Forget Dress For Success. Dress To Express!

When you want to be at your best, dress to express your best. Dress to express your best behavior style characteristics. When you express your best behavior style characteristics, your confidence will shine through.

We are combinations of the four basic behavior styles, with most of us having one main or High behavior style modified by a Secondary High behavior style. (For a better understanding of DISC behavior styles, download S&R Keys.)

Four basic behavior styles means four basic ways of dressing. Have you noticed fashion magazines highlighting the latest trends for each behavior style? Of course not. I don’t know how fashion trends start, but being fashionable means dressing one particular way. If the fashion trend of the moment happens to match your High behavior style, then your confidence will shine right through your fashionable wardrobe.

If you are one of the three behavior styles that the fashion trends ignore, dressing according to fashion will prevent your confidence from shining through. If you dress according to fashion trends that do not give you confidence, you give any competitive advantage you could have to the people who do feel confident when dressing according fashion trends.

Think about your wardrobe. Which outfits make you feel like you can do anything? Those outfits give you confidence. Those outfits are your dress to express clothes.

For example, Hillary Clinton felt able to express herself in comfortable pantsuits. Steve Jobs felt able to express himself in black turtlenecks and jeans.

Keep in mind that situation plays a factor. As Secretary of State, Clinton did have to dress in a professional style. But her pantsuits are professional and she wears a variety of colors. Steve Jobs owned his company so he could set his own fashion. Most of us have to be more like Clinton, finding a way to express ourselves while dressing for the situation. If all you can do to express yourself is to add an accessory that lets your confidence shine through, then do that. Or do what Hillary Clinton does and wear the colors that express you.

I learned the clothing styles of the four basic behavior styles from the man who introduced me to the DISC behavior style theory. Since we are all combinations of the four basic behavior styles, we may need to express different behavior styles in different situations. This would be a second reason we need to dress to express ourselves according to the situation.

Think which behavior styles match your behavior. I am a High I over Secondary High S, so I am both outgoing in some situations and reserved in other situations. I am always looking for ways to connect with people. I know what to wear so I speak confidently in front of a group of people. I know what to wear when I want to stay on the sidelines. I know how to express myself with confidence. With understanding, you can express yourself with confidence, too.

High D — Outgoing, gets things done
Neat, functional clothing

High I — Outgoing, connects with people
Dramatic, unconventional clothing

High S — Reserved, connects with people
Traditional clothing (could be women wearing skirts and men wearing ties)

High C — Reserved, gets things done
Conservative clothing

The late personal stylist and image consultant Annie Brumbaugh of AD Wardrobe Works had tips for creating a wardrobe that could change your life. One of her tips was to buy “what you love, what makes you comfortable, what you feel expresses you.” Even Annie’s obituary includes her wardrobe advice:

“You are the star of your life. Your wardrobe is the costume department.
Are you dressed for the role you want to play?”

Dress to express who you are as the star of your life.

~~~~~

Paula M. Kramer
© 2015 to the present.
All rights reserved.

Posts on this blog alternate with posts at the link below. Posts for both blogs are published on Wednesdays as they are ready to be published. Time between posts could be weeks or months.

blog.smilessparksuccess.com

Resource Websites

speakingfromtriumph.com

smilessparksuccess.com

Business Directory

betterplanetbusiness.com

Positive Identity Directory For People With Mugshots

myrecordnow.com

Negative Stereotypes Behind Bad & Ugly Gossip: Romance

If you use negative stereotypes about people who are different from you, you are inviting everyone who hears you to use negative stereotypes about you. Below are some of the negative stereotypes other people could use about you in romantic relationships.

My collection of stereotypes comes from books, magazines, newspapers, movies, television shows, radio programs, news shows, conversations, etc.

Stereotypes and categories overlap at times. I create categories of stereotypes as I have stereotype examples to put into those categories.

The research into gossip goes back at least to the middle of the 20th century. Both men and women research gossip. Putting all of their research together, gossip is talk and writing about people — both other people and ourselves — in family, social, workplace, and public settings.

Much of the research shows that gossip is both positive and negative. I define gossip as good, bad, or ugly. Good gossip ignores or breaks stereotypes while bad and ugly gossip are based on negative stereotypes.

Negative stereotypes exist about everyone, no matter their age, gender, race, religion, profession, etc. These stereotype blog posts will help you understand the negative stereotypes about you. Each post will focus on one or two or a few characteristics.

Stereotype Updates

I add stereotypes as I come across them.

I will add the new stereotypes at the bottom of each listing, putting ~~~~~ between the older stereotypes and the new stereotypes.

~~~~~

 

Relationship Between Men & Women

war

Women in romantic relationships

should give up jobs when children are born

should not accept a job offer that could jeopardize partner’s caree

Romantic relationships are likely to end if

the woman has a high status career and stays in her career

If a woman succeeds while her partner fails it means the woman

caused her partner’s failure

could destroy the relationship

If a woman fails while her partner succeeds it means

her partner had the ability to succeed, but she didn’t

The most successful relationship is between

a man with a high level career and a woman with a low level career

Women wearing revealing clothing are

seen by men as seductive

seen by women as not nice

Women who go to a bar, have a nightcap in an apartment, dress up

interested in sex

Women who drink alcohol

sexually available

more aggressive

have few social skills

Obese people

less attractive

lower self-esteem

less likely to be dating

less erotic

deserves fat, ugly partner

Friendly women

want sex

Men who dress revealingly

less liked

not sexy

Muscular men

domineering

controlling

mean

abusive in relationships with overweight or underweight people

In abusive relationships

men do all the abusing

Women battered by men

masochists

castrators

flirts

Men battered by women are

liars

freaks

Women in violent domestic relationships

blameless

Men in violent domestic relationships

blameworthy

Analyzing women’s roles in violent relationships

sexist

Analyzing men’s roles in violent relationships

giving men an excuse

Taking into account individual pathologies, marital dynamics,
and personal circumstances, and any abuse men suffer

would only give men an excuse to get away with abuse

If a woman acts out abusive behavior toward her partner

drunk

unstable

shrewish

Obese people

less attractive

lower self-esteem

less likely to be dating

less erotic

deserves fat, ugly partner

Points to Ponder

First, the list above provides an example of hedge-your-bets stereotyping. Hedging your bets with stereotypes means using opposite stereotypes about the same group or individual. The opposite stereotypes in this list are about women abused by men. These women are all of the below:

masochists

castrators

flirts

blameless

People who use hedge-your-bets stereotyping are truth definers. They define truth according to what they believe. Maintaining their definition of truth means using stereotypes according to situations. Opposite situations require opposite stereotypes. However, some truth definers will use opposite stereotypes within the same conversation or paragraph.

Second, these stereotypes make abusive men inherently bad, even when situational factors make their abuse more likely. Domestic violence will not end as long as anyone uses these stereotypes about romantic relationships.

Third, the stereotypes ignore the women who abuse men in romantic relationships. My mother was one of those abusers. She emotionally abused my father.

~~~~~

Critical Thinking Questions

1.  What’s happening?

2.  Why is it important?

3.  What don’t I see?

4.  How do I know?

5.  Who is saying it?

6.  What else? What if?

Stereotype Thinking Questions

1.  What is threatening my beliefs?

2.  How can I make it unimportant?

3.  What can I reject?

4.  What can I laugh at?

5.  How can I attack people who threaten my beliefs?

6.  How can I deflect?

The stereotype thinking questions are mine, based on my observations of stereotype thinkers.

~~~~~

Online workshop that provides strategies to chip away stereotypes in both professional and personal relationships:

End Negative Gossip & Increase Collaboration

“After participating in the gossip power presentation, I know I now have a better plan to be more effective in understanding how gossip affects every area of a person’s personal and professional life. Using her strategies on gossip power and gossip ears I feel I will be better able to navigate these areas both inside and outside the office. Paula does a great job, using both scientific research and personal anecdotes and examples, to develop strategies for turning the power of gossip into positives for anyone attending her presentation. I left energized and excited about her message and what I learned and am definitely looking forward to learning more at her glass ceiling presentation.“
Mark Spiers
SBDC Consultant

Paula is a fabulous motivational speaker. Not only does she speak on positivity, but she conducts webinars on gossip and how to get out of the trap!! She is very knowledgeable, professional and inspirational! I love Paula’s talks and webinars! She mentors women to bring out their best and believe in themselves! Thank you for all that you! The world needs you right now!
Lauren Ebbecke

~~~~~

Paula M. Kramer
© 2015 to the present
All rights reserved.

Posts on this blog alternate with posts at the link below. Posts for both blogs are published on Wednesdays as they are ready to be published. Time between posts could be weeks or months.

blog.smilessparksuccess.com

Gossip Posters

Gossip Proverb

Good, Bad, & Ugly Gossip

Resource Websites

speakingfromtriumph.com

smilessparksuccess.com

Business Directory

betterplanetbusiness.com

Positive Identity Directory For People With Mugshots

myrecordnow.com

 

Negative Stereotypes Behind Bad & Ugly Gossip: Workplaces

If you use negative stereotypes about people who are different from you, you are inviting everyone who hears you to use negative stereotypes about you. Below are some of the negative stereotypes other people could use about you in your workplace.

My collection of stereotypes comes from books, magazines, newspapers, movies, television shows, radio programs, news shows, conversations, etc.

Stereotypes and categories overlap at times. I create categories of stereotypes as I have stereotype examples to put into those categories.

The research into gossip goes back at least to the middle of the 20th century. Both men and women research gossip. Putting all of their research together, gossip is talk and writing about people — both other people and ourselves — in family, social, workplace, and public settings.

Much of the research shows that gossip is both positive and negative. I define gossip as good, bad, or ugly. Good gossip ignores or breaks stereotypes while bad and ugly gossip are based on negative stereotypes.

Negative stereotypes exist about everyone, no matter their age, gender, race, religion, profession, etc. These stereotype blog posts will help you understand the negative stereotypes about you. Each post will focus on one or two or a few characteristics.

Stereotype Updates

I add stereotypes as I come across them.

I will add the new stereotypes at the bottom of each listing, putting ~~~~~ between the older stereotypes and the new stereotypes.

