Admiral Rickover

I was going through some old records when I found some words of wisdom from Rear Admiral H. G. Rickover. This man responsible for creating the modern nuclear-powered Navy and served later as Admiral and head of the Naval Reactors division. Some of his thoughts are listed below.

1) More than ambition, more than ability, it is rules that limit contribution; rules are the lowest common denominator of human behavior. They are a substitute for rational thought.

2) Sit down before fact with an open mind. Be prepared to give up every preconceived notion. Follow humbly wherever and to whatever abyss Nature leads, or you learn nothing. Don't push out figures when the facts are going in the opposite direction.

3) Free discussion requires an atmosphere unembarrassed by any suggestion of authority or even respect. If a subordinate always agrees with a superior he is a useless part of the organization.

4) All men are by nature conservative but conservatism in the military profession is a source of danger to the country. One must be ready to change his line sharply and suddenly, with no concern for the prejudices and memories of what was yesterday. To rest upon a formula is a slumber that, prolonged, means death.

5) Success teaches us nothing; only failure teaches.

6) Do not regard loyalty as a personal matter. A greater loyalty is one to the Navy or to the country. When you know you are absolutely right, and when you are unable to do anything about it, complete military subordination to rules becomes a form of cowardice.

7) To doubt one's own principles is the mark of a civilized man. Don't defend past actions; what is right today may be wrong tomorrow. Don't be consistent; consistency is the refuge of fools.

8) Thoughts arising from "practical" experience may be a bridle or a spur.

9) Optimism and stupidity are nearly synonymous.

10) Avoid over-coordination. We have all observed months-long delays caused by an effort to bring all activities into complete agreement with a proposed policy or procedure. While the coordination machinery is slowly grinding away, the original purpose is often lost, the essence of the proposal is being worn down, as the persons most concerned impatiently await the decision. This process has been aptly called "coordinating to death".

11) A system under which it takes three men to check what one is doing is not control; it is systematic strangulation.

12) A man, by working 24 hours a day, could multiply himself 3 times. To multiply himself more than 3 times the only recourse is to train others to take over some of his work.

As a former Navy man, I know that I was expected to follow the "orders of those appointed over me" which includes the Admiral....but in this case, I think that these are some excellent suggestions which I would contend should be applied (amended only for context) to all areas of government and political thought. If only we would apply them here in our area, then we might truly experience Fair Winds and Following Seas.

Standing on the Shoulders

"If I have seen farther than others, it is because I was standing on the shoulders of giants."
- Isaac Newton

Alas, it has been a long time, too long, since I last sat in the confines of my humble office and spent some time pondering and musing over the happenings of the day and sharing those paltry thoughts with all of you. It has been a busy season as I have wrestled with injuries, started a new career, moved (just out to Toftrees - I'm still local!), and ,obviously, stayed involved with several candidates and campaigns. Much has happened - the 2006 elections have come and gone (hopefully as a wake up to some!) and there have been so many issues on which to comment (...stay tuned!)

But as I write today, I am grateful for the strong foundation which my views and beliefs offer; from which I am able to observe, interact with and comment on the world around me. This past week has been especially dire as we are forced to examine the happenings in Blacksburg and the sobering effect that it has had on our communities. The value of human life reexamined and thoughts of preserving it echo through American society - everywhere from the Supreme Court decision to uphold partial birth abortions to right here in Happy Valley.

And while some actions are quite noble, such as Penn State fans donning Maroon and Orange at the annual Blue/White game, others are quite despicable. And much like Robert Burton states: "A dwarf standing on the shoulders of a giant may see farther than a giant himself." I am able to comment on the actions of one PA House of Representatives member with clarity.

Within 48 hours of the tragedy at Virginia Tech, 77th District Representative Scott Conklin (D), introduced legislation in the form of a non-binding resolution to encourage PA schools to collect data to inform students of campus emergencies. Not a bad idea.

...Except...He also stated on the House floor that he wanted copies of the resolution sent to the 33 families of slain students. And he wrote and presented all of this within 48 hours.

Evidently, the CDT supports this sort of political grandstanding by attacking Kerry Benninghoff (R), 171st District for negatively commenting on the TIMING of the resolution. After speaking with Rep. Benninghoff on two separate occasions today, he clarified that he does not criticize the resolution as the article headline blatantly contends, but the timing and motivation of the actions.

I guess the CDT stands next to Rep. Conklin - not on the shoulders of giants - but on the still-wet bloodstained graves of VT students.

