The “Honorable Members” of the Newfoundland and Labrador Government

Character is the only secure foundation of the state. - Calvin Coolidge

The qualities of a great man are vision, integrity, courage, understanding, the power of articulation, and profundity of character. - Dwight Eisenhower

I used to muse a fair bit over the years about the Newfoundland and Labrador political scene but I found that for the most part, while my musings evoked a lot of emotion in people, those same people rarely took action, preferring to complain from the sidelines, on social media or in their local coffee shop. 

My insane work schedule these days further limits my musings but occasionally something comes to my attention that bothers me so much that I need to work it out in a musing of some sort, whether it be in my journal or here in my blog.

I’ve been receiving a lot of communication over the last year or more regarding the activity of the Honorable Members of the Newfoundland and Labrador Government.

I’m not referring to the politicians themselves but rather, their “honorable members”.

It seems that the political world that exists in the Confederation Building has become overrun with predators who have learned at one point or another that one of our most basic primal needs serves as a useful tool to accomplish what they need (often to the detriment of others).

Stories of rampant infidelity trouble me but I’m not a prude, I’m not ignorant of the ways of the world nor do I judge people who prefer to throw their families and relationships under the bus as they (including Ministers of the Crown) roam the hallways of government, using their honorable member to satisfy their primal needs for sex and power (this includes certain female MHAs and their equivalent “portfolio”).

Judgment of their deeds, where appropriate and deserved, comes soon enough at the hands of others or the Ultimate Authority.

I don’t judge the married MHA who was confirmed to have an Ashley Madison account (verified by his own credit card).

I don’t judge the MHA who has a diaper fetish (not a need for adult diapers) and likes to be treated like a baby in private.

I don’t judge the spouses who have made the choice to turn a blind eye to the deeds of their partners in exchange for the benefits they derive from the power and prestige bestowed upon their partners.  I do feel badly for the ones who don’t really understand what is happening – their families will be hurt at some point by the actions of their partners.

It is true that I have been known to make a few digs here and there, such as the time when a minister was honored with new court title and I asked him on Twitter whether he told his girlfriend or his wife first.

And yes, I do judge the senior Liberal bureaucrat who has helped protect a family member from prosecution.  Many years ago, his family member had a paper route and had asked a 7-year-old boy if he would help him.  For curious reasons, the paper route went off into the woods where the family member offered the boy a nickel to be allowed to be shown “what a screw was”.  In the conversation that followed, the boy quickly determined what was happening and fled the scene untouched.  Even at the age of 7, I wasn’t that stupid but I have since learned that the behavior of this individual continued for years unabated.  Unfortunately, what I experienced cannot be used as grounds for charges and others must be willing to step forward.  Speaking in hushed tones or in private confessions of a secret do not bring people to justice and justice would be difficult to obtain when that person is protected by someone with power.

Lifestyle choices, whether I agree with them or not, are the private business of those who choose them.

For the most part.

Where I do take umbrage to someone’s lusty, licentious needs is when such needs are used to intentionally harm others or when they open the door to creating harm for others. 

When male MHAs offer or demand sex from female MHAs in exchange for favors or support of legislation, it opens the door to the female MHA (or the male one, if the female one is the instigator) feeling compromised, potentially threatening their work, their ability to retain their portfolio and their intention to serve the people as they were elected to do.

The fact that for some women, keeping their job (whether elected, appointed or hired) depends on their ability to be “a part of the team” is tremendously disconcerting.  While we in the business world understand the ramifications of being caught making such demands, it seems that those who make the rules find no issue in breaking them.  In one case where I have screen shots of the demands, I was told by police that the victim must come forward herself, which she is very hesitant to do.  Too often the women in such situations are intimidated or humiliated into silence, some fear that their naivety makes them look stupid and yes, some women encouraged or allowed “an exchange” to happen for their own gain before they realized they had gone too far and now they can’t say anything for fear of personal disgrace.

What disturbs me equally are the many women who know this is going on but accept it and say nothing.  They may express pain, concern or disgust over it in private but publicly they say nothing.  They are the embodiment of Martin Luther King when he said, “One who condones evil is just as guilty as the one who perpetrates it.” or Lieutenant General David Morrison who noted, “The standard you walk past is the standard you accept.”

And as I noted previously, some are active, willful participants, harvesting their own benefits from such actions.

In addition to creating a toxic environment that would sink most businesses or business people who dared to partake in such miscreant behavior, there is also the potential that people who participate in such things open themselves up to extortion.

For example, If news of the MHA with the diaper fetish came out (or, God forbid, a photo of him), that MHA could be leveraged, with the person on the other end of the lever demanding cash or some sort of government gift in exchange for silence.

When MHAs, employees or consultants have been intimidated to put out or get out in order to accomplish their own work or when they could be compromised through extortion, government ceases to be of and for the people but rather, of and for the people who hold the secrets.