~~~~~

People who do their jobs well

hall monitor

tattle tale

troublemaker

trying to get coworkers in trouble

hormonal

rebellious

stroppy

time of the month

bad tempered

argumentative

Half White / Half Black

Performs better than Black

Businessmen

aggressive

materialistic

mercenary

Nice guys

finish last

Businesswomen

less happy with success

unattractive

aggressive

unpopular

less likely to maintain a steady relationship

egoist

dominant

hide feelings

less feminine

more masculine

less desirable

Women bosses

petty

envious

power-mad

too aggressive

Women are seen as unsuitable for management positions

when their hair is long, curly,  extreme in color, in the face,
fastened with barrettes and ribbons

when they wear extreme amounts and colors of makeup,
soft or tight sweaters, low necklines, ruffled blouses,
dangling or ostentatious jewelry,  and don’t wear a jacket

when they are attractive

Attractive women

stupid

should be trophy wife instead of career woman

interested in sex

schemers

less trustworthy

more expendable

should smile at everyone

less competent

Handsome men

ambitious

threat to management self-interest

opinionated

Feminine dressing women

low managerial skills

low interest in work

illogical

overemotional in critical decision making

financially responsible

helpless

dependent on the influences of others

sexy

flirtatious in social relations

not  assertive

low independence

low self-confidence

Successful / career black women

arrogant

hard

controlling

self-centered

uppity

Women who use the title Ms.

more motivated

more masculine

less likable

Women who use the titles Miss or Mrs.

lacking personality characteristics of a successful middle manager

Secretaries

materialistic

pregnant workers

overly emotional

often irrational

physically limited

less than committed to the job

don’t perform well

not valuable or dependable as a worker

Older workers

absent more

lower productivity levels

less flexible in their behavior

unable to learn new skills

prone to job-related accidents

Overweight workers

blameworthy

guilt-ridden

untrustworthy

incompetent

salesclerks

pushy

insensitive

insincere

fawning

Construction workers

ordinary

unremarkable

Soldiers

shell shocked soldiers are neurotically susceptible and infantile

Journalists

callous

cavalier

hound celebrities

interested in human weakness

chew up private lives for entertainment

Clothing designers

aggressive

Men who work in stereotypical female professions

taking a step down

receive preferential treatment for hiring and promotion
— a glass escalator

Male nurses

gay (which assumes that being gay is bad)

Male librarians

wimpy

asexual

Male social workers

feminine

passive

Male elementary school teachers

pedophiles

failures as men

Male managers

domineering

challenging

Disabled workers

incompetent

vulnerable

ineligible for jobs

CEOs

need to be compensated with huge sums of money to
motivate them to do their jobs well

Lawyers

untrustworthy

contemptible

fast talkers

dishonest

subverters of justice

look for loopholes

Truckers

bullies

menace on the highway

Low income workers

will not be motivated by higher salaries to do their jobs well
or work harder

will only be motivated by the threat of their jobs being moved
overseas

Giving raises, health care, and retirement benefits to workers

will increase inflation

squeeze profit margins

end economic prosperity

Giving stock options, bonuses, and multimillion dollar salaries to CEOs

will lower inflation

increase profit margins

lead to  economic prosperity

Whistleblowers

squealers

rats

stoop-pigeons

finks

loose cannons

dangers to businesses damaging to career of fellow workers

habitual liars

irresponsible

masters of deceit

committed crimes

fudged resumes

In general women workers are stereotyped as

less competent

not good as leaders

incapable of assertiveness

less knowledgeable

having less authority

being deviant for showing competence and assertiveness

being deviant for interrupting a man

too emotional to do important work

In general women’s work is stereotyped as

less important

less authoritative

less convincing

less valuable

needing to be rejected

ignored or unrecognized

inferior to men’s work

Because of the stereotypes, employed women experience

less pay

lower performance evaluations

fewer promotions

fewer opportunities

less power

fewer resources

less autonomy

less approval for efforts and more disapproval of efforts

more pressure

less accommodation

less cooperation

more interruptions

less authority

less respect

less credit for their work

When men succeed on the job, the stereotyped reasons include

the ability and talents of the men

When women succeed on the job, the stereotyped reasons include

unstable or external causes

When men fail on the job, the stereotyped reasons include

lack of effort

a difficult situation

bad luck

When women fail on the job, the stereotyped reasons include

lack of talent and ability

work-family issues

are concerns for women

research on the impact of parental work

focuses on the mother having a job or the father losing a job

Entrepreneurship

criminal activity

Points to Ponder about Men in the Workplace

Men in women’s fields enjoy a glass escalator of preferential treatment for hiring and promotion and are over represented in managerial positions. But choosing a career in a traditionally female field means you’ll face stereotypes of failure and criminality.

Points to Ponder about Women in the Workplace

If you are a woman, be careful to never use any of the negative stereotypes about women in the workplace against other women. If you do, you will be giving permission to everyone else to:

Pay you less

Lower your job performance evaluations

Pass you over for promotions

Deny you opportunities

Deny you power

Deny you resources

Deny you autonomy

Denying approval for your efforts while disapproving your
efforts more

Put you under more pressure

Be less accommodating with you

Be less cooperative with you

Interrupt you more

Deny you authority

Deny you respect

Deny you credit for your work

Points to Ponder about Pay & Benefits

Did you notice the following?

Money and benefits supposedly motivate CEOs but not the
workers that keep the company going.

Raises for CEOs supposedly benefit the economy but raises
for ordinary workers supposedly harm the economy.

Secretaries cannot be motivated by raises but are materialistic
while CEOs need big pay raises to be motivated but are not
materialistic.

Perhaps we should ask the CEOs who get the top pay and benefits to explain why programs that give money to the poor have created so many benefits that dozens of countries have those programs.

~~~~~

Critical Thinking Questions

1.  What’s happening?

2.  Why is it important?

3.  What don’t I see?

4.  How do I know?

5.  Who is saying it?

6.  What else? What if?

Stereotype Thinking Questions

1.  What is threatening my beliefs?

2.  How can I make it unimportant?

3.  What can I reject?

4.  What can I laugh at?

5.  How can I attack people who threaten my beliefs?

6.  How can I deflect?

The stereotype thinking questions are mine, based on my observations of stereotype thinkers.

~~~~~

Online workshop that provides strategies to chip away stereotypes in both professional and personal relationships:

End Negative Gossip & Increase Collaboration

“After participating in the gossip power presentation, I know I now have a better plan to be more effective in understanding how gossip affects every area of a person’s personal and professional life. Using her strategies on gossip power and gossip ears I feel I will be better able to navigate these areas both inside and outside the office. Paula does a great job, using both scientific research and personal anecdotes and examples, to develop strategies for turning the power of gossip into positives for anyone attending her presentation. I left energized and excited about her message and what I learned and am definitely looking forward to learning more at her glass ceiling presentation.“
Mark Spiers
SBDC Consultant

