is her "human-ness" that takes her even beyond what The Doctor is capable of... not because she was a scientist, a political leader, or even because she was "the best temp in Chiswick", but because she was human.

Donna is gone from the show and I will miss her. Let's hope that the next companion can retain some that good "everyman" character that she injected into the show.

Good job Catherine, thanks.

Is this thing on?

What is it with public figures and microphones? They think the things are off, the figures make jackass statements, then get all apologetic when they are caught. Latest case, Jesse Jackson saying just before going on air that he thinks Obama talks down to black people and (apparently) he wants to cut Obama's n*ts off. OK, if those are his honest thoughts (motivated by jealousy perhaps) so be it. What is funny is how once he finds out the remarks were captured he "apologized" (you can listen to the rambling mess here). If you go there listen closely to statements like "If I have offended" and "live mic". First off, sounds a bit like his statements were meant to be taken as they were given and if it bothers you Jesse is sorry and second what he is most sorry about is that he said them into an open microphone. Jesse also loses points in the common sense game for saying them on a Fox set. I mean, how stupid can one get?

It's sad that our so-called leaders apologize when they get caught. Hey boys and girls (I would say "men and women" but that would be elevating them too much), you know how to keep out of trouble like this? DON'T say things in private that you wouldn't say in public.

The Women In My Family...

When I saw this I thought how fortunate I was to have a mother and two grandmothers like this:

New McCain Ad - Awesome

Don't hope for a better life, vote for one. This really struck me. I keep hearing "change" and "hope" from the Obama people but still have no clear idea on what he will do differently than any typical liberal. So far for an economic plan all I hear is "spend money on more programs". Now some prudent spending may be necessary, but there is really very little that I hear that will stimulate the economy to create new jobs. In truth the only "change" I hear is that government must be bigger, must have more control of the lives of the citizens. That isn't they type of change I want.

Blog Splitting

Well, I have finally decided to start another blog on a special topic that I have come to appreciate over the years. I will continue writing on this blog talking about politics, technology, culture, etc. so don't go away. What I have decided to do is write more on wine. Yes, there are hundreds if not thousands of blogs out there talking about wine but this one will be different, it will be mine. This blog will not be written from the view point of a professional wine person or of someone to whom money is no object or to play the part of "wine snob" and try to show off what (little) I know about wine. This will truly be the work of an amateur, someone who does something because they like it.

Catching Up

It seems like it has been a while since I posted on here so this is an attempt to catch up on the personal side. First, Mr. Beau and I took a little trip up to the Santa Barbara area for some wine tasting. This was in part to just get out of town for a couple of days and in part to provide a wide selection of wines for Mr. Beau to taste and help me gauge where his wine preferences lay. Over a three-day weekend we traveled to and tasted wines at the following wonderful wineries:

Brander Winery (excellent all around offerings)

Gainey Winery (very good wines, nice chardonnays this year)

Kalyra Winery (a fun winery with some excellent lighter and dessert wines)

Beckman winery (top-notch Syrahs and and tasty Grenache... and the hottest pourers)

Bridlewood Winery (they seem to have come up a notch in their offerings since the Gallo buy-out)

Firestone winery (Good wines, nice Riesling)

Fess Parker Winery (Davy Crockett knows his wines, but watch the alcohol content on the new Syrahs)

Curtis Winery (wonderful Rhone-style wines)

Zaca Mesa Winery (a new one for me, great offering, don't pass up the Z Cuvée or the Z Three from them)

We dined at the consistently great Hitching Post and discovered another fantastic place to dine at the local casino Willows.

As usual the trip was too short but it was relaxing and wonderful to get away from "the real world" for a couple of days.

For the Fourth we spent a lot of time together taking turns taking care of each other. On the Fourth we went to the San Diego Zoo, saw a movie, took a walk along the beach talking about what the day meant to us (and how we both tend to say "Independence Day" instead of "Fourth of July" when mentioning the holiday), had dinner at a local cantina and sat on the beach while watching one of the best fireworks presentations I can remember. On Saturday we used my San Diego Art Museum membership and took our friend Sarah to "get some culture" and then spent time relaxing at The Prado having appetizers and drinks and enjoying each person's company. I can think of very few ways of passing time than just being with friends and loved ones and I hope that you had the same privilege this weekend.

Classification

Of course the questions were loaded, multipart and philosophically flawed but what do you expect from a simple online quiz? Personally, I am not much surprised at the results as in many ways I am quite difficult to pin down with simple labels.

Your Political Profile:

Overall: 75% Conservative, 25% Liberal Social Issues: 75% Conservative, 25% Liberal Personal Responsibility: 75% Conservative, 25% Liberal Fiscal Issues: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal Ethics: 25% Conservative, 75% Liberal Defense and Crime: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal

How Liberal Or Conservative Are You?

Dobson, Obama and "The Speech"

Funny how today we hear James Dobson, a man with whom on many issues I agree, attack Senator Obama on a speech he made two years ago at the liberal Christian conference Call to Renewal. In reading the text of this speech I bristled at the comments Dobson made about Senator Obama and his exegetical prowess. Now don't get me wrong, if the Senator and I were to sit down and "talk Bible" I would probably disagree with him on quite a bit, but with regards to this speech there wasn't much I had trouble with.