While this is not unusual for governments in general (to be at the whim of those on the other end of a secret), use of behavior that intimidates people or makes use of tactics that are illegal everywhere else should be considered unacceptable.

Shouldn’t it?

The Bottom Line

Secrets have always been a part of government and business and those who have been compromised regret the impact when those secrets are revealed.

But when those secrets hurt innocent people such as family members unaware of what is going on, MHAs being coerced into compromising situations in order to get their own work done, workers being intimidated into submission to keep their own job or similar evil acts, we have a problem.

When those secrets can be used to compromise a Minister into performing any task at the request of a master of extortion, we have a problem.

When people who observe it do nothing to fix it, we have a problem.

When people who believe they are a guiding post of ethics, character and morals and are a role model for young people demonstrate behavior that doesn’t portray any of these attributes, we have a problem.

The dilemma with problems is that they continue to grow in scale, frequency and impact unless we choose to do something to solve them.  We may think these problems do not affect us but eventually our analysis is proven to be flawed and we claim surprise or indignation as a result.

The other dilemma is that there are many good people inside the Legislature, whether elected, appointed or hired, whose efforts and intentions are being bent, interfered with or thwarted entirely while people use their primal wiring of lust to satisfy their primal need for power.

Where is the courage for people to stand up and demand better, both inside or outside the Legislature or the courage of others to support those who would do so?

When do we demand better so that the people inside who are capable of doing better and who want to do better are free to execute without fear of intimidation or compromise?

What happens if the list of things I have seen, also in the possession of other people who are more motivated by personal power than I am, decide they want to take down a government unless they get what they want?

Where does it end?

With us, of course.

But that all depends on whether people have the courage, the strength, the wisdom and the will to stand up for what they believe in and to take a stand against behaviors that we are taught to be unethical, immoral and in many cases, illegal.

Or we can make this fodder for social media or coffee house chatter, marveling or being disgusted with it but doing nothing else until something happens that affects us directly.

Doing the latter doesn’t change anything.

In fact, finding a reason to justify why we can’t do something only becomes an excuse, an excuse that translate into ignoring the activity, then condoning it and then supporting it …. making us part of the problem despite our vehement protests to the contrary.

What does change things depends on whether people care and demand better.

Do you?

Be the change you wish to see or stop complaining about it.

In service and servanthood,

Harry

PS Don’t bother asking me for the list of licentious behaviors and the names attached to them.  There are plenty of people who have this information.  Unfortunately, when such deeds are so rampant, there is no shortage of sources of information.  However, my tweets in recent days referencing this behavior have produced calls, texts and emails from MHAs demanding to know who “their evil colleagues” are. Weakly disguised efforts to see if “I am on the list” only make the whole situation more comical and more pathetic.

I wonder what minor event becomes the tipping point that takes out an entire government, only to be replaced by another one that suffers from the same complexities.

---

Addendum – The Initial Reaction – July 20, 2017

After my blog was posted, I was contacted by four MHAs, two men and two women.

The men were outraged at the content and the idea that I had publicly identified them. The curious thing was that I not only didn’t name anyone in this post, I wasn’t even thinking of these two in particular.  When I tried to convince them of this, they didn’t believe me. 

Awkward.

The two women provided curious responses also.

First of all, in an attempt to identify the people I was referring to, they named other people (consistent across both of them) that again, I was not thinking of.  The plot thickens in an environment filled with rumor, conjecture and malfeasance.

The other thing is that they both found the environment incredibly difficult to survive in.  They used words like intimidation, bullying and the like to describe actions directed towards them and other women.  They freely named women who were targeted victims of intimidation and manipulation.  They both identified women who “played the game” with multiple MHAs.  They both admitted to having been offered sex by Ministers in exchange for “whatever”.  They also admitted to having acts of jealousy directed towards them when, having refused the advances of someone, were then accused of doing so only because “they must be sleeping with x”.

They both agreed with me that women should never accept abuse in the workplace or anywhere else.

All good.

However, they both admitted that they were willing to accept all of this in order to retain their seat and to continue doing the work that they do.  They also admitted that they had an acceptable tolerance level of abuse, “a price” as both named it, that allowed them to keep quiet.

Hmmmm …. didn’t they say that abuse was unacceptable?

Both had complained to someone else known to be an active participant in the environment.  Their words won’t create change and they know it but they take solace in knowing that they did talk to someone about it.

Neither is willing to take a public stand against it.

I asked them both to consider the quotes from King and Morrison in regards to saying and doing nothing while acknowledging the toxic environment.  I asked them also to consider how they would feel if they had a daughter, sister or mother caught up in such a situation. 

They are not stupid people but their willful inability to see themselves in the quotes speaks volumes.  I’m not sure either of them agree with my position – that to not take a stand outside of complaining privately makes them part of the problem. 

That’s what we are told in the private sector!