Paula is a fabulous motivational speaker. Not only does she speak on positivity, but she conducts webinars on gossip and how to get out of the trap!! She is very knowledgeable, professional and inspirational! I love Paula’s talks and webinars! She mentors women to bring out their best and believe in themselves! Thank you for all that you! The world needs you right now!
Lauren Ebbecke

~~~~~

Paula M. Kramer
© 2015 to the present
All rights reserved.

Posts on this blog alternate with posts at the link below. Posts for both blogs are published on Wednesdays as they are ready to be published. Time between posts could be weeks or months.

blog.smilessparksuccess.com

Gossip Posters

Gossip Proverb

Good, Bad, & Ugly Gossip

Resource Websites

speakingfromtriumph.com

smilessparksuccess.com

Business Directory

betterplanetbusiness.com

Positive Identity Directory For People With Mugshots

myrecordnow.com

Want The Satisfaction Of Being A David (Or Davida) To A Goliath?

You are I are the Davids and Davidas. The U.S. Postal Service is the Goliath. David took Goliath down with a sling and a stone. I don’t want to take down the U.S. Postal Service, but I do want stop the postal service from 5 cent stamp increases. I cannot do that alone. We could do it together.

I‘ve had snail mail problems since 1988, for as long as I’ve lived in my house. I live in a village that usually has less than 200 residents. Therefore, the postmaster for any year knows everyone in the village.

As the problems continued I reduced my use of snail mail to a bare minimum. Since the postal service decided to raise the cost of stamps by 5 cents in a single increase, it seems likely that other people are making the same choice to use the U.S. Postal Service less. I decided to conduct polls on Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter to discover how widespread the problems are. I hope to get responses from 1000 Davids and Davidas. With 1000 Davids and Davidas making similar complaints, maybe we can make enough noise to get the Postmaster General to pay attention. Maybe we can get the U.S. Postal Service to fix its problems instead of raising its prices.

This blog post provides detailed explanations for all of the problems I list in #PaulaPolls1. I plan more #PaulaPolls on other topics.

Many postal workers do their jobs well. They are productive postal workers. Others are pussyfooting postal workers. They pussyfoot around actually doing the work required by their jobs. Another group is probably a mixture of productive and pussyfooting. Postal workers undoubtedly pussyfoot around doing their jobs for a variety of reasons. Perhaps they don’t like the work. Perhaps they are lazy. Perhaps they feel overwhelmed by required procedures. I’m certain that the problems come from both postal service procedures and pussyfooting postal workers.

Which Of These Problems Have You Had?

#1
Slower General Delivery

It now takes three days for first class mail to travel between my village and another village three miles away. The mail travels the equivalent of one mile per day.

#2
Months Late Delivery

A friend who lived 18 miles away mailed a thank you card to me in June. I received it in September.

#3
Take A Detour Delivery

I ordered plants. The plants went from southeastern Wisconsin to the Minneapolis area of Minnesota before arriving at my post office in central Wisconsin. Most of the plants were dead on arrival.

#4
Disappearing Incoming Mail

I took an advertising class in college. For one advertising project, I contacted a cereal company and asked for information I could use in my project. When the material did not arrive, I called and talked to the same woman. She said she had sent out the 9×12 brown envelope soon after I called. She sent me another 9×12 brown envelope full of information. When that envelope didn’t arrive either, I asked her to send the information to a friend in a nearby small city. That envelope arrived. I believe the woman did send me all three envelopes because my class project was free advertising for her company’s cereal.

Other mail has disappeared from the village three miles away and from the small city 15 miles away. I know the mail disappeared because it was mail we expected but didn’t get until we had it sent again. Three notices in a row from my bank in the three-miles-away village disappeared.

#5
Disappearing Outgoing Mail

I started paying most bills online after two checks to my utility company disappeared in consecutive months.

I’ve also started calling local businesses when I mail them a check, asking them to let me know when my check arrives. One business told me that other people make the same request.

#6
Mixed Up Incoming Mail

At times, people in my village receive mail meant for village neighbors. We leave mixed up mail on a table for the addressees to find.

#7
Revolving Door Wrong Mail

I twice received mail from different counties that kept revolving back to my P.O. box. The only similarity between my address and the other two addresses was the P.O. box number. The names of the addressees were different (one addressee was a business). The towns were different. The zip codes were different. But in both cases the mail revolved back to my box twice more after I put the mail in the outgoing box. I had to write notes on the envelopes to get the mail to stop revolving back to my box.

#8
Hungry Postal Machines

The last time I had a parking ticket was decades ago. I mailed a check to the police department within the prescribed time. I was unhappy to receive a second notice about the ticket with an added fine. I took my checkbook to the police department to show that I had written a check within the prescribed time. The woman at the desk said, “The machine probably ate it.” Her statement means she had previous experiences with postal machines eating mail. How hungry are the postal machines? We’ll never know.

#9
Partial Procedure Postal Workers

I placed an order that meant parcel post delivery. When my parcel should have arrived, nothing was in my post office box indicating a parcel had arrived. The company insisted the parcel had been delivered. The postal worker insisted she had not received the parcel. After two weeks of my asking about my parcel, the postal worker decided to look through the bigger post office boxes where she put parcels. She found my parcel. My parcel had arrived on time. She had put the parcel in a bigger box, but then failed to place a key to that box in my post office box.

#10
Picky Perfection Postal Workers

For several years, we had a postmaster who refused to deliver mail when the address was not absolutely perfect. One big business owner in the village got into trouble with the state because the postmaster refused to deliver something about taxes. The part time post office employee working with this picky perfection postmaster told me every village resident would be horrified to learn what the picky perfection postmaster did with our mail.

When I was on a jury duty list, I called the county clerk in charge to say that the picky perfection postmaster did not deliver all of our mail and would she please call me when she sent me mail. She told me about a picky perfection postmaster in another village who also refused to deliver mail that was not addressed perfectly. One of the potential jurors lived across the street from that other post office, but the picky perfection postmaster refused to deliver the mail because some little detail in the address was wrong.

#11
Pity Party Postal Workers

Even on one job I had to cope with poor mail service. Decades ago, I did customer service for a company that did its biggest business during the Christmas season. One customer called to complain that her post office had decided to return all parcel post boxes to the companies instead of delivering them to their customers. Yes, you read that correctly. The post office decided to return all parcel post packages to the companies instead of delivering them to customers for Christmas. Apparently, the idea of doing the work of their jobs was just too much for those postal workers. How many Chrismas parties and Christmas mornings did that post office pity party ruin?

#12
Twin Post Office Pity Parties?

Many years ago, I was standing in line at the post office in the village three miles away when I heard an incredible complaint. A woman had delivered postcard invitations for a big wedding anniversary party to that village post office. Half of the postcards never arrived. The half that did arrive had the postmark from the small city 15 miles away. The only way for those postcards to get from the village post office to the small city post office was for a village postal worker to deliver the postcards to the small city post office. Pity party! Did the small city postal workers have a twin pity party and decide to toss half of the postcards? Did twin post office pity parties ruin a big wedding anniversary party?

Models For Postal Delivery From
Iceland & New Zealand

Contrast pussyfooting U.S. postal workers with productive postal workers in Iceland and New Zealand.

A letter sent to a post office in Iceland included a map and these explanations:

Country: Iceland. City: Búðardalur. Name: A horse farm with
an Icelandic/Danish couple and three kids and a lot of sheep!
The Danish woman works in a supermarket in Búðardalur.

Productive Icelandic postal workers successfully delivered the letter to the correct address.

“Letter Sent to Iceland with Hand-Drawn Map Instead of Address Actually Arrives at Destination”
Cammie Finch
My Modern Met
September 1, 2016

~~~~~

A letter sent to a post office in New Zealand had this address:

2 Kay + Phillip
On a farm near
situated up a long
drive with cows,
opposite cust
pub or there abouts

The productive New Zealand postal workers put the address on Facebook and found the recipients.

“How a package to ‘a farm situated up a long drive with cows’ got to its destination”
CBC Radio
March 20, 2018

The U.S. Postal Service Could Get It Right

I have a hint for the U.S. Postal Service. They should use the technique the late Ken Hendricks (ABC Supply) used to become a billionaire. When Hendricks considered buying a business, he spent as little time as possible listening to the executives. This was Hendricks advice:

“Walk in the back room and talk to the warehouse guy or the forklift operator and say, ‘If you were running this business, what would you do differently?” says Hendricks. “I guarantee if you fixed what they tell you, 95 percent of the time that would be a successful business. These guys hit it on the head all the time. But management never asks them.”

Is the Postmaster General going to be as smart as billionaire Ken Hendricks?

“How To Buy A Business”
Inc Magazine Staff
December 1, 2006

Your Turn To Speak Up

Please join me as Davids and Davidas in holding the U.S. Postal Service accountable for both its problems and its prices. Go to one of the links below to give your responses to #PaulaPolls1. I will keep reposting #PaulaPolls1 on Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter until I get a combined 1000 David and Davida responses. Once we get the U.S. Postal Service listening to us, you could have the satisfaction of telling people you know that you were a David or Davida who helped change the procedures of a Goliath.

Thank you.

Facebook

LinkedIn

~~~~~

Paula M. Kramer
© 2015 to the present.
All rights reserved.

Posts on this blog alternate with posts at the link below. Posts for both blogs are published on Wednesdays as they are ready to be published. Time between posts could be weeks or months.

blog.smilessparksuccess.com

Resource Websites

speakingfromtriumph.com

smilessparksuccess.com

Business Directory

betterplanetbusiness.com

Positive Identity Directory For People With Mugshots

myrecordnow.com

Negative Stereotypes Behind Bad & Ugly Gossip: People In General

Apologies for the formatting.
WordPress is not letting me fix the spacing.
I’ll try to fix it every once in a while.

The research into gossip goes back at least to the middle of the 20th century. Both men and women research gossip. Putting all of their research together, gossip is talk and writing about people — both other people and ourselves — in family, social, workplace, and public settings.

Much of the research shows that gossip is both positive and negative. I define gossip as good, bad, or ugly. Good gossip ignores or breaks stereotypes while bad and ugly gossip are based on negative stereotypes.

Negative stereotypes exist about everyone, no matter their age, gender, race, religion, profession, etc. These stereotype blog posts will help you understand the negative stereotypes about you. Each post will focus on one or two or a few characteristics.

My collection of stereotypes comes from books, magazines, newspapers, movies, television shows, radio programs, news shows, conversations, etc.

Stereotypes and categories overlap at times. I create categories of stereotypes as I have stereotype examples to put into those categories.

Stereotype Updates

I add stereotypes as I come across them.

I will add the new stereotypes at the bottom of each listing, putting ~~~~~ between the older stereotypes and the new stereotypes.

