It was a terrible day, the Ides of March 2020, when the Donald realized three things.

First, the pandemic is real and history changing. 

Second, the United States could lead the world with its resources in solving the challenge.

Third, it would probably mean the Nobel Prize from Donald if he could pull it off.

Fourth, Donald realized he didn’t have what it took to manage the challenge.

It would have been a game changer.  Rats!

We now have a once-in-a-life-time opportunity to step back and consider the intellectual development of our population. The matters bringing this opportunity to us are:

• The Pandemic forces us to reconsider all of our population interactions
• The education facilities shutdown offers us the opportunity to search for new ways
• The relationship between people of color and all authorities needs to be redefined
• The Race Riots force us to really look at economic and technology discrimination
• The world economic challenges, including completion, require a better understanding

To picking one item from the list - schools defined by historical standards are no longer appropriate and require rethinking with the following questions:

• What is the best way to educate infants?
• Beginning the third year, how can we begin to deliver better education based on expert understanding of the differences in children and differences in beneficial education?
• "Grade Schools" should not have grades. This is a constraint that is more troublesome than effective. Grades may optimize teaching resources but may constrain imagination in learning.
• "Middle Schools" whisper the reality of puberty, but could address the social change with far more imagination and effectiveness.
• "High Schools" with an apparent 4-year requirement feature superior education for some and feature ways to pass the time for others that don't appreciate "superior education".
• "Four Year Colleges" amazingly can train a very large number of programs that coincidentally all take four years!

Taking one of these item, the Four Year College, the challenge should be obvious.  First, lets dispatch with the most obvious.  Why four hears.  Requiring four years to get the diploma (a whole different discussion) is simply smart economic decision making for the colleges. Institution requires four years for all disciplines, and pads the curriculum as needed with "core" requirements or "required electives" to generate guaranteed income. "I've completed all the required courses but don't have enough hours to graduate". 

To cut straight to the recommendation of this blog: Colleges and Universities should be able to issue certificates regarding course completion. Organizations which ultimately hire an individual should confer the title of accomplishment and qualification based on real life accomplishments. Yes, this is suggesting that an apprenticeship program and levels of expertise based on demonstrable experience should be what makes a doctor, a lawyer, a mechanic or a sanitation worker. An apprenticeship approach automatically joins institutions of education with commerce, a win-win-win for citizen, education, and commerce.

Wow, that a big change, right?  Yes it is.  But if we consider the situation we are in, we starting from scratch anyway.  Let's make it the best way possible. That way will include;

• How do we expose very young people to variety of life?
• How do we let young people explore options without fear of destructive failure?
• How do we create an exciting environment for team building?
• How we encourage the development of relationships between individuals that are the most expanding whether it is between races, neighborhoods or lovers?
• How do we establish the best way to expose teenagers to broader roles in life?
• How do we really deliver apprentices to all of the career possibilities?
• How do we remake the Department of Education?

Stay tuned.

​Schools。This is the time to rethink education.
• “Grades” defined by age are a false grouping
• Skill sets are tracks of experiences
• Four year colleges are a income generating scam.  How could so many disciplines each take 4 years to attain a certification/diploma?

There has been considerable effort put into trying to really understand our founding fathers when the condense amendment was written.

​"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

I believe that there are only two interpretations.

First, that the founding fathers were interested in a well regulated militia. They had just gone through the revolutionary war, and the founding fathers did not want there to a chance that the government could forbid guns and take over the population by force. I do understand their fears because the King of England could have done such a thing.

I think this aspect of the amendment is out of date.  To test the extreme, I believe that if every person capable of carrying a gun did carry a gun, the government could still take over if said government really wanted to do that.

The second possible interpretation of the amendment would be that a "well regulated militia" is a historical concept no longer possible. If that is the interpretation, the amendment is out of date and silent.  

This one should be a simple matter for the supreme court.

I had always thought that our president could be considered stupid, or as at least one in the cabinet says, a moron.  But both of these terms are derogatory digs when there is clinical terms that are clearly the case.