Thank you

First let me thank all those of you who sent messages, phone calls and or emails wishing me a speedy recovery - I appreciate it and am doing much better. I am out of the hospital and survived working in downtown State College over Arts Fest. I am moving this week and setting up a new....everything: phone, address, computer hook-up, etc.
while there is definately much to discuss, I am also moving the computer, so look for me to be back online about the beginning of August - just in time for fall football (Eagles and PSU) fall politics (mostly on a state and national level - but a few local races worth mentioning as well) and all of the other exciting and controversial things that autumn in Centre county brings.
In the meanwhile, check out my friend Chris's blog over at Sweet Home Happy Valley and be sure to coongratulate him on his new radio spot (I hope that wasn't a secret - but I know I'm looking forward to listening in!)!
So check back next week and thanks again to all of you for your recent concern.

One eye open

I am just posting to warn you that I may not be on for a few days. It appears that I have contracted some sort of eye infection and need to see a doctor. As such, staring at a computer screen kinda gives me a headache.

I guess this is the price of working to keep both eyes open when searching for the facts and the truth that the media often tries to hide or spin. So, I'll give it a rest for a bit and just keep an eye on the news for those that enjoy reading these posts (or rest for the weary for those that don't!).

In the meanwhile, feel free to read (or reread) some of the archived stories (listed at right), post your own comments, or email me with suggestions for future topics - I'd love to hear from you (since I can't see you)!

But with only one eye open, I'm sure that is still at least twice as as many as some of our local officials.

Undue Blame

In typical fashion, the CDT and its bloggers attempt to place blame on Senator Rick Santorum (presumably in a feeble attempt to undermine his reelection campaign) for a recently declassified military report about WMDs in Iraq. Also in typical fashion, they again can't seem to get their facts straight.

First, Mr. Frank seriously downplays the report (which he undoubtedly and evidently did not read) by quoting the most innocuous of lines in the entire report - that Americans have more toxic matierials under their sink - in a blatant spin on the facts. He then has the utter gall to accuse the Senator of spinning the report and then accuses Santorum of being consistently wrong.

Just to set the record straight, lets see who else was wrong on this issue. (To help me, I am going to copy a lengthy post from a fellow blogger, John Hawkins, who has done an amazing job in compiling the following)

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will
threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him
succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002

"Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction." -- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct
2002

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know
after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002

"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott
Ritter in 1998

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration’s policy towards Iraq, I don’t think there can be any question about Saddam’s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002

So, it would seem that Senator Santorum was not the only person who may have been mislead here. Quite Frankly, Frank, it seems the whole world was duped. Your presumptuous arrogance reminds me of a coffe mug quote, "I never made a mistake. Once I thought I did, but I was wrong."

Cook says "can't have your cake ..."

According to a recent CDT article, Senator Jake Corman has agreed to serve as a mediator between the State College Area School Board and State High Vision over the proposed $102 million dollar high school renovation, which I have blogged about previously and will continue to do so in the future as the situation, and its projected price tag, inflates....

In the meanwhile, I want to comment on a few things that others have said, including Mr. Bob Heisse, and then offer a thought.

First from Mr. Heisse:

"Mediation can be a good thing and it seems that if Corman serves this role in
State College, perhaps State High Vision and the school board could spend a few
weeks in Harrisburg mediating the deep divide in the Legislature over meaningful
tax reform for Pennsylvanians."

Well thanks for that, Bob! I can see know why CDT editors make such good public elected officials - they understand the scope of what elected officials do! Let me help you, Bob - Jake Corman is a State Senator. It is his job to address issues of local concern to the state in whatever means he deems most appropriate - and if that means mediating rather than bringing it up on the General Assembly floor - so be it! After all, I didn't see you complaining about his efforts to help State College get a new baseball stadium... Nice try at muddying the waters, though!

Then from the article:

"CCP, a community group, has expressed support for the board's planning process.
'I see this as an obstructionist tactic' by SHV, said Mary Dupuis, a leader of
CCP. She called it a 'purely political ploy' that attempts to violate the
separation of local and state government powers."

(Here again - same point as above!) Additionally, it seems to me that I recall some of these same people coming out in support of a local measure which opposed a Federally adopted resolution just a few months ago! Talk about the pot calling the kettle black...

So here's my thought - or, as the cook says, "You can't have your cake and eat it too!"

Option one: (otherwise known as "The Cake")

We all blindly show up, uninformed and unaware, every year and dutifully vote for people to make all of our decisions for us. Furthermore, we limit the scope and jurisdiction of elected officials' decisions only to issues directly affected by office that they were actually voted into. In other words, if it is not their issue, they do what the rest of us do - shut up and meekly accept all decisions made by our elected leaders. This includes all topics such, but not limited to: the War in Iraq, the USA PATRIOT Act, PA tax reform & pay raises, High School renovation plans, or State College Borough parking regulations. You want a say - run for office - otherwise, shut up and go home (just like the School Board says!)