~~~~~

Beautiful People

adulterous
vain
egotistical
greedy
status-seeking
arrogant
aloof
self-indulgent
rotten lovers
too impatient to work at relationships

Physically Unattractive People

political radicals (which stereotypes political radicals negatively)
homosexual (which stereotypes homosexuals negatively)

Geeks (Nerds)

real pains
know-it-alls
uninteresting
social outcasts

Blondes

dumb
less trustworthy
can’t be taken seriously

Brunettes

mousy
boring
less attractive

Redheads

mean
wild
hot-tempered
brash

Short People

arrogant
defensive
perverts

Heavy People

smelly
dirty
lazy
failures
unable to control self
unable to maintain personal health
take up too much space

Heavy Men

lazy
low self-esteem
lack will power
few friends
unattractive
sloppy
dirty
slow
unhealthy

Heavy Women

few friends
lazy
slow
unhealthy
unattractive
low self-esteem
lack will power
must answer intrusive questions
gluttons
undisciplined
lack self-control

Thin Men

few friends

Thin Women

vain
flirtatious
egotistical
have an eating disorder

Women In Jane Austen’s Time

laughing is a sign of sexual availability
showing teeth is a sign of being garrulous, plebeian, vulgar

Nice Men / Sensitive Men

less competent
less hirable
lower performer
less likable
weaker
not assertive
not independent

Men Not Interested In Sports

wimp
gay (which stereotypes being gay as bad)
Body builders
flakes
Cross Dressing Men
sickos

LGBTQ+ People

promiscuous
nonreligious
godless
lesbians are masculine
lesbians hate men
gay men are feminine and flamboyant
gay men are sexual predators or pedophiles
transgender women are drag queens
mentally ill
determined to ‘convert’ others

Infants

extensions of women

Crack Babies

hopeless
lost generation
permanently damaged

Children With Mental illness

 

in a phase they will grow out of
should be able to control themselves

Child Nerds
friendless
book-smart sissies
suck up to authority figures

Single Parent Families

broken

Single Mothers

promiscuous
immoral
leeches
not trustworthy
selfish
dangerous to married women
strippers
raise children who resent and hate them
have questionable income
gave up on marriage too easily
desperate for a man
milking the system

Single Fathers

deadbeat
clueless about cooking, housekeeping, laundry
can’t handle pressure
not nurturing
resentful
no good with infants or toddlers
emotionally inexpressive
ineffective at jobs
harming their children
ignorant

Women seeking abortion

kissing cousin relationships
ignorant about sex
childless

Children From Single Parent Families

end up in trouble
low self-esteem
behavior problems

Birth Mothers

bitch
irresponsible
abandoned her own flesh and blood
sinner
whore
slut
prostitute
dopehead
weak
poor
unhealthy
uneducated
AIDs carrier
slick manipulator

Birth Fathers

drops out of sight
weak
poor
unhealthy
uneducated
drug user
alcoholic
AIDs carrier
slick manipulator

Child Free Women
selfish
superficial
poor decision makers

Adopted Children

screwed up
troubled
delinquet
burden to the family
yearn to find birth parents

Teenagers

juvenile delinquents
brainless
bubble gum chewers
hormone laden slobs
wild
rude
irresponsible
tacky

Young People Who Don’t Vote
lazy
apathetic
ignorant
disengaged
Male College Students
childish
irresponsible
stupid
Sororities
superficial
ridiculous
Middle-Age People
lack motivation
Baby Boomers
whiny
spoiled brats

Elderly People

incompetent
sad
lonely
ill-tempered
demanding
selfish
stubborn
nosy
slow moving
snobbish
prejudiced
hypochondriac
bored
miserly
incapable of making effective decisions
too old for business success
deserve to die

An Unhealthy Old Age Is…

a punishment for living “wrong”

People Who Recommend Kindness

needy
insecure
People Living With Disabilities
less than human
unhappy
need to be fixed
menacing
full of rage
hostile
immoral
choose to be disabled
fakers
liars
lazy
slobs
have a chip on their shoulder
obstinate for not doing what abled people think they should be able to do
~~~~~
not trying hard enough to live a normal life
choose to be poor
~~~~~
couldn’t possibly feel more pain than normal people feel

Government Officials

tell lies
cover up the truth
engage in conspiracies to deprive citizens of their  liberty

People Not Part Of Organized Religions, Conspicuous Consumption, Car Culture

weird
mentally ill

People Who Report Being Abducted By Aliens

masochists
inclined to fantasize
have a propensity to daydream
enthralled by novels

Terrorists

represent everyone in their ethnic group or religion
feel racism and hatred without reason

Cheerleaders

gum-chewing ditzy snobs
airheads
gossipy
mean

Homeless People

want to be homeless
single men
drunks
worthless
thieves

Unemployed People

lazy
freeloaders

Truth Tellers

naive
suckers
fools

People Dependent An Others

immature
weak
shameful
uniquely feminine

Newspaper Readers, Television News Audience, & Radio News Audience

unintelligent
uninformed
morons
uninterested in good news
uninterested in hard facts
want soft news, uninterested in world news
only interested in crime

Television Audience To Advertisers

lying
cynical
mindless boobs

Prison Inmates

liars about health problems

People With Tourette Syndrome
behavioral problem
possessed by the devil
Hare Krishnas
greasy
scarred
Third World
weasel-looking aliens
skanks
creeps
rejects
deluded scammers
Jews
primitive-minded
Atheists
immoral
stupid
Western Societies
decadent
materialist
exploitative
People Living In Slums
criminals
drug addicts
delinquents
Pro-life advocates
hillbillies
ignorant extremist
People who want to debate the tactics of the war on terror
on the fringe of society
Democratic Voters
ignorant
bad Christians
bad Jews
bad Muslims

Points to Ponder

Pay attention to shared stereotypes, contrasting stereotypes, and opposite stereotypes. You can see who you share stereotypes with and when people see opposite negatives in you. Many stereotypes can be similar, but I highlight only shared exact word stereotypes here.

Shared Stereotypes #1

Heavy Men
Heavy Women
Thin Men

few friends

Contrasting Stereotypes

Thin Women

flirtatious

Shared Stereotypes #2

Child Free Women
Single Mothers

Elderly People

selfish

Shared Stereotypes #3

Beautiful People
Short People

arrogant

Shared Stereotypes #4

Beautiful People
Thin Women

egotistical

Shared Stereotypes #5

Heavy People
Heavy Men
Heavy Women
Unemployed People
People Living With Disabilities

lazy

Share Stereotype #6

Single Mothers
People Living With Disabilities
Atheists

immoral

Opposite Stereotypes

People Living With Disabilities

need to be fixed
fakers

Because medical professionals misdiagnosed my childhood spinal injury for 33 years, I’ve lived with the stereotypes about people with disabilities. No one alive has any guarantee that they will never become disabled. How many elderly people confined to wheelchairs planned to be confined to wheelchairs at the end of their lives? None, of course.

You face the same stereotypes if you become disabled. Break stereotypes about disabled people to protect yourself in the future.

 

Strategies For Shattering Stereotypes

Choose a strategy based on the level of danger in the situation. Talk to the target in front of the harasser only if the situation is safe for conversation. If the situation is dangerous, create some kind of distraction. I now carry a personal alarm with me for creating distractions quickly.

Talking to the target instead of the harasser allows the harasser to just walk away. If harassing situations come up regularly in a workplace or other common location, you could also use these strategies at calm times to increase understanding about the consequences of using stereotypes. Just tell stories to your coworkers/colleagues as opportunities come up.

Adapt the strategies as you need to. Write about other successful strategies in the comments section.

Surprise The Harasser(s)

If you can possibly do so, give the harasser(s) a moment of dignity. People harassing others will not expect positive statements. The positive statements might be enough to stop them in that situation. One example:

“It’s obvious —– is having a bad day. Let’s give him/her/them time to
calm down and ease the strain on his/her/their heart(s). Let’s hope
tomorrow will be better.”

This statement tells the harasser(s) that they are under stress and deserve to feel better. By expressing concern for their health, you are letting them know you consider them valuable. They may not feel much value in their daily lives.

Visit the website below for resources on opening doors that give moments of dignity. Read People Success Example #5 on the People Success page. You’ll learn how I turned a bad relationship around using moments of dignity, and reaped an unexpected reward.

smilessparksuccess.com

Make Yourself An Example

This works best if you are not whatever is the reason for the harassment, not Muslim, not black, not Jewish, not Hispanic, not whatever. If you can identify any commonality between yourself and the target(s), talk about them to the target.

“Excuse me, but I noticed that we share a taste for … How would you
recommend cooking it?”

Your commonality will at least partially shatter the stereotype.

Provide Information About Stereotypes

If you can connect to the Internet, bring up the appropriate stereotype blog post and tell the target what the stereotypes are about you and why they are wrong. You could start with:

“Did you know there are stereotypes about everyone? The stereotypes
about me are …, but they don’t fit me because …”

You would be shattering a stereotype in front of the harasser.

Talk About The Consequences Of Creating Failure

Visit this Success & Failure Choices page to read about various types of success and failure. If you can think of an example from your own life, tell that story. Otherwise, use one from the blog below.

You could use this example from “Standout Success For 19 Year Old Joey Prusak”:

“A Dairy Queen customer saw manager Joey Prusak stand up for a
visually impaired customer. The bystander customer sent an email
to Dairy Queen. The story ended up on Facebook. The owner of Dairy
Queen, Warren Buffet, called Joey to thank him. Queen Latifah invited
Joey to appear on her show and gave him money for his college fund.
NASCAR driver Kevin Harvick invited Joey to a race. Good things can
happen to people who take care of other people.”

blog.smilessparksuccess.com

Talk About The Benefits Of Living The Golden Rule

Remind the harasser of the Golden Rule:

“Since the Golden Rule is important to me, I’m going to treat you
the way I want to be treated. I also know that being kind to others
is good for my health.”

My favorite version of the Golden Rule comes from Buddhism, “Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.” See these Golden_Rule statements in 21 religions, 5 philosophies, and 2 moral/ethical systems to pick your favorite version.

Read up on the health benefits of kindness for details to talk about.

And again, write about other successful strategies in the comments.

~~~~~

Critical Thinking Questions

1.  What’s happening?

2.  Why is it important?

3.  What don’t I see?

4.  How do I know?

5.  Who is saying it?

6.  What else? What if?

Stereotype Thinking Questions

1.  What is threatening my beliefs?

2.  How can I make it unimportant?

3.  What can I reject?

4.  What can I laugh at?

5.  How can I attack people who threaten my beliefs?

6.  How can I deflect?

The stereotype thinking questions are mine, based on my observations of stereotype thinkers.

