Monday, March 5, 2018

Confessions by Accusation OR Guilty is the Accuser

The human condition is a consistent dynamic. 
 You can try to change it, you can pervert it but it will NEVER thrive.

the Abnormals...
All those in that large basket from the left actualize their human condition when they like to deceive.  
When they distract to deceive, when they PROJECT their guilt on to you...
you have just experienced a CONFESSION by ACCUSATION

Tuesday, February 20, 2018

Broken MEN, Masculinity diminshed - now CATTY.....Back Stabbing, not withstanding.

Nature is geometric, its IS what it change it means to pervert it..

This is my story, my experience, my words.  

No research, per se, just living 67 years throughout all the turmoil of the communist left, popCULTURE revolution.

Before the human condition was redefined...I defined being "CATTY" as OK.....

A women stabbing a man in the back was sarcasm.....why you ask?

Because...MEN are stronger physically....therefore...leveling the playing field with woman...the "weaker sex"...mandated common sense to allow....women to BE catty..

Now the world is upside down....women want to be such an extreme allowing manMADEwomen...

We now have mangina "men".....

Since all of these exceptions to the rule reject their MALEness they have adopted the notion of BEING CATTY....."we're NOT men either"

It follows, then, that "men" are acting like cowards...catty, stabbing you in the back, shooting you in the back, ....

there is little HONOR when BEING (a) displaced with female "sensibilities."

Wednesday, January 31, 2018

Pareto's Principle and Marxist - Global Elitists Pareto principle The Pareto principle states that, for many events, roughly 80% of the effects come from 20% of the causes. Management consultant Joseph M. Juran suggested the principle and named it after Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto, who noted the 80/20 connection while at the University of Lausanne in 1896, as published in his first paper, "Cours d'├ęconomie politique". Essentially, Pareto showed that approximately 80% of the land in Italy was owned by 20% of the population.

The Pareto principle states that, for many events, roughly 80% of the effects come from 20% of the causes.
 Management consultant Joseph M. Juran suggested the principle and named it after Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto, who noted the 80/20 connection while at the University of Lausanne in 1896, as published in his first paper, "Cours d'├ęconomie politique". Essentially, Pareto showed that approximately 80% of the land in Italy was owned by 20% of the population.

Globalists knowing that no more than 20% of total population will be THE uber successful, 
they understand  by marketing evil they can take advantage of the over whelming number of malcontents....
that natural laws dictate.

A. low class...welfare and lacking rational behavior
B,  working class...factory workers, fast food, affordable college
C. Middle class....two families..probably have community college and a new chevy
D. upper middle class....
E. Upper class, Ivy league schools
Understanding Pareto's Principle
In 1906, Italian economist Vilfredo Pareto created a mathematical formula to describe the unequal distribution of wealth in his country. Pareto observed that twenty percent of the people owned eighty percent of the wealth. In the late 1940s, quality guru, Dr. Joseph M. Juran, attributed the 80/20 Rule to Pareto, calling it Pareto's Principle. Pareto's Principle or Pareto's Law is a useful tool to help you prioritize and manage the work in your life.

Monday, January 8, 2018

Oprah for President OR the coming of President Trump's FIELD day!

Oprah's Presidential run...entitled..."How's that going to Play?"

President Trump....will SHAME the hell out of OPRAH who has little to NO shame...will BE shamed....

How many "controversial" leftists has this media HOE....HOEd up to?

Something tells me...this will PREVENT anyone with skeletons in their closet to cringe...

Oprah and's that going to play?
Oprah and's that going to play?

Her apology to Switzerland....How's that going to play?

Monday, December 25, 2017

Slavery IN America IS a VOLUNTEER proposition...

Slavery in America is a volunteer proposition
The United STATES of America (not for) provides you the vehicle...
to be self BE an engine, NOT a drain....
to make, NOT to take....
to yell out being PROUD..
not just loud...

But, one catch...

you fuel it with your ambition squared with effort....

The ONLY other alternative is to BE Liberal....
 you stay childlike, or remain will come natural...

It takes WORK....
to appreciate NOT being a slave in American Privilege

Tuesday, November 28, 2017

Arizona Daily STAR misrepresents Conservative school board memeber Stegman

Dear supporters and correspondents,

The Star has extensively covered, through a news story and editorial, the board’s 3-2 vote on November 14 to ask the Human Resources Dept. to review the pay grade of the Director of Staff Services. This is currently the only TUSD employee, other than the superintendent, who reports solely and directly to the board.

The news story and editorial both cast the vote as retaliation for the employee’s old harassment complaint against Rachael Sedgwick. Because the complaint was amicably settled, months ago, I did not anticipate the interpretation as retaliation. That was obviously a misjudgment; providing more information, earlier, could have helped to forestall that interpretation. I suggested the salary review because of TUSD’s unexpectedly difficult budget situation and longstanding questions about the pay grade of that position. Other administrative positions face similar questions, and a superintendent-initiated review recently reduced the pay grade of a senior position within his purview. 