Option two: (or "Eating it, too")

Everyone - citizens and elected officials elect - recognizes that America is a democracy where freedom of speech is a right guaranteed by our Constitution and governing documents. We not only allow everyone their right to have their opinion and/or dissent heard - but we applaud it for what it is - a celebration of our rights and freedoms that we enjoy. This occasionally means eating some "humble pie", listening to opposing viewpoints, acknowledging the other person's rights to voice those opinions, and then celebrating together to create a bright future we can all enjoy. This means that war protesters can stand at the Allen Street gates and protest, groups like Clean Sweep PA and State High Vision can organize and be heard, and yes, State College Borough can continue to pass meaningless and impotent resolutions while ignoring the more important needs of the community.

In closing, I would like to commend Jake Corman for stepping forward and celebrating this very process. To take the time out of a very busy schedule, working in Harrisburg, trying to run a re-election campaign and having a third baby to take care of yet still finding time to address local concerns - I only wish that all legislators would follow your example!

Olympics coming to a city near you?

Okay - I'm sure that local interest in international sports is likely to drop off now that the US loss to Ghana has eliminated them from the 2006 FIFA World Cup, but chew on this for a while...

I know its the 2016 Olympics....

And I know this is just the presentation to the US Olympic committee....

And I know that the International Olympics Committee will not decide until 2009, but...

the Olympics coming to Philadelphia - how awesome would that be?!

Philadelphia had its opportunity to present its case to the USOC yesterday and justify why it should host the 2016 games. Philly is competing with four other cities - Los Angeles, Houston, Chicago, and San Francisco - to be the official US bid for the 2016 games.

I for one, hope to hear bells - Liberty bells, that is - tolling out this announcement!

In the meanwhile - start saving now - tickets should go on sale in about...10 years! - In the meanwhile, you can probably see me at Pickels wathcing the rest of those soccer matches...

The E-divide

Most of the time, when you hear someone talk about the "e-divide", it generally has something to do with the comparison between those that have access to the internet in their home (own their own computer) and those that don't. In Centre county, however, e-divide refers to a different division...over what types of voting machines people want.

The Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002 was designed to help bring American voters into the new century, promising us new electronic means of voting that would help prevent voting SNAFUs (which is a great - and appropriate - acronym, by the way!), such as the "hanging chads" made infamous by the 2000 Presidential election in Florida. Gone would be the paper ballots and lever machines and in their place would be new electronic technologies. These new requirements are required to be in place by "the first federal election after January 1, 2006" - or for those of us in PA - this November.

I, for one, was optimistic that the change would help speed up the process and prevent future questions, yet cautious (as many across the state and nation were also) that electronic systems can be hacked and/or tampered with - thus making it easy for someone to "rig" an election.

The commonwealth's General Assembly drug their feet (they must have been too busy with more important matters ...like voting for a pay raise!), putting PA counties in the awkward position of having to scramble to purchase, install, and train personnel on the new machines. As anyone who voted in the May primary can attest, Centre County commissioners opted to try two different options - a digital scan reader (using technologies much like the "fill in the oval" SAT college admissions test) or a touch screen (not unlike Sheetz's MTO food ordering and delivery system) and let the voters decide which the preferred.

I used the touch screen...and I loved it. It was quick, easy, and very straightforward. And according to the CDT, about 54% of voters used this method. There were concerns - namely the lack of a paper trial, accuracy, and procedural items (such as ensuring that the machine had been "zeroed" prior to the first vote being cast). However, if I understand correctly, all of these issues can easily be addressed; the first by a bill currently seeking passage in the General Assembly to add a "receipt" printer, if desired, and the latter two by adjusting policies and training poll workers here at a county level.

All of that considered, I was glad that our county commissioners today decided to purchase a "direct recording" electronic means of voting (such as the touch screens used in the primary) rather than the "scan-tron" format which would, in my opinion, cause huge lines during heavily contested elections, thus driving away voters. I also hope that they seriously consider the touch screen option despite its potential 1.5 million dollar price tag. If the ability to add a receipt is added anytime in the future, I think it would be the perfect mechanism to record votes.

I, like all of you, want accurate elections above all else. Additionally, I prefer that it be an easy process that encourages voters to turn out. I believe that commissioners Chris Exarchos and Steve Dershem deserve our gratitude for the hard work that they have put into this issue and for, above all, striving to find a solution to a difficult situation that meets the criteria listed above - accurate and easy!