~~~~~

Online workshop that provides strategies to chip away stereotypes in both personal and professional relationships:

End Negative Gossip & Increase Collaboration

“After participating in the gossip power presentation, I know I now have a better plan to be more effective in understanding how gossip affects every area of a person’s personal and professional life. Using her strategies on gossip power and gossip ears I feel I will be better able to navigate these areas both inside and outside the office. Paula does a great job, using both scientific research and personal anecdotes and examples, to develop strategies for turning the power of gossip into positives for anyone attending her presentation. I left energized and excited about her message and what I learned and am definitely looking forward to learning more at her glass ceiling presentation.“
Mark Spiers
SBDC Consultant

Paula is a fabulous motivational speaker. Not only does she speak on positivity, but she conducts webinars on gossip and how to get out of the trap!! She is very knowledgeable, professional and inspirational! I love Paula’s talks and webinars! She mentors women to bring out their best and believe in themselves! Thank you for all that you! The world needs you right now!
Lauren Ebbecke

~~~~~

Paula M. Kramer
© 2015 to the present
All rights reserved.

Posts on this blog alternate with posts at the link below. Posts for both blogs are published on Wednesdays as they are ready to be published. Time between posts could be weeks or months.

blog.smilessparksuccess.com

Gossip Posters

Gossip Proverb

Good, Bad, & Ugly Gossip

Resource Websites

speakingfromtriumph.com

smilessparksuccess.com

Business Directory

betterplanetbusiness.com

Positive Identity Directory For People With Mugshots

myrecordnow.com

 

Torture Or Not Torture: Proof In Experience

Do an Internet search with the words “not torture” and you will find several claims that the CIA’s “enhanced interrogation” techniques do not constitute torture.

I will believe that those techniques are not torture when all the people using the phrase “not torture” give me proof in experience. I want them to prove from their own experience that those techniques are not torture. To do this, they have to experience the techniques themselves and report back to me that they did not feel tortured.

I did not read or listen to any details about the techniques because just knowing about them sickens me. However, I do know some details about the situation.

The standards for proof in experience in this situation mean that all supporters of the “not torture” enhanced interrogations must agree to be…

…taken from their own lives without notice.

…taken to a destination away from their lives.

…prevented from seeing or contacting anyone in their lives.

…softened up for interrogation sessions.

…interrogated in anyway the interrogators choose to
interrogate them for the length of time interrogators
choose.

…kept away from their lives and families for an indefinite
period of time, subject to enhanced interrogation
techniques at any time.

If supporters of the “not torture” enhanced interrogation techniques come back from these experiences and tell me they were not tortured, then I will have to believe them.

I do already have proof in experience from the other side of the situation at Abu Ghraib. Eric Fair is an Army veteran who was a contract interrogator in Iraq at Abu Ghraib in 2004. These are Eric Fair’s words about himself:

“I was an interrogator at Abu Ghraib. I tortured.”

These are Eric Fair’s words about the Senate’s torture report:

“I assure you there is more; much remains redacted.”

Re·dact

To delete or remove (private or sensitive information)
from a document in preparation for publication

The British Psychological Society reported on a study showing that  “regular people” supported torture “…on a desire for payback, not intelligence.”

Support for torture depends on whether people “are told that torture is likely to be ineffective”, of if they are told the suspect is a terrorist, or if they are told that the suspect had actually planted a bomb.

The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence found that:

Not once between late 2001 and early 2009 did the CIA’s use
of torture result in intelligence that helped to foil a terrorist
plot. All of the most useful information came from standard,
non-violent interrogation approaches. Furthermore, tortured
detainees frequently made up things in an attempt to get
their torturers to stop.

Even support for a “ticking time bomb scenario”

depends on a ‘highly idealised’ and ‘highly unrealistic’ set of
assumptions being met. Moreover, their finding that people’s
support for torture is influenced by the identity and the
culpability of the suspect shows that the practice is often
endorsed as a form of punishment, not as a way to extract
information.

The Middle East Research and Information Project found that refusing to use torture creates more security.

…torture is ineffective in enhancing security; on the contrary,
states that do not torture (or extra-judicially execute)
prisoners experience substantially less terrorism, and their
counter-terrorism efforts are more effective.

If you want to feel secure from terrorism, then you should insist you’re your government uses effective interrogation techniques. It turns out that the most effective interrogation techniques are humane.

Disclosure was 14 times more likely to occur early in an
interrogation when a rapport-building approach was used.
Confessions were four times more likely when interrogators
struck a neutral and respectful stance. Rates of detainee
disclosure were also higher when they were interrogated in
comfortable physical settings.

If you want to inflict pain on other people, come right out and say it. Just don’t expect the person in pain to give you the information you need to feel secure. When you approve torture, you make it easier for others to harm you because you create less security for yourself.

Your choice is payback or security:

Choosing payback will bring you less security.

Choosing security will bring you less terrorism.

Basing your choice on your feelings suggests unresolved feelings that need to be addressed. Exposing yourself to more terrorism might not be the best way to satisfy the needs behind those feelings.

I’m waiting for the “not torture” volunteers to give me proof in experience.

“American Torture: The Price Paid, the Lessons Learned”
Lisa Hajjar
Middle East Research and Information Project
Summer 2009, Volume 39

“Committee Study of the Central Intelligence Agency’s Detention and Interrogation Program”
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
Approved December 13, 2012
Updated for Release April 3, 2014
Declassification Revisions December 3, 2014

“The Humane Interrogation Technique That Works Much Better Than Torture”
Olga Khazan
The Atlantic
December 14, 2014

“I Can’t Be Forgiven for Abu Ghraib”
Eric Fair
The New York Times
December 9, 2014

“Interviewing High Value Detainees: Securing Cooperation and Disclosures”
Jane Goodman-Delahunty, Natalie Martschuk, and Mandeep K. Dhami
Applied Cognitive Psychology
October 17, 2014

“People’s support for torture in “ticking time bomb scenarios” is influenced by their desire for retribution”
Research Digest
British Psychological Society

“Rapport-building interrogation is more effective than torture”
Research Digest
British Psychological Society

“The Ticking Time Bomb: When the Use of Torture Is and Is Not Endorsed”
Joseph Spino and Denise Dellarosa CumminsReview of Philosophy and Psychology
August 16, 2014

~~~~~

Paula M. Kramer
© 2015 to the present.
All rights reserved.

Posts on this blog alternate with posts at the link below. Posts for both blogs are published on Wednesdays as they are ready to be published. Time between posts could be weeks or months.

blog.smilessparksuccess.com

Resource Websites

speakingfromtriumph.com

smilessparksuccess.com

Business Directory

betterplanetbusiness.com

Positive Identity Directory For People With Mugshots

myrecordnow.com

6 Nitty Gritty Questions To Ask Sarah Palin

The current dissatisfaction with political professionals (politicians, pundits, speechmakers, etc.) stems in part from the failure of ordinary citizens to set standards of effectiveness for them. Ordinary citizens live the nitty gritty details of life. One standard we could set is the expectation that political professionals talk about nitty gritty details and answer 6 questions about nitty gritty details. Former Alaskan Governor, former Republican vice presidential candidate, and former Fox News Channel contributor Sarah Palin is so bad at talking about nitty gritty details that she is my example for setting a standard of effectiveness for political professionals.

As Republican vice presidential candidate in 2008, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin did an interview with Katie Couric. During that campaign, the worst financial crisis in decades had disrupted world financial markets and the U.S. government had decided to spend $700 billion bailing out the financial system. Couric asked:

“Why isn’t it better, Governor Palin, to spend $700 billion helping middle-class families struggling with health care, housing, gas and
groceries? … Instead of helping these big financial institutions that
played a role in creating this mess?”

In 151 words, Palin talked about:

“taxpayers”

“healthcare reform” (twice)

“job creation” (twice, including “umbrella of job creating”)

“shoring up our economy”

“reducing taxes”

“reining in spending”

“tax reductions”

“tax relief”

“trade as opportunity”

“trade sector”

The words “middle-class families” never came out of Palin’s mouth. Political professionals would be effective if they answered the 6 nitty gritty questions of any issue: who, what, where, when, how, and why.

An effective answer from Palin would have focused on

Who

Middle class families and big financial institutions

What

What the bailout money was for

When

The schedule for releasing the money and the
estimated time for financial recovery

Where

“Main Street” versus “Wall Street”

How

How the government could ensure “Wall Street”
spent the money on helping “Main Street” instead
of on self-congratulating celebration trips, as AIG
and Wells Fargo wanted to.

Why

The reasoning behind and/or past examples of
bailing out “Wall Street” rather than “Main Street”
or behind “Wall Street only” rather than “Main
Street, too”

Vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin came nowhere near the nitty gritty details. If citizens of the United States insisted that political professionals include the nitty gritty who, what, when, where, how, and why when they talk about issues, interviewers like Couric might start using the same standards for effectiveness in their interviews.

It is always possible that political professionals will not know part of an answer. In that case, they should say they will find out the information and post it on their website with their answers to all of the other nitty gritty questions so their response is complete.

Every topic a political professional addresses would have its own 6 nitty gritty questions. Below are two more topics Palin has spoken about.

Sarah Palin compared paying off the federal debt to slavery. Some nitty gritty questions for Palin on this issue include:

Who

Who was the first president to borrow money from
a foreign country?

What

What activities will American taxpayer slaves be
prevented from doing, since slave owners take
freedom of choice away from slaves?

When

When will American taxpayer slaves be forcibly
taken from their families?

Where

Where will American taxpayer slaves be put up
for sale?

(Who will taxpayer slaves be sold to?)

How

How do you decide which debts mean slavery
and which debts do not? Do homeowners
become slaves when mortgage holders sell
mortgage notes to a new “master that is not
of your choosing”?