I wonder if they have read the following Government-issued documents:

• Workplace Bullying
• Maintaining a Harassment and Discrimination-Free Workplace
• Harassment and Discrimination Free Workplace
• Preventing Workplace Violence

I assume HR does nothing because they see elected officials as “their boss”.  It’s a curious thing to me, working in an industry where HR heavyweights will sometimes lay into someone for looking at another person the wrong way.

In regards to accepting abuse in order to get work done, I wonder what would happen if one of my executive team were caught behaving as these people behave and when the police and legislators show up, I used the excuse, “You can’t arrest him – do you realize how much work he gets done?”

My team member would still be arrested and I would be humiliated and vilified - rightfully so for demonstrating such ignorance.

As I look at the SMS messages on my phone early this morning, I wonder if they could be used to establish a precedence whereby abuse was allowed in the workplace.

After all, if the legislators embrace it as status quo, why shouldn’t we?

Such thinking is dangerous, destructive and regressive.

Which makes me wonder why it is tolerated (and even embraced) within the highest authority in the Province.

Where are the public outcries amongst women’s groups who likely know this is happening?

Perhaps it serves their interests to stay quiet rather than risk offending “useful friends”.

And how do women expect to create respect in the workplace (whether in Government or elsewhere) when they are unwilling to stand up and demand it?

How indeed?

---

Closing Thoughts (almost - I changed my mind later)

I know from my contacts within the Government and from feedback that some MHAs have sent me to directly that once again, I have stirred up a hornet’s nest.  I have been accused of being immoral or unethical (by the people who committed the acts) for making these observations while they fail to see that had they not committed the acts in the first place, there would be no observations to make.  So in their mind, performing or accepting nefarious acts is not immoral – reporting them is.

I made some observations on social media about naming names, which was met by cries of foul from some who say that such actions will hurt the innocent.  My response to this is that the innocent are already being hurt and that the number of people who are being hurt will continue to grow as long as miscreant behavior is not addressed.

I find the ultimate message here to be confusing – the contradictory rule that certain behavior is considered unacceptable except in the areas where it is considered acceptable (based on nebulous, fluid rule interpretations and damaged rationalization).

Perhaps someone smarter than I am can enlighten me.

Perhaps.

---

Addendum – Are You Really Surprised? Who Wants to Bell the Cat? – July 23, 2017

When people act surprised about something, it’s always an interesting exercise to see if they are truly surprised or just feigning surprise.

A few people brought the story of Valerie Penton to my attention, a woman who was being sexually harassed by a fellow employee of the Government and who felt that Human Resources within the Government did little if anything to help her. 

She eventually settled a  harassment suit out of court and moved on to other opportunities.  One writer writing about her story noted that the man who harassed her (and used access to DMV records to examine her personal records including her address) was still working there.  I don’t know if that is still the case but most of us get fired immediately for such indiscretion.

Interestingly enough, many of the stories written about Ms. Penton by the local media have been deleted (although some are still available in different web cache locations).

There are at least four articles that remain that don’t require exploring the web cache (at the time I write this):

• Feeling Abandoned (Gander Beacon)
• No Place to Turn (Southern Gazette)
• Bad Behavior in the Civil Service (The Pilot)
• Davis Orders External Review of Harassment Policies (Pink White Green)

The people who came forward telling similar stories after Valerie Penton’s story became public indicated that HR did little if anything for them when their harassment was reported.

Those same people indicated that Ministers were slow to respond to their concerns and needed to be prompted multiple times to take action.

Some people inside and outside of Government said, after reading my post, that they have never heard of any type of harassment inside Government before I posted my piece.

And yet an external review was undertaken to review this very subject after Valerie Penton’s case became public.

So where is the surprise regarding any of this?

Maybe the answer can be found in a personal experience of mine.

Some years ago, I was on the board for an international charity when some significant indiscretions by staff members were discovered.  When I reported them to fellow board members, I found out that they already knew.

When they discovered that I now knew also, they demanded to know what I was going to do about it.

When I asked them why they hadn’t already done something about it, they replied that they didn’t want to jeopardize their other board postings.

Ah yes … courage only when convenient and risk-free.

We need to find a way to encourage those who are victims to know that they have our support in ferreting out miscreants.

And we need to find a way to pressure those with authority to stand up for them.

Many of the latter have been coming to me demanding to know what I am doing about this.

I am asking them in return,“What are you doing about it?”

It reminds me of this story:

A group of mice were arguing in a mouse hole one day about a cat that had been terrorizing them.  With every passing day, the cat would sneak up on one of them without warning and would make off with the unsuspecting victim.  The mice were now tired of this and were arguing about what to do about the villain.

One mouse suggested that if they put a bell on the cat’s neck, then he would no longer be able to creep up on them unawares.

Recognizing the brilliance of the solution, the mice spent considerable time congratulating themselves on how they had solved the problem when their celebration was interrupted by a lone voice in the back of the mouse hole.

“The solution may be brilliant”, observed a wise old mouse, “but who will bell the cat?”