Functional illiteracy is reading and writing skills that are inadequate "to manage daily living and employment tasks that require reading skills beyond a basic level". Functional illiteracy is contrasted with illiteracy in the strict sense, meaning the inability to read or write simple sentences in any language.   (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_illiteracy ​)

The fulfillment of this definition has been demonstrated repeated in our President's tweets and his well documented inability to read documents larger than a couple of pages such as the Presidential Daily Briefing, a document essential to the president's "employment tasks".

Attention Disability (ADD or newer ADHD) under any name describes our president my my opinion when he hears something like,  "This report does not address collusion", and understands "There was no collusion".  The president filters and modifies all words and phrases to reflect favorably on him no matter the modifications required to make that so. And when it is all said and one, he believes the modified version is true. That's the disorder.

Another strange example might be the fact that the president feels that when the FBI badly botched warning information regarding the Florida shooter Cruz was because the FBI was distracted by the Russian Investigation. Apparently the president believes that all of the 35,000 employees of the FBI are focused on him.  That is self centered foolishness.

I believe that not only do we have to get bipartisan action in congress, it must be veto proof so that the president is a non-factor..

iPut me in the column that believes that the Falcon Heavy launch on February 6, 2018 is in the top three events in our lifetime.  In no order,  

(x) The SpaceX launch and the Tesla in solar orbit;
(x) The USA landing on the moon;
(x) The worldwide understanding that the U.S. President is a pathological liar.

​An incredible time to be alive.  

​“I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you.”  - Friedrich Nietzsche
 
“Trump is a liar, everyone knows that. But he made Paul Ryan lie. Now I can’t believe him either.” – Dave Murphy

How dare I say that Trump made Ryan lie?  Something monstrous changed Ryan. One can see in Paul Ryan's eyes that he doesn't believe himself.

The Trump-Tax plan clearly does offer very nice monetary rewords for the rich. The estate tax as a simple example will go away in 2024.  That says if the Donald can live another 7 years, his kids will reap perhaps a billion dollar tax savings in their inheritance . That's just not right.

And do I understand that the middle class can expect to see perhaps $400 a year in tax savings starting next year?  Wow isn't that great.  

The annual wage of $75,000 has been used to talk about who will get the windfall of $400. The target inflation rate for the Fed is 2%.  That means that in a typical year, what cost a dollar last year costs $1,02.  That's 2% more.  What cost you last year $75,000 assuming you spent the total earning, will cost $76,500.  (2% of $75,000 is $1,500.)  So you're going backwards just a little tiny bit slower. 

I'd rather have the $ billion. 

​​Why is Trump on TV all the time.  Look at the audience.

There are Trump followers, those that worship whatever he says, and can't  get enough of it. There are no leaders among these followers.

There are the Trump proponents who listen to the real meaning of the Trump phenomenon and mindset, and they like it.  We can find some leaders here.

There are those how hate Trump and love to watch him, in their mind, make a fool of himself.  

There are the political activists who thrive on the competition in the U.S. presidential selection process. 

There are the students of politics who are learning revolutionary processes being defined.

There are those that fear Trump

There are those that hate Trump

And after all those, there are those that couldn't care less but take care to know what's going on.

I finally there are those that never cared, or became fatigued. These are likely not to vote.

Is it a good thing? If there are more voters, it's probably good. 

Chris Matthews - Hard Ball

One thing leads to another.  Donald Trump trashes Megyn Kelly and it makes me look harder at Megyn Kelly.  I like her.  Who knew?

MSNBC suggests Rachel Maddow (I'm a fan) might be the smartest person on television, and I look harder at Ellen DeGeneres, the TV show host, actor, writer, producer, philanthropist and activist.  I think Rachel should aspire to the the Ellen DeGeneres of political pundits.

But the biggest surprise to me is the way Chris Matthews interviews a person with such a badgering manner.  Hardball I guess.  In his interview with Donald Trump, Matthew's signature method of asking a question, and as soon as the answer starts, he pounces with quick one liners amplifying the question or even changing the subject.  He makes a listeners try harder to understand the person being bullied.  I've never before tried to understand Donald Trump.  (Still don't.)  

​In defense of Chris Matthews, he treats everyone same, even his colleagues.  I've come to like them better, too.