Why

Why didn’t you complain about taxpayers
becoming slaves in 2010 when House
Republicans chose “Prince of Pork” Hal Rogers
to Chair the House Appropriations Committee?

Sarah Palin visited Wausau, Wisconsin in late 2013 because of a controversy over religious music during school Christmas concerts. Some nitty gritty questions for Palin on this issue include:

Who

Who thinks the war on Christmas is an
exaggeration?

What

What are your proposals for protecting the “heart”
of all religious holidays celebrated by nonChristian
Americans?

When

When will you talk about the effective way Wausau
community members came together to discuss the
controversy and create a solution before you arrived
in Wausau?

Where

Where is your anger when people “diminish” the
“true meaning” of religious holidays celebrated by
nonChristian Americans?

How

How will you protect the religious celebrations of
nonChristian Americans from Scrooges?

Why

Why did you think Wausau residents would need
to buy your book to follow your steps
“to combat the Scrooges” when the Wausau
community had already settled  the issue?

If people keep asking political professionals like Sarah Palin the 6 nitty gritty questions, they will have to start responding with at least some nitty gritty answers.

“Palin: ’What The Bailout Does Is Help Those Who Are Concerned About Health Care Reform’”
Ryan Powers
Think Progress
September 25, 2008

“400 line up for Sarah Palin book promotion at Rib Mountain”
Lydia Mulvany
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
November 14, 2013

“Bailed-Out Bank Nixes Lavish Vegas Junket”
CBSNEWS
February 3, 2009

“Conservatives Peeved After GOP Taps ‘Prince of Pork’ to Lead Spending Committee”
Fox News
December 10, 2010

“Sarah Palin coming to Wausau area”
Dan Griffin
WAOW Television
November 6, 2013

“Sarah Palin invokes slavery, inappropriately of course”
Jonathan Capehart
The Washington Post
November 15, 2013

~~~~~

Paula M. Kramer
© 2015 to the present.
All rights reserved.

Posts on this blog alternate with posts at the link below. Posts for both blogs are published on Wednesdays as they are ready to be published. Time between posts could be weeks or months.

blog.smilessparksuccess.com

Resource Websites

speakingfromtriumph.com

smilessparksuccess.com

Business Directory

betterplanetbusiness.com

Positive Identity Directory For People With Mugshots

myrecordnow.com

Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz Has Left The Room

Below are two reasons I do not donate money when I receive Democratic fundraising emails, even though I am a registered Democrat.

Reason #1

“The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Has Left The Room”

Reason #2

Florida’s Democratic Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz sent me a fundraising email saying:

“President Obama sent you an email.

Vice President Biden sent you an email.

Nancy Pelosi sent you an email.

Now I’m sending you an email.

We’re emailing you because this is really important.”

Wasserman Schultz provided no email address for me to respond to her. When I went to her website to send an email, I received this message:

Zip Code Authentication Failed

I called Congresswoman Wasserman Schultz’s Florida office and asked if she or her staff would read a letter from Wisconsin. The staff member who answered the phone told me there was no guarantee because they had to look at mail from Florida first. If Wasserman Schultz is not going to give me a way to respond to her, then she has no business emailing me about anything. I told the staff member I would publish my response to Wasserman Schultz in a blog post with the hope that someone else would read it and say something to her.

Wasserman Schultz insulted me by deciding I was too “intellectually unsophisticated to know what is “really important” without her explaining it to me.

Wasserman Schultz created inequality for me by expecting me to remain silent and passive.

I do not trust politicians who ask for money so they can satisfy their power addiction, as indicated in the emails the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) sends out. Debbie Wasserman Schultz has left the room along with all of those other Democrats.

I see little difference between Republican politicians seeking power for the sake of power and Democratic politicians seeking power for the sake of power. My needs fall outside the focus of power-seeking politicians from both  sides.

It is “really important” that politicians pay attention to my needs. Debbie Wasserman Schultz ignored my needs, treated me as if I were her intellectual inferior, and created inequality for me. Wasserman Schultz expected me to accept this insulting treatment without question and send money.

I refuse to donate money to politicians who will use my money to buy ads that say things I do not want said. I need Democrats and Republicans to speak respectfully about and to each other, to identify commonalities, and to identify ways to work around differences. I need Democrats to respect my needs, to respect my intelligence, and to create equality for me before they ask me for money.

Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz did none of what I need. She is yet another female politician who treats female constituents as unequal.

Time has proved that other Democratic voters feel that Wasserman Schultz has left the room.

“The Arrogance of Feminist Leaders”

“Demand Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s immediate resignation as DNC chair”
Spirituality for Justice
change.org

“It’s Time for Female Politicians to Treat Female Constituents
as Equals”

“What Do Feminist Leaders Have In Common with Outlaw Bikers,
Hierarchical Leaders, Donald Rumsfeld, and the Old Guard of the
Catholic Church?”

~~~~~

Paula M. Kramer
© 2015 to the present.
All rights reserved.

Posts on this blog alternate with posts at the link below. Posts for both blogs are published on Wednesdays as they are ready to be published. Time between posts could be weeks or months.

blog.smilessparksuccess.com

Resource Websites

speakingfromtriumph.com

smilessparksuccess.com

Business Directory

betterplanetbusiness.com

Positive Identity Directory For People With Mugshots

myrecordnow.com

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Has Left The Room

I am a registered Democrat. For a reason I cannot remember, I gave the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) my email address. I receive frequent emails asking for money. The emails reveal that the DCCC left the room I’m in years ago. In my room, I talk to friends and acquaintances about wanting Democrats and Republicans to work together. I talk about the Republican politicians I like. I want Democratic politicians to speak respectfully about and to Republicans so that Republicans learn they can trust Democrats.

The room the DCCC was in when I wrote this blog post was all about taking down Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner. The emails I received frequently said nasty things about John Boehner. Below are several samples:

“Boehner must be tearing his hair out right now.”

“Boehner just got caught red-handed!”
(This one from Nancy Pelosi herself.)

“Boehner wasn’t expecting this, friend.”
(Another one from Nancy Pelosi. Nancy Pelosi is not my friend.)

“Boehner is already bragging.”
(Nancy Pelosi)

“This news will make Boehner furious!”

“Boehner surely didn’t bargain for this.”

“…a slap in the face to Boehner’s attempt to hold on to his obstructionist Tea Party majority.”
(This is a mischaracterization of John Boehner.)

“…we could really embarrass Speaker Boehner come this fall.”

“You can bet Speaker Boehner and Paul Ryan are high-fiving in the hallways of Congress over their record-breaking haul.”

“Boehner’s going to hate this.”

“…to hand Boehner’s buddies a devastating defeat.”

“…completely demoralize John Boehner…”

“Speaker Boehner was riding high a couple of days ago, but he’s going to have an absolute meltdown…”

“…a major embarrassment for John Boehner.”

I might be a registered Democrat, but my political goal was NEVER to catch John Boehner red-handed, make him tear his hair out, embarrass him, make him furious, slap him in the face, demoralize him, or give him a meltdown. Those words and phrases are NEVER part of my conversations.

My political goal is for all Democrats and all Republicans to learn to work together to make sure all citizens have what we need to create success in our own lives. The ability of individual citizens to be successful does matter. The mortgage crisis would have proved that to politicians who paid attention. When millions of ordinary people could not pay their mortgages, the financial world came tumbling down. But if the entire Democratic party is focused the way the DCCC emails are focused, then my hope for a better life is doomed.

The Republicans might be sending similar emails to registered Republicans, but I don’t know that. I do know that Democrats are losing elections because they keep proving they are in a different room than voters. Democratic voters on or near the political party fence at times decide that an individual Republican candidate sounds closer to the room they’re in than the Democratic candidate.

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is one example. In his second election as Governor, nearly a third of Democratic voters chose Republican Christie. Voters in numbers big enough to swing elections want bipartisan politicians who stay in the same room voters are in. Those voters do not want politicians who leave the room and fantasize about what they could do to leaders from the other party. Governor Christie’s lower approval ratings in the years since the George Washington Bridge scandal suggest he isn’t as bipartisan as he appeared.

House Democrats keep demonstrating that they are intent on satisfying their own needs, not mine. They need to take John Boehner down and they think I need to take John Boehner down, too. I don’t. I need Democrats to spend time in my room instead of closing themselves off in a room by themselves. Right now, I have no hope for a better life with Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House for a second time. She offended me the entire four years she was Speaker of the House.

In private, Democrats sound just as bad as Republicans sound in public. Given that sameness, what difference does it make who wins the majority in Congress? If Democrats keep focusing on taking down John Boehner and do win the majority in Congress, they would still be in a different room. Their focus would still be on satisfying their own need to humiliate the other party instead of on satisfying citizen needs for Democrats and Republicans to work together.

Besides writing this blog post, I wrote a letter to my Democratic congressional representative. I included a $3 check. I also sent a copy of this blog post. The letter is below.

Dear Rep. ————-,
Enclosed is a $3 check and a blog post I wrote about the DCCC. Please read the post.

I also sent copies of the post to the DCCC, to Rep. Nancy Pelosi, and to President Obama.

I will send you more money if you do all of the following:

1.  Stop using words and phrases like “howling” and “gang of Republicans”.

2.  Speak respectfully about Republicans both publicly and privately so they have no excuse to speak disrespectfully about you.

3.  Explain what you will do to seek commonalities between Republicans and Democrats.

4.  If you have already identified commonalities, explain what those commonalities are and how you will approach your Republican counterparts to talk about them.

Making those four actions your normal method of representing me will put us back in same room.

I trust you to be creative in finding commonalities, but I’ll give you an example of how I would like you as the politician who represents me to look for commonalities with Republicans.