Silence filled the mouse hole and eventually the mice went about their business, realizing that there is a big difference between being full of ideas and having the courage to carry them out.

So … who wants to bell the cat?

The Complexity of Morality Duality

Rationalization is a process of not perceiving reality, but of attempting to make reality fit one’s emotions. - Ayn Rand

Everybody makes excuses for themselves they wouldn't be prepared to make for other people. - Rebecca Goldstein

The ego is a mean mechanism which mobilizes the absolute strongest rationalization traps in order to preserve itself. - David Jascha

The #1206 “fiction” series continues …

---

The two lawyers sat in a Starbucks in a city in Alberta and stared in silence at their respective coffee cups.

The older of the two alternated between sighing heavily and biting his lip in frustration while his younger colleague said nothing.

“What really ticks me off more than anything”, said the older lawyer as he broke the silence, “is the lack of morality in this matter.  How dare someone do such a thing and think that they can get away with it?  There is something seriously wrong in a world where people seem to think that they can get away with acts highly deficit of ethical or moral substance while thinking they can do so without fear of retribution or rebuke.”

He lightly struck the table between them with his fist as he shook his head in anger.

“How dare they?”, he said forcefully but not loudly.

“I don’t know”, muttered his younger colleague.  He had always looked up to the partner seated across from him but now he wondered if he had aligned himself with the wrong mentor.

“What do you think I should do?”, asked the older lawyer.

His younger colleague shrugged.  “I’m not sure”, he replied, “I don’t have any experience with stuff like this.  I don’t know if there is much you can do at all.”

“Well”, continued the older lawyer, “there is one thing that I can guarantee you.  If I find the son of a bitch who did it, I will have his butt hanging from the flagpole.  It is a sad day when we allow the immoral and unethical to do things that interfere with hard working people like us.”

He was interrupted by a chime from his phone.  He picked it up and examined the message displayed.

His face began to darken in anger and he looked up at his younger colleague.  “I’ve got to go”, he said tersely, “she is sending me some material and I need to respond to it before the day is out.”

He got up and without so much as a nod of thanks to his younger colleague, walked out of the coffee shop.

One of his partners had been watching the interaction from the other side of the coffee shop and walked over to the younger colleague.

“He seems pretty angry about something”, he observed, “Is everything ok?”

Feeling a little uncomfortable about revealing something shared in confidence but not wanted to anger the partner now seated across the table from him, he shrugged and asked, “Can you keep a secret?”

“Of course”, the partner assured him.

“He’s angry because someone just sent his wife a list of the women, including clients, that he has been having affairs with for years”, said the younger lawyer, “and now he wants revenge on the person who did it.”

The younger lawyer paused for a moment before continuing.

“What I don’t understand”, he said uncertainly, “is that he is saying that what that person did was immoral and yet he doesn’t see the immorality of what he has done.”

He paused again before looking the elder partner directly in the eye.

“How is that possible?”, he asked.

The two men looked down at their coffee cups in silence for a moment before the elder lawyer pulled out his mobile phone and texted to a colleague.

I have a secret that we can use to finally get rid of you-know-who.

To be continued.

---

© 2015 – Harry Tucker – All Rights Reserved

Background

While some things have been altered here to present a coherent story, the basic facts of the story are true.

In my world of Wall St., I have always been fascinated with the duality of morality, the notion that what I do is “always proper, ethical and moral” while the other guy who is doing the same thing suffers from a serious deficiency of ethics, morals and practically anything else.

There is also the point of how some people leverage the immorality of others for their own gain (and some people specialize in this technique).  Is that any better than the original immoral act?  I don’t think so.

The ego, when motivated by the wrong things and a twisted sense of perspective, can produce some interesting results and how the results are perceived by different people.

Ah the concept of duality.

I spoke to a farmer last week who was all wound up about what we are doing to our environment (including our food supply) in the name of money and how we all needed to do something about it.  I agreed totally and then asked the farmer if he used Round-Up ready seed from Monsanto and he indicated that he did.

I asked him why he would use such a product when it has been demonstrated that Round-Up, one of the most poisonous chemicals known to man, is now turning up in our food and water supply, especially when he was so fired up about what we are doing to our environment.

“Could this be a variant of greed?”, I asked.

“This is different”, he replied, “this is all about maximizing yield quantity and quality.  That has nothing to do with greed.”

“Possibly”, I replied, “but if you are maximizing your yield quantity and quality, is this not all about maximizing profit?”

“Of course it is”, replied the farmer.

“As a businessman, I have nothing against maximizing profit”, I observed, “but could it be said that this is a variant of greed when we know that we may be sacrificing the health of others in order to achieve a maximized profit?”

The farmer was silent.

“What I would recommend”, I said, “is that you need to remove the duality from your Life.  You can either focus on maximizing profit using the products you are using, not care about the impact of the health of others and stop complaining that people need to stop contaminating the environment or you can start making the difference on your own farm that you so passionately believe is needed and thus be the change you want to see in others.  You cannot live both sides of duality.”