Obama makes some good points (which obviously are those I agree with *snicker*). In fact, most of what I disagree with is not so much his interpretation but rather his typical liberal way of thinking. I agree with much of what Obama says on the role of personal religion in politics, that the word personal means "private, individual". If you are going to thrust religion into the political spotlight and in a democratic-republic try to declare one of them as "the truth" then Obama is right to ask which one are we going to pick? In truth, if we are going to go with denominational lines, we should embrace some type of Catholicism as that is where the plurality resides. Going protestant causes a lot of headaches, for though non-Catholic Christians are the majority, Episcopal beliefs differ somewhat from Southern Baptist, UCC is in places radically different from Presbyterian. So who do you hold up the as "the standard"? And then there is the messy issue of the existence of agnostics and atheists. I had this discussion with a fellow conservative at work today when I declared I didn't want to know all of the details of a person's personal faith. I kinda like my Christianity minimal but deep and strong, not shallow and public (kinda like prayer, I prefer to pray in my closet rather than on the street corner wearing bells and covered with ashes). And as for Dobson taking Obama to task over his mixing Old Testament with New Testament, while I agree with him as a good Dispensationaist he should know there is a small sect within Christianity that wants us to go back to Old Testament laws even though we are "no longer under Law but Grace" (I would hope that if he considers himself as a spokesman for Christianity Dr. Dobson has heard of these Theonomists, a scary lot).

Now where do I think Obama went off track? Let me put your gray cells to work. Consider this:

Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons, but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God's will. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.

First off, it sounds good, but Senator Obama seems to ignore the fact that most conservatives who engage in public debate do try to "translate their concerns into universal... values... amenable to reason". The problem is he disagrees (or seems to) with many of the stronger philosophical arguments against abortion on demand (among other things, but most arguments against abortion do not introduce god into the discussion). Most liberals do this and think they are the rational ones when what they often do is take a knee-jerk reaction to anything that could have some tie back to religion (and seem to turn secularism into its own type of "religion"). In the following example he does it again. Notice how nothing is said of the individual as a possible causative agent in the situation, instead they are always at the whim of external forces around them:

After all, the problems of poverty and racism, the uninsured and the unemployed, are not simply technical problems in search of the perfect ten point plan. They are rooted in both societal indifference and individual callousness - in the imperfections of man

Why are the problems of the uninsured and the unemployed rooted in societal indifference? I hate when people talk about slippery slopes but honestly here I think we are one one... if the roots are societal then what are our options? What must change to kill this weed in the human garden? Like almost everything in his campaign, Senator Obama doesn't tell us, doesn't seem to want to do more than point fingers and if I take this last quote of his along with other things he has said what I see is that he thinks a Socialist/Marxist society would be of the greatest benefit. In this Obama seems to have missed some portions of Scripture too... about the worker deserving his wages (in context of getting what he is given for his work) and the example (and rule) given in 2 Thessalonians 3:9-11 ("... If a man will not work he shall not eat"). No one is owed anything in this life. At some point we have to take some responsibility for what we do. Perhaps the Right take this too far, but if he was honest in his speech Senator Obama should have admitted that the Left tend to veer off track in the own direction just the same.

Surprised?

In working on a project in my Leadership and Creativity class for my MBA I took a test to see if I was left brain (logical and analytical) or right brain (artistic and creative). The results:

You are a right brain dominant student!

You probably get bored during long lectures and prefer to take classes with a lot of freedom of movement and thought. You like to write stories and even tell stories about your funny experiences. You might be a little suspicious of other people's motives sometimes, but that's only because you can usually tell whenever someone is lying or when they're up to no good. You are a little on the dreamy side--or a lot. You plan books or movie plots but you don't always follow through on things you think about. You should work on that. You are fun and spontaneous. Your feelings run deep, and it shows. You have strong instincts, and you solve problems on hunches and feelings. You are artistic in some way. You can believe in things based on experience, without seeing scientific proof. You might be a finalist on Survivor some day, since you know how to read people so well, and you have great survival instincts.

A Gem In Temecula

Mr. Beau has been showing an interest in wines so last Saturday we took a little trip up the 15 to Temecula. In earlier posts you read of my trip with Elbert and some of the places we visited. On this trip I thought I would do two things: introduce Mr. Beau to more wines and find perhaps another place where I could get local wines that I would not be afraid of offering to my friends. As luck would have it I hit the jackpot on both with our first stop, Leonesse Cellars. In fact, I liked it so much I joined their wine club. After a couple of samplings together (a good representative Pinot Grigio, stainless-steel fermented so you get the melon and light green apple notes and their not overly oaked Chardonnay showing some traits of malolactic fermentation) I turned Mr. Beau loose on the whites (his palate tended towards the sweeter white Merlot and their rather good Riesling with very nice fresh fruit aromas) while I went off into red land. Their Melange de Reves is a nice medium bodied Rhone blend of Syrah, Cinsault, and Grenache with good berry tastes and just a hint of smokiness. Their 2004 Syrah is a good representation of a smooth Syrah, almost seductive with layers of black fruit, pepper, and a hit of smokiness. A big surprise was their Zinfandel which, given the current trend of overly alcoholed concotions was very smooth with good blackberry, pepper, and hints of clove with soft tannins. To top it off we had a fantastic lunch at their recently opened Block 5 restaurant. I really do recommend spending the extra time there sipping wine in the outdoor environment and enjoying their wonderfully prepared food.