Many Republicans are pro-life, meaning they support the right of every baby to be born. The most effective way to create a commonality on this issue is to focus on babies. If every baby has a right to be born, then every baby has a right to be born to parents who want him or her. Unfortunately, babies are born everyday to parents who do not want them. Those children endure neglect, abuse, and even murder at the hands of their parents. Focusing on babies turns the discussion with pro-life Republicans to protecting all babies by finding ways to make sure all babies are born to parents who want them.

It will take thought, but I voted for you assuming that you would take the time to think. It will be challenging, but you can challenge any Republican who does not live up to their pro-life claim. Not all Democrats are pro-choice and not all Republicans are pro-life, but I expect you to look for and build on the commonalities.

Sincerely,
Paula Kramer

Generally, the emails from my own representative are far better than the emails from the DCCC. However, I get the least partisan and most respectful emails from New Jersey Senator Cory Booker. Senator Booker is willing to work with Republicans and spoke out against both Republican and Democratic campaign attack ads. Booker’s backers have apparently used some attack ads, though. Hard to say what Booker’s involvement was. However, Booker is still more with me in the room I’m in than not with me.

Letter_To_Democratic_Politicians

Democratic_Power_Desires

“Boehner Fights Back Against Tea Party, Again”
David Welna
National Public Radio (NPR)
February 14, 2014

“A Brief History of Infanticide”
Dr. Larry S. Milner
The Society for the Prevention of Infanticide
1998

“Cory Booker on ‘Nauseating” Attack Ads & More Sunday Talk (Video)
The Daily Beast
May 20, 2012

“Exit Polls”: N.J. Governor”
The New York Times
Election 2013

“Poll: Christie Approval rating at New Low in N.J.”
Courtney Such
RealClear Politics
June 23, 2015