“That makes me a hypocrite, doesn't it?”, asked the farmer.

“Not necessarily”, I replied, “although the duality you are trying to live doesn’t work at all and eventually you will be called out on it or you will drive yourself crazy.”

The conversation ended without a stated purpose on the farmer’s part.

I suspect that profit will win in the case of this farmer – it is the preferred path of most people in the world today.

As a businessman, I understand the importance of profit.

However, the duality within our lives, whether in how we generate a profit or how we live our lives in general, often leads to complexities in our Lives as the things we desire, the things we demand of others and the things we do run into conflict with each other (often at the sacrifice of someone else).

Do you have unresolved dualities?

What do they say about you?

What are they doing to you?

Should you do something about them?

Why or why not?

How do you know?

Series Origin

This series, a departure from my usual musings, is inspired as a result of conversations with former senior advisors to multiple Presidents of the United States, senior officers in the US Military and other interesting folks as well as my own professional background as a Wall St. / Fortune 25 strategy and large-scale technology architect.

While this musing is just “fiction” and a departure from my musings on technology, strategy, politics and society, as a strategy guy, I do everything for a reason and with a measurable outcome in mind. :-)

This “fictional” musing is a continuation of the #1206 series noted here.

---

Addendum – Duality Examples – August 12, 2015

I rarely post addendums to #1206 blogs but I had an interesting event occur today that illustrates dualities perfectly.

Someone who taught me in theology some years ago posted a photo today of a naked man standing in water and made an observation that if we had more of this type of thing, we could get more women interested in fishing.

It might have been amusing had it not been for the fact that this person, a woman, is highly sensitive regarding pictures and comments that men post about women, especially when it looks like the man is objectivizing the woman.

Recognizing the duality of “do as I say and not as I do”, I politely asked what she would do if I had posted a similar photo of a woman.  After she made her point (poorly) that she is proving what women have to go through, she disconnected me from her social media account before I could reply.

It brings to mind this duality variant.

When people call us on something, we can either observe the following (with context specific information included from this event):

1. If we teach or have taught theology (including application of morality and ethics behavior), we don't post pictures of naked men to make "a fun point".
2. If we are offended by men who objectivize women when they post pictures of naked women "for fun", we don't post pictures of naked men in return.
3. We don’t "make a point" by performing the same act as the person who affronts us (two wrongs never make anything right).
4. If we don't see the inconsistency of what we do versus what we demand (or what we teach), we should remember that Life teaches us to:

a. Understand dissenting / questioning opinion when expressed respectfully.
b. Discuss differences of opinion maturely.
c. Entertain dialog in give and take without getting emotional.

OR ... we can do this:

1. Make a point and then immediately unfriend / block the other person before our action can be explored or questioned (thankfully we got the last word in before disconnecting from them).

JR once said:

The more social media we have, the more we think we're connecting, yet we are really disconnecting from each other.

They say that social media keeps us connected but I think it is providing us with new ways of forgetting how to connect with each other in respectful, mature ways that matter, creating many opportunities for new dualities to be created in our lives.

I also think social media creates many opportunities for us to be inconsistent, with our dualities in plain sight for all to see (even if we are blind to them).

It doesn’t create the dualities themselves but merely reveals them.

The only issue is that when we get caught in our dualities, it is not the other person’s fault and so we shouldn’t be angry with them.

The fault is our own and so we should accept blame and responsibility accordingly.

What do you think?

If you don’t agree with me, don’t bother emailing me – I’ve already disconnected from you in a proactive, pre-emptive fashion.

Morals - Setting the Bar Lower

“The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in times of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality.” - Dante Alighieri, “Inferno”

It is intriguing to see the fuss currently being stirred up over Miley Cyrus’ sing and grind routine at the VMA’s last night.

Her actions didn’t leave much to the imagination as this image demonstrates.

What is interesting is that this will make a big spike in social and traditional media and will then fade away.

As did this image from an HBO special last year.

Sorry … I offended you on purpose.

Or maybe you weren’t offended – this is a world built upon freedom of expression and many people see images like this as “artful expression”.

While the noise will subside and disappear regarding these images, every such image that we are presented with lowers the bar for what we tolerate as morally acceptable.

And with the lowering of that bar, we are setting a new standard for what is acceptable in society - especially in how we depict women and children.

Are you offended by this?

If your answer is yes, then do something about it.

If your answer is no, I don’t want to hear complaints in a few years about how the world has gone to heck in a hand basket.  And if your answer is no and your kid goes off the rails as a result of such influence, be proud.  You will have created the best person possible with the standards of morality you have embraced.

The funny thing about slippery slopes is that they don’t progress gently and in a linear fashion.  They change exponentially over time, getting steeper and faster.  At some point, the ride you find yourself on is going so fast that you can’t get off  until you get to the end - an end that is beyond your ability to change or influence.