So, Temecula is showing promise. I look forward to seeing how the area develops over time.

Harvey Corman R. I. P.

The passing of a great comedian always make the world seem a little less bright, a little more dull.
I was fortunate to see Harvey Corman and Tim Conway at Harrah's Rincon. It was such a pleasant evening to see funny, clean comedy for a change.





You know, I always had my suspicions about Methodists. Thanks Harvey.

More Than Just Numbers

646,392

320,518

1,076,245

103,284

211,454

2,442

44,308

What are these numbers? They represent the number of U. S. soldiers wounded or killed in

War Between The States (Civil War)

World War 1

World War 2

Korean War

Vietnam

Afghanistan (as of 31-Dec-2007)

Iraq (as of 31-Dec-2007)

How strange and how disheartening to me that the majority of people in this country will honor these men and women (and many others) by getting drunk and watching television. At 3:00pm I would hope that there is at least a slight pause in your activities to remember those who gave their all so that you have retained your right to do whatever it is you are doing today. These and many others took the following oath and lived those responsibilities:

"I, _____, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

Those of us who remain should remember what it means to affirm, to commit, to "swear" an oath. In today's world it is far too easy to be morally "squishy", to be non-commital, to not choose a side, to wait and see if something better comes along, to save our own hides at the expense of others. These men and women didn't, and we are a better country for it. I am reminded of what President Reagan said at the 40th anniversary of D-Day:

" Today the living here assembled -- officials, veterans, citizens -- are a tribute to what was achieved here 40 years ago. This land is secure. We are free. These things are worth fighting and dying for."

The Last Of My Vices

And given what current research is turning out, soon the wine will not count. Good.

Beginning Of The End For Don't Ask, Don't Tell?

OK, it's time to grow up and get rid of that incredibly stupid Clinton legacy of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT). Just how many ways could Bill Clinton say "smoked but.. didn't inhale"? That is what DADT reminds me of... you can be gay, but you can't tell anyone or "act like it" (whatever that means). How so very Catholic of him. But now we may have a glimmer of hope. This week the 9th Circuit became the first court to review the military policy of DADT since the landmark case of Lawrence v Texas. Under Lawrence, the 9th Circuit said Wednesday, "Don't Ask" must be subjected to something more stringent than the rational basis test. The upshot is that the 9th Circuit's ruling makes it far more difficult to discharge someone simply because of their sexual orientation. They now have to make a specific case for discharging that person under consideration and that no other options are possible for that particular person. If it stands, this means being gay is not enough to disqualify you from active military service. You can read the entire ruling here.

Dinner Conversation

Saturday night I had the pleasure of spending time with Mr. Beau and friends, eating and drinking the evening away. At one point the mass of cells located in my cranium aligned to make me think strange thoughts (well, not so strange for me but it would be strange for many people) about how given the different genders, sexual orientations, ages and backgrounds that it would be a good time to talk about something "deep" (after all, Smurfs seemed to dominate the first part of the dinner). Given the situation I launched into Plato's Symposium. Given that the title itself comes from the Greek and roughly meaning a "drinking party", I introduced the same topic discussed in that work, namely, what is love? I took a little different tact and asked the more concrete question "What do you look for in someone to form a relationship?". While not allowing for such responses as Aristophanes' regarding the feeling of wholeness one finds in that special person they love (one of my favorite pieces in Plato's writings), I admitted that I look for a "Dr. Phil" guy. What I meant was someone who observed many of the "life rules" set forth in one his earlier books Life Strategies. In short the idea is that you have to be realistic in that the world is the way it is. It's not fair, it's not nice, and you have to have your eyes open. You have to take responsibilities for your actions. Each of us create our own experiences. You have to be honest to yourself before you can be honest with anyone else. In short, someone who is real, grounded, honest. I don't want someone who is the way they are because they think that is what I want but they are the way they are simply because that is the way they are. In a relationship I want someone who understands that how they treat me creates their own experience of the relationship. If you ignore me, you can't sit around asking why I don't contact you, you need to start with yourself. If you don't make time for me in your life because you want me in it, then don't be surprised if I don't make time in my life for you. Get the picture? Outside of autoeroticism or narcissism, love and relationships involve more than one person. I think that starting with these traits as the foundation, traits of moral strength and looking at the world in a realistic way, you can be more assured that the person you are with is the person they say they are and that their feelings for you are real, honest, and open. I was lucky, because sitting at the other end of the table was someone who has almost all of these traits and he wants to be with me.

Not as eloquent as Plato, but I think I am more fortunate.