“Rand Paul, Cory Booker Kindle Festivus Bromance Over Sentencing Reform, Ending War On Drugs”
Matt Sledge
The Huffington Post
December 23, 2013

~~~~~

Paula M. Kramer
© 2015 to the present.
All rights reserved.

Posts on this blog alternate with posts at the link below. Posts for both blogs are published on Wednesdays as they are ready to be published. Time between posts could be weeks or months.

blog.smilessparksuccess.com

Resource Websites

speakingfromtriumph.com

smilessparksuccess.com

Business Directory

betterplanetbusiness.com

Positive Identity Directory For People With Mugshots

myrecordnow.com

Letter To A Crony Clique

This post is an attempt to help you recognize crony cliques, understand their barriers and tactics, and make them answer for their actions.

The Encarta World English Dictionary definition of crony is:

“a close friend, especially one of long standing”

The Encarta World English Dictionary definition of clique is:

“a close group of friends or colleagues having similar interests
and goals, and whom outsiders regard as excluding them”

A crony clique is a group of friends or colleagues that keeps its interests and goals separate from outsiders. Cronies treat outsiders who try to participate in the clique’s interests and goals as trespassers. As a group they use crony tactics to protect themselves from trespassers.

Crony tactics to keep outsiders out include restrictions on membership using a variety of barriers:

Identity barriers

Rule barriers

Physical barriers

If a crony clique is forced to include an outsider, the cronies will treat the outsider as a trespasser and use a variety of tactics to prevent trespassers from participating in their privileges, including:

Double standards for accomplishments

Double standards for behavior

Behind-their-back meetings

Rerouted communication for the purpose of hijacking a decision or process

Ugly gossip about trespassers to hide crony tactics
(Crony clique members hide their own wrongful actions by accusing
the people they harmed of taking wrongful actions.)

If they feel the need, crony cliques will use a combination of barriers and tactics to protect themselves from outsiders and trespassers.

If a crony clique is treating you as an outsider or a trespasser, try sending them a letter asking specific questions. If any individual, group, or organization has a stake in the effectiveness of the crony clique, you could also send a copy of the letter to them. This will put pressure on the crony clique members to explain their actions to the people whose approval they need.

I had a bad experience with a crony clique that was part of the county historical society. After doing research on crony cliques, I decided to send the crony clique a letter and send a copy to the county historical society. You can use my letter as a template for writing your own letter to a crony clique. If you like, send a copy of your letter (with names removed) to paula at speakingfromtriumph.com. Let me know the crony clique’s response, as well as the response of anyone with a stake in the crony clique. I will use all the letters and responses to give my readers more information about coping effectively with crony cliques. Together, we can work to make our communities, states, and country more effective.

My Crony Clique Story

I live near an historical building that belongs to the county historical society. Individuals volunteer to be on the committee that hosts fundraising events for the purpose of maintaining the building. The events include an annual art show as well as music and other events. The woman who had originally organized the art show decided to end her participation after more than a decade. No one stepped in to keep the show going, so one year went by without an art show. The next year, 2006, I discovered that no one was going to organize a show again that year, so I said I would do it. I had volunteered at the art show for years, so I at least had that experience.

I contacted people who had been part of the historical building committee before, inviting them to the first meeting. Since I had never been on the committee before, I mostly coordinated the meetings and provided opportunities for the people with more experience to do what they had done before. I also headed up the art show committee, organizing the artists and volunteers. Through our combined efforts, the show was a rousing success.

In March 2007, I finished making a documentary about the Midwest Renewable Energy Association (MREA), host of the longest running and most successful renewable energy fair in the world. I made the documentary to understand the amazing success of the MREA’s annual energy fair. I discovered the ingredients for spectacular success. Every spectacular success around the world uses most if not all of the ingredients for spectacular success. Examples include Habitat for Humanity, the Underground Railroad, Martha Stewart, Solidarity in Poland, Starbucks, Southwest Airlines, the world’s largest trivia contest, and the navy cruise missile destroyer USS Benfold under Captain D. Michael Abrashoff and the commander who followed him.

At a three person art show committee meeting in early 2007, I said I wanted to sell my documentary at the art show. An artist at the meeting immediately told me I would have to ask the full committee for permission.

Artists on the historical building committee sold their art at the art show without ever asking permission to do so, including the artist who told me I had to ask for permission. A singer on the committee regularly scheduled her own group to sing at the historical building without ever asking permission to do so. A business owner whose store is across the street from the historical building used the historical building’s outdoor bulletin board for free advertising without ever asking permission to do so. The owner of a landscaping company donated trees and plants to the historical building and used the donation to advertise her business. A former committee member with a framing business framed old photographs to hang in the historical building and used the donation to advertise her business. A local businessman who did some work on the historical building posted a sign in the parking lot to advertise his business. All of those people found ways to personally profit from their volunteer time for the historical building.

Any community artist who wants to sell their work at the art show merely had to say, “I want to sell my art at the art show.” They wrote their names and addresses on a list. A few months before the show, the head of the art show committee (that would have been me at the time), sent letters to everyone on the list and the first 40 who responded sold their art at the show.

No one had to ask permission to personally profit from the art show.

I sent an email to all of the committee members asking why I was the only person who had to ask for permission to sell their art at the art show. I received no response. The artist had created a rule barrier, but no one could think of a way to justify the rule barrier.

I would like to point out here, as I did to the historical building committee, that very few people would have bought my documentary. Documentaries do not sell well. I watch documentaries all the time, but I have never bought one. I wanted people to see my documentary on a table and pick it up to read the back cover. Then people who had never heard of the MREA would learn about it and possibly look them up on the Internet, visit the fair, or attend a one of the workshops the MREA hosts at other times of the year.

Because my documentary shows the history of an historical event in the county, it seemed to me that it should be included in historical society events. I emailed the president of the county historical society, and he agreed to take copies to sell at historical society events. Any profit would go to the historical society.

I was right to consider my documentary a resource for the county’s history. A former executive director of the MREA later told me that whenever they hired a new employee, she would hand them a copy of my documentary and say, “Here. This is the history of the MREA. Watch it.” A later MREA director used 17 quotes from my documentary in a book about the first 20 years of the energy fair. My documentary was the major source for the book.

As soon as the committee found out that I had contacted the president of the historical society, one of them emailed me to accuse me of going behind their backs.

I was unable to attend the next two meetings — an art show committee meeting and a full committee meeting. After those two meetings I received the following email. I have put the crony clique clues in bold font:

To let you know, we discussed a policy (initially at the
art show mtg and then confirmed at the General Comm.
Mtg) regarding the sales of non-art items at the Art Show
and music events, as well as other items in general. We
decided that we don’t want to be in the business of selling
stuff, or promoting others’ materials. So the policy reads
something to the effect that only items from non-profit
organizations may be displayed or sold (that gives us
discretionary power). We hope it will eliminate complications
such as the (specialty) T-Shirts in which we ended up losing
money because we lost track of the inventory.

This policy would also apply to your DVD’s, Paula. We
hope this isn’t taken as a personal affront. We just want to
avoid the complications of selling other products.”

The singer who used the historical building as her personal performance stage wrote this email to me. Her group no longer performs yearly at the historical building. Perhaps the conflict of interest became to blatant to ignore.

Lets look at the crony clique clues in detail.

“…we discussed a policy (initially at the art show mtg and
then confirmed at the General Comm. Mtg)”

These were behind-my-back meetings.

“non-art items”

“stuff”

“other products”

The art show sells still photographs. One year they sold photographs that had been cut to fit magnets to put on refrigerators. Video is a form of photography. Both still and moving pictures begin with cameras. My documentary includes graphics and music, both of which are considered art.

After receiving that email, I googled “documentary as art” and got 1,100 hits. I googled “Arts and Sciences + documentary” and got 27,400 hits. I googled “documentary artist” and got 10,200 hits. Every year around the world, thousands of film festivals and awards ceremonies recognize and celebrate documentaries as art. The crony clique historical building committee set a double standard for my documentary by deciding it was “non-art” “stuff”.

In the case of video photography, the crony clique historical building committee actually set two double standards. For years, the historical building committee has shown a version of my “stuff” at the historical building. They have a yearly summer movie night. They started out showing movies about people and events in Wisconsin’s history.

Remember, my documentary is about a nonprofit organization within the same county as the historical building. Members of the MREA staff consider my documentary a history of the MREA and its annual fair. It fit the characteristics the committee looked for in the movies they showed.

“others’ materials”

These words created an identity barrier. They clearly identified me as an “other”. The cronies saw me as a trespasser.

“So the policy reads something to the effect that only items
from non-profit organizations may be displayed or sold
(that gives us discretionary power).”

Again, my documentary is about the nonprofit MREA. Selling the documentary at the art show would support the MREA in more than one way. First, my documentary would draw attention to the MREA. Second, the back cover states that 50% of the profits will be donated to the MREA. (Because documentaries do not sell well, I have not yet made a profit.) This rule barrier excluded the nonprofit MREA.

“This policy would also apply to your DVD’s, Paula.”

This is a rule barrier written specifically to prevent me from sharing in the privileges the cronies wanted to protect from trespassers. Obviously, the other members of the historical building committee considered their ability to personally profit from being on the committee a privilege that I did not deserve.

The two meetings I did not attend took place two months before the art show, so they had ample time to wait for me to be present at a meeting to discuss my documentary. They purposefully discussed my documentary behind my back so they could use an identity barrier to create a rule barrier using a double standard for accomplishments. They did this to prevent me from sharing in the personal profit privilege they wanted to keep to themselves.

I resigned from both committees.

I cannot quote any specific instance of ugly gossip. I suspect that the committee member who accused me of going behind their backs has used ugly, blaming gossip to hide her own sabotage. I believe this because of another incident.

I live near a curve in our village. The accusing committee member drives around that curve to get to our post office. When I can see cars coming around the curve, I have 6 to 7 seconds before they reach my driveway — if they are going the speed limit. When cars go faster than the speed limit, I might have 3 to 4 seconds before they reach my driveway. I have looked towards the curve, seen no car, and backed out of my driveway only to find a car on my bumper as soon as I stop to shift gears.

To protect myself, I back slowly to the end of my driveway looking in the other direction where the road is straight. At the end of my driveway I turn to look at the curve before backing out. One day when I was slowly backing down the driveway and looking at the straight side of the road, the accusing committee member came speeding around the curve and honked at me. She obviously had not considered the danger I face every time I back out of my driveway, because she did not slow down to the speed limit. Given that experience, I am certain the accusing committee member would use ugly gossip about me without a second thought.

Years later, the accusing committee member and I left a nearby city at the same time on a four lane highway. She moved into the left lane and quickly disappeared into the distance. I was doing the speed limit. She still speeds past my house. I live next to the park. Children live across the road from me in several houses. The accusing committee member put children at risk to satisfy her need for speed.

Crony Clique Short-Sightedness

Since crony cliques exist for their own personal gain, cronies cannot see beyond the tips their noses to consider:

Big picture

Long term consequences

Personal costs

Big Picture

Not everyone agrees with the thinking or actions of crony cliques. I told several people about how the historical building committee crony clique treated me. These are three of the responses:

“How weird! Of course film is art!”

“It’s their loss.”

“Have the MREA ask them to sell your documentary at the art show.”

In fact, the MREA sold my documentary every year I brought copies to their energy fair.

The historical building committee also ignored my documentary’s discoveries about 26 situational, organizational, financial, emotional, and relationship ingredients for spectacular success. One ingredient focuses on self. Two ingredients focus on task. Nine ingredients focus on working with others. Fourteen ingredients focus on satisfying others. Spectacular success comes from working with others and satisfying others.

Other people are paying attention to the ingredients for spectacular success. One of the people I connected with at the energy fair is now moving into a new career. This person is impressed with my findings about spectacular success. In response to an email, she told me she would remember the ingredients for spectacular success in her new career.

Long Term Consequences

The county we live in is a hotbed of spectacular success. I am revising a book that will include a chapter about this county. The chapter will list this county’s spectacular successes. If the historical building committee had treated me as an equal, working with me and satisfying me, I would have wanted to work with and satisfy them. I write about ordinary people who create success for others. I would have named individual members of the committee to bring them recognition for the success they create for artists at their art show.

But the historical building committee invited me to create failure for them, and I accept their invitation. I am using the historical building committee as an example of a crony clique focused on keeping their personal profit privilege to themselves. I am also offering my letter to the historical building committee crony clique as a template for other people to expose the true purpose of all crony cliques — protecting their privileges from people they see as outsiders and trespassers.

I will also refrain from increasing the committee’s success. As my income grows, I plan to be generous. I have built generosity into every sale from my online store. Using my own methods, I will be generous with people and groups in Portage County. If the historical building committee had treated me as an equal rather than as a trespasser, I would have donated money to the historical building. The committee chose to let me know that my “non-art” “stuff” documentary was far too inferior to include in their art show. Therefore, I will not force my inferior money on them.

Personal Costs

First, some of the people who read this blog post will recognize members of the crony clique. I have used no identifying details in this post, but some readers will know whom I’m writing about.

Second, the determination of the historical building committee to create failure for me is evidence that they create failure for other people, both as a crony clique and as individuals.  Failure begets failure, what I call “full-blown failure”. The crony clique members are living with more failure than what this blog post and letter will create for them. They are unlikely to completely understand the extent of the failures because much full-blown failure is done behind their backs. I am letting them know directly that I am creating failure for them because of the failure they created for me.

With this blog post I hope to make letters to crony cliques a common personal cost to crony clique members. Notice, however, that I am polite throughout my own letter to a crony clique. No name calling, no insults, no threats.

My Letter To A Crony Clique

To the 2007 historical building committee,

Please explain in detail what criteria you used to determine that my documentary is “non-art” “stuff”.

Please explain in detail what criteria you used to decide I was an “other”, as in “others’ materials”.

Please explain in detail how selling a documentary about a nonprofit is not a way of supporting that nonprofit.

Please explain in detail why I was told to ask for permission to sell my art at the historical building when no other artist had to ask for permission to sell their art at the historical building.

Please explain in detail why discussing my documentary at two meetings without my knowledge when you had ample time to include me does not fit the definition of “going behind my back”.

The only reason you could claim that I had gone behind your backs was that you had created a rule specifically to justify denying me the same personal profit privilege you maintained for yourselves. Please explain in detail your justification for creating that rule.

In 2009, the MREA celebrated it’s 20th anniversary. Please explain in detail what was unthinkable about showing my documentary history of the MREA as your summer movie and inviting founding MREA members to answer audience questions. The MREA could have sold copies of its book about its first 20 years. You would have shown support for the MREA by showing my documentary and selling their book. Why was that unthinkable?

If the MREA came to you with copies of my documentary and asked you to sell them so they could get their 50% of the profits promised on the DVD cover, how would you explain to them that my documentary is “non-art” “stuff” that does not support a nonprofit?

My documentary is both a history of the nonprofit MREA and a how to. It shows how ordinary amateurs with passion created spectacular success. The founding members of the MREA were all ordinary people who were amateurs at hosting a renewable energy fair, but they were amateurs with passion. Their amateur passion has created all kinds of successes for people, groups, and organizations in Wisconsin, in the United States, and around the world, including:

Friendships (and maybe romances)

Partnerships (and maybe marriages)

Skills for using renewable energy

New public policy on renewable energy in Wisconsin

Hands on learning for teachers

Workshops for kids

Service projects for community organizations

Economic boosts for local businesses during the annual energy fair

Portage County is a county of spectacular successes including but not limited to Trivia, the Green Circle, the College of Natural Resources, CAP Services, and the Suzuki Institute. Please explain in detail why it would be unthinkable for other Portage County amateurs with passion to learn the how-tos of spectacular success from the founding members of the MREA in my documentary.

Sincerely,

Paula Kramer

My Preference

I want to end by saying that I would prefer to write positive stories about the members of this crony clique. I have studied success and failure long enough to understand that my success is dependent on the success of other people. The more successful the members of the crony clique are, the more successful I can be. The crony clique members are intelligent people who have already created a number of successes in their lives. I know they are capable of creating more success than they’ve already created. They just do not understand that creating success for other people opens all kinds of doors to successes they did not know were possible.

I hope every single member of that committee comes to that understanding someday. We all benefit from other people’s success. We deny success for ourselves when we deny success for others. People who focus on one particular kind of success with the belief that achieving it requires excluding others will achieve only that one kind of success. People who exclude others lose out on all the other possible successes that the other people could have created for them.

To understand the possibilities of other kinds of success, read my post “Wrong Age, Wrong Color, Wrong Status, But The Right Person For The Job.” Anyone who has enjoyed the benefits of heart surgery is reaping those benefits because a black male teenage carpenter’s assistant enjoyed enough success in his life to develop the techniques and instruments for heart surgery. He taught those techniques and the use of those instruments to all of the first surgeons who wanted to learn heart surgery. And yes, it all began when he was still a teenager.

Good luck with your crony clique letters.

~~~~~

Paula M. Kramer
© 2015 to the present
All rights reserved.

Posts on this blog alternate with posts at the link below. Posts for both blogs are published on Wednesdays as they are ready to be published. Time between posts could be weeks or months.

blog.smilessparksuccess.com

Standards For Success Posters

Working With Others & Satisfying Others

Resource Websites

speakingfromtriumph.com

smilessparksuccess.com

Business Directory

betterplanetbusiness.com

Positive Identity Directory For People With Mugshots

myrecordnow.com