There is a not-so-fine-line between change that improves humanity and change that tears it down.

Do you know where this line is drawn?

Are you sure?

In service and servanthood,

Harry

Addendum

The irony about all of this is how we can rationalize anything.  We can embrace Miley Cyrus’ actions on a live, allegedly family-friendly TV program as entertainment while the same actions performed in the street will get you arrested for indecency.

Some will argue that you don’t have to watch TV, that you can turn it off or change the channel.

True enough.

But if you see it on the street, you can also look the other way.

Like I said.  We can rationalize anything. :-)

When Our Values Become Inconvenient

I was intrigued to see a Roman Catholic hospital win a malpractice suit in Colorado on the claim that fetuses aren’t really human.  The story of the lawsuit is here.

It is intriguing because a major tenet of Roman Catholic belief is that:

Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.

Unfortunately, it appears that this Catholic hospital is ok with living the values and tenets of the Catholic Church until they become legally inconvenient, at which point they make an abrupt turn to protect their own interests.

Whatever side of the pro-choice / pro-life dialog we find ourselves on, I still find it an interesting reflection on humanity that the dialog is even taking place while we admit that should we find bacteria on Mars, it will be automatically hailed as a sign of Life.

Meanwhile, we can’t agree on whether or not a fetus is alive (or even human, as in this case).

This case also reminds me of how wishy-washy many of us are when it comes to living our values, ethics and morals.

We claim to live by them when convenient or when Life is not squeezing us too hard.  But when Life squeezes us to the point where it is safer or more convenient to abandon them, then we do so as this hospital did.

Einstein reflected on this lack of personal fortitude when he said:

“Relativity applies to physics, not ethics”

Twain wondered about it as well when he noted:

It is curious - curious that physical courage should be so common in the world, and moral courage so rare.

The world would be a much better place if we were authentic in living the values, ethics and morals that we claim to embrace.

As Robert Kennedy said:

Few men are willing to brave the disapproval of their fellows, the censure of their colleagues, the wrath of their society. Moral courage is a rarer commodity than bravery in battle or great intelligence. Yet it is the one essential, vital quality for those who seek to change a world which yields most painfully to change.

Are you authentic as far as your values, ethics and morals are concerned?

Or do you have a price, after which you find it easy to allow them to “slide” a little.

Or even worse …. do you present them as a facade portraying that which you do not really care about but which serves as a convenient platform for the purposes of reward / self-promotion / elevation?

How do you know?

Do you even care?

Someday you will.

In service and servanthood,

Harry

Killing the Heart of a Nation

Anyone who knows me knows how I treasure and value the importance of rural Canada and rural America.

As a businessman, I recognize that the larger centers, whether it be Toronto, New York or the like, provide the “energy” to drive nations.

However, I also believe that the rural towns are the lifeblood of nations, often providing the last vestiges of the morals and values of yesteryear that we lament have disappeared from the larger centers.  The rural towns provide the balance against the larger centers and together, we find a way to make the balance work to create as strong a future as we can.

As someone who grew up in a rural environment before moving on to success in larger centers, I recognize the need for both.

When the lifeblood of a nation is weakened, I wonder what happens to that balance and the future of the nation itself.

While my ancestral home is Bell Island, Newfoundland, Canada, I grew up in a rural town “across the bay” called Foxtrap.  In 1971, it had an official population of 971 souls so this is as rural as it gets.  Until the early 90s, the primary sources of income for the majority of residents was farming and fishing.

Today, with the amalgamation of some surrounding communities, it still has a population of under 3,000 and Foxtrap itself is now part of the larger community of Conception Bay South.

It’s still as small as it gets.

So you can imagine my surprise and disappointment when I heard that in this sleepy little ocean-side town, it was announced that a new cabaret was opening today.

Cabaret is usually defined as form of entertainment featuring music, comedy, song, dance, recitation or drama.

Doesn’t sound so bad, does it?  In fact, while being a strange place to locate a theater, perhaps they are introducing a little culture to the town of my upbringing.

But it does strike my interest to know that a nearby house was also purchased to house “the dancers”.  Intriguing indeed – I’ve never heard of such special care being given to thespians before.

As a result, I couldn’t help but wonder what else they might do in such a house.

And then I look at the owners of the facility.

They are also the owners of a facility in the nearby city of St. John’s known as Sirens.

What kind of facility is Sirens?

This picture on the opening page of their website speaks volumes.

It doesn’t leave a whole lot to the imagination, does it?

It doesn’t look much like cabaret either.

Now, I’m not a prude by ANY stretch of the imagination.

I have no issue with strip clubs or the more commonly used term “gentlemen’s clubs”.

However, I do have an issue with where they are located.

Sirens is located in downtown St. John’s in an area known for its mix of bars, pubs and gentlemen’s clubs.