On Sunday the Star published a response from me, which provides more details. I have attached the published oped.

I appreciate that the Star allowed me to respond, but I was surprised to see that the editors deleted many sentences from my submission, affecting its tone and substance (without notifying me). They removed positive statements about TUSD’s potential future and its reform effort. Then, ironically, they removed criticism of the Star’s tendency to ignore the reform effort and TUSD's major policy issues. Is the newspaper, which finds plenty of space to attack the board repeatedly, so short of space or unsure of its ground that it must censor responses?

Discussing leadership's efforts to address TUSD's big policy and budget issues, whether or not the newspaper agrees with specific proposals, would do more to help the district and its students than continually focusing on personality conflicts and viewing every issue through that lens.   

Thanks for your interest in TUSD. The rest of this note contains the oped as originally submitted. The portions that the Star chose not to print are in red.

- Mark

Sarah Gassen (11/19) criticizes the TUSD board’s recent 3-2 vote to request its Human Resources Department to review the pay grade of the Director of Staff Services. This is currently the only employee (aside from the superintendent) who reports solely and directly to the board. She portrays this action as vindictive.

This ignores the context of the vote.

The new board and superintendent have recently eliminated five senior administrative positions and reduced the salaries of several others. None of those changes has touched the board office, which is apart from the superintendent and solely the board's responsibility. The board's action is a first step toward checking the expense of that office. Salary reviews are a standard procedure; a superintendent-initiated review led to one of the recent salary reductions.

 The board's action is warranted because it is unusual for a Director-level position to have only two subordinates. (The position's salary of $79,000 also exceeds the maximum on the teachers' pay scale.) I expect the board to respect the judgment of the HR department.

Gassen, while ignoring the recent administrative reductions, portrays this action as retaliatory, because the affected Director filed a complaint against one board member earlier this year. That complaint was resolved amicably months ago, long before we learned that TUSD lost about 1,100 students year-over-year and must cut millions of dollars mid-year. The board cannot expect massive cuts from the rest of the administration, while refusing to contemplate an internal review that many in TUSD consider long overdue.

 The huge budget shortfall implies much more to come. The board and superintendent agree that deep cuts should come from administrative positions rather than instruction. Scores or perhaps hundreds of positions face scrutiny, including the lower-ranked positions within the board office. The process will be painful, though everyone in leadership will work to minimize the pain and allocate it fairly.

Ignoring this larger context, Gassen spends two paragraphs extolling the work of the Director of Staff Services. Such position-by-position praise for TUSD’s administrators could fill countless pages. Yet such isolated analysis ignores the acute aggregate budget problem. The cold choice between cutting instruction and cutting administration means that even the meritorious will feel pain, sometimes through increased responsibilities.

By electing Rachael Sedgwick, a fresh candidate with a reform agenda, Tucson acknowledged TUSD’s need for big changes. The question now is not whether the new board will go too far, but whether it is willing to go far enough.

Sedgwick and I proposed in April that TUSD increase its instructional spending to 50% (still far below the 58.3% average of its six large peer Arizona districts), with further increases in subsequent years. This resolution could not gain a third vote. We have likewise failed in other attempts to trim unnecessary non-instructional spending. Yet the new board has shown courage and made progress in some areas. Dr. Trujillo's appointment has, in itself, led to some significant improvements.

I continue to believe that TUSD has tremendous unexploited potential. Tucson will judge, through next year's election, whether the new board has made enough progress toward the huge changes necessary to reach that potential.

The Star's editorial page has, meanwhile, largely ignored these reform efforts and the hard budget and policy choices confronting TUSD. Its occasional forays into TUSD affairs focus on personalities and real or exaggerated internal conflicts. Here is news: most of the community hardly cares about the personalities on the board. They care about its decisions and how those decisions help or hurt its schools.

The Star could have better used the same editorial space, weeks ago, to discuss the bond and override measures that four local districts put to the voters. Instead it remained conspicuously silent. It is apparently easier to spot one bottle among the acres of educational issues, and throw a rock at it.

Sunday, November 19, 2017

Thanksgiving -Rules for Civilized Discussion on Politics.

Not withstanding is the notion that "one" should never TALK ABOUT politics and religion.

Rules for Civilized dialogue during Thanksgiving and ALL OTHER times...

Lets start with a few premises.
1. Clarity is what you should accept...when and cannot successfully sell your point of view to one who is trying to SELL YOU, their point of view.
     a.  Once it is determined that no one is buying what the other is agree to ...#2.

2.  To agree to disagree vs being disagreeable...(requires intellectual honesty)

3.  Personal attacks on their face is taking the intellectual out and the emotional in, should NEVER BE, family gathering or NOT!

4.  BE AWARE of what worked in "yesterday's world"....where one never spoke of religion and politics....for a very good reason..Those who looks to divide PEOPLE instigate that which should be and used to be ones' private affair..

Last rule that encompasses words above and much the Ten Commandments of LOGIC

Trust me...I know what I know!