The new “cabaret club” is smack dab in the middle of the small rural town of Foxtrap.  The club has an elementary school bus stop in front of it and will be open for business when kids are dropped off in front of it.

All of these facts create a toxic mix in my brain that is not sitting right with me.

Who approved this?

This brings me to the people who approved the development of a “cabaret club” in the middle of this sleepy town.

The Town Council of Conception Bay South and Mayor Woody French said they had no confirmation of what the building would ultimately be, which is why they allowed the club to be put there.

Here’s the problem with such a statement.

If the leadership of a town doesn’t know what is being put in the town, then they shouldn’t allow it until they know.

If they know but can’t be transparent with the people living in the area, then they shouldn’t allow it to happen either.

To do so anyway speaks volumes in terms of their competence level and their ability to run a town.

Or perhaps it speaks louder in terms of their inability to do so.

If our rural towns are going to be allowed to have their heart ripped out through incompetent or immoral politicians, I fear for the future of our nation.  Once our foundation of morals and values is lost, all is lost.

A Message to Our “Leaders”

As for the Mayor of CBS and any councillors who voted for this and slyly slid it by the local residents, I offer this musing.

Since we are on the subject of cabaret, let’s explore the root of the word “actor”.

The word “actor” is derived from the Greek word “hypokrites”, from which we get the modern word hypocrite.

Any politician who would thrust a “cabaret” upon the residents of a small rural town by either not telling them that it was coming or by saying that he didn’t really know what was going there (which somehow makes it ok), is a hypocrite.

Or perhaps they are just acting, pretending to be competent community leaders when they in fact are not.

Either way, in conducting themselves as they are, they are taking responsibility for ripping the heart out of a rural community and a nation.

I wonder if they already have a communications strategy in place for when the inevitable drugs and prostitution pop up in the same area.

Here’s a hint to them: You better prepare it now – you will need it.

Here’s another thought to the town council: Why don’t you licence the establishment on the same street that you live on so you can see how it “contributes” to your neighbourhood.

All that being said, if the residents of Foxtrap don’t want this to happen, they need to do more than complain on the local radio station.

As Moliere, the French actor, once said:

“It is not only what we do, but also what we do not do, for which we are accountable.”

We all share responsibility for making our communities and our nation strong.

A nation is made stronger when we take action and is weakened when we choose not to take action.

I wonder how the home of my youth chooses to defend that which is important to them and to the nation.

“To be, or not to be, that is the question”.

In service and servanthood,

Harry

PS  Dear churches.  You claim to be the keeper of morals and values in society-at-large.  Your absence in this dialog speaks volumes in itself and is in fact, hypocritical. 

Lead by example or move out of the way and let someone else do so.

PPS I wonder what the Right Honorable Terry French, Member of the Newfoundland and Labrador House of Assembly, nephew of the mayor of Conception Bay South and resident of the area, thinks of this also.  As the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation and with a young daughter, his thoughts on the matter would be interesting to know.

Elections and the Smear Campaign–Weapon of the Future

Watching the Democrats employ the ultimate smear campaign against Mitt Romney has been the most disappointing campaign I have ever witnessed. 

Democrats in recent months have accused Romney of being a felon, a tax evader and now a direct contributor to someone’s death from cancer.  I understand that Mr. Axelrod and Mr. Obama have used this technique quite successfully in previous campaigns and so they are bringing out the big guns one more time

Sadly, Mr. Obama did promise never to resort to such tactics as noted below in a campaign speech from 2008 but you know what they say about how you can tell if a politician is lying.

 

2008 Democrat campaign trail

 

Some liberal democrats that I have tried to discuss this with using data and facts have tried to silence me with yelling, screaming and death threats.

Yes, the days of the ultimate weapons of choice to win an election or a debate have arrived.  Campaigns have always been dirty, but these unsubstantiated allegations by “unnamed sources” are a new low.

The way I see it, there are only a few things left for Romney to be accused of:

1. Wife battery

2. Pedophilia

3. A desire to reinstate slavery as a personal affront to the President once he is out of office.

4. That gun-toting Republicans will be ordered to shoot Democrats randomly in public places should the GOP lose the upcoming election.

But let’s explore this a little.  Maybe I am wrong.

Maybe these guys are on to something.

Perhaps if we consider some scenarios that ring closer to home that we will be able to see the power and wonder of this technique.

Bidding For Business

You might consider my competition, Mr. Prospect.  Hopefully he will have dug himself out of the court case with his last client by then.  What are the details?  Oh, I can’t say. That’s confidential information.

Business Relationship That Ended

Of course I couldn’t work with that guy any more.  I don’t work with guys sleeping around on their wives. Who is he fooling around with?  I can’t say because I wouldn’t want to hurt his family.

High School

Dear Mr. So-and-So.  Here’s a picture of you and my fellow student so-and-so (you don’t know that it’s photoshopped).  I’m expecting to have a good year in my senior year, if you catch my meaning.  I’d hate for this picture to get onto Facebook by accident.

School Yard

Mommy, Sarah keeps picking on me!.  That’s ok, Dear.  The next time Sarah picks on you, tell all the other kids that her Daddy touches her where he shouldn’t and she will stop picking on you.

Bored Soccer Mom

Can you believe that she said she didn’t like my new purse?  Maybe if she didn’t spend her time snorting lines of coke at home that she might still have some semblance of taste.

Sprinkle in some social media as we embrace this and we’re reaching the masses with our “powerful” message.

Yes, the possibilities are endless.

But wait!  What about the example we are setting for our youth?

Screw ‘em – they’re just a bunch of devil-worshipping, drug-dealing, lazy people, aren’t they?  They don’t care.

The Reality

Anyone who knows me knows that I don’t believe this about young people.

But there are three things I do believe when it comes to our youth.

1. We emulate our leaders in thought, word and action.

2. That which we tolerate today we embrace tomorrow.

3. The legacy that we are leaving for our youth and the models of behavior that we want them to emulate leave a LOT of room for improvement.

I believe we can and must do better and that we must hold ourselves and our leaders, whether in politics, business, religion or anything else to a much higher standard.

What do you believe?

Or worse …. do you even care?

Someday you will.

In service and servanthood,

Harry

PS  Here is what David Rothkopf, a well-known Democrat, thinks of the current Democrat campaign - Reid's Romney smears an insult to voters. 

Sometimes the greatest insult of all to someone is when their intelligence has been insulted or they are being used but they don’t know it or don’t stand up to fight it.  But then again, people who suck it up incessantly without question make for the perfect electorate, don’t they?

Chick-fil-A and Intolerance of Intolerance

The Mayor of Pittsburgh has joined the Mayors of Chicago and Boston by informing Chick-fil-A that its leaders’ stand on same-sex marriage is not welcome and thus their chain is not welcome in their respective cities.

I think this is a very dangerous slippery slope.

For starters, there are the legal and constitutional ramifications of governments that punish companies for the beliefs of the leadership of those companies.  I’ll leave that subject to the experts in those respective fields.

But if we are now going to start a moral crusade by punishing every company whose leadership has beliefs that we don’t agree with, then let’s line up the leadership of the Fortune 500 and fry them now because I’m sure every company has a leader who has a belief or who has committed some act that someone doesn’t agree with.

I happen to know that the CEO of one of the largest companies in the world has a significant hash pipe collection.  Does this mean that if we are strongly anti-drug that we will stop buying the products of that company?  Would someone consider this leader’s values to conflict with our “war on drugs”?  What about the paradox for those who work for the company who have to undergo drug screening?

Secondly, when Chicago Mayor Emanuel said that Chick-fil-A’s values are not Chicago’s values, I’m not certain who appointed him the de facto representative of everyone’s values on every issue.

I’m not even certain what Chicago’s official values list looks like.  Can someone point me in the direction of this official list?

Thirdly, it’s easy for many people to get behind the mayors of these cities and support their pro-same-sex message.  After all, it’s always easy to get behind someone and support their message when you agree with THAT message.

But what happens when at some point down the road, mayors or other government leaders decide to take similar action for other areas of moral judgement based on THEIR opinion and you suddenly discover that you don’t agree with THAT particular choice?

It will be too late to do anything, because we will have enabled them by our support or apathy in this instance.

There is also an irony in the Boston mayor’s comments – to preach intolerance of other people’s opinions because we feel they are intolerant of ours is to hope that two wrongs make a right.

Weren’t we taught as children that this doesn’t work?

Whether we strongly agree with or disagree with an opinion is one thing.

However, when a government threatens legal action over the opinion of a citizen or when it claims to represent everyone’s values and morals is another.  Such assumptions have the potential to destroy the great nation built upon ideals such as the First Amendment and the belief that through the expression and debate of opinions, a great nation can learn to strengthen itself.

But then again, yelling at people who disagree with us appears to be the norm these days.  Maybe the people of the great nation of the United States of America would prefer to intimidate anyone who dares to have a difference of opinion.

And if that’s the case, I wonder if it’s only a matter of time before the First Amendment and the Second Amendment collide.

Whether that happens or not, when the day arrives that we are not entitled to our own opinion, it will be a sad day indeed.

Maybe that day has already arrived and we just don’t know it yet.

In service and servanthood,

Harry

 

Addendum: July 27, 2012

The bashing of Chick-fil-A continues, as does the rhetoric and the false information suggesting things about Chick-fil-A that are not true.  I wonder what social cause these government representatives will embrace next. 

There is another slippery slope here.

What happens if a mayor or other politician with intent to run for election / re-election discovers they have a powerful opponent in a particular organization’s leadership and uses the guise of a “social cause” to discredit / disempower their opponent?

Would the average voter be able to see through such an act?

I highly doubt it.

What happens if the same politician leverages an emotionally-loaded cause to “use” the electorate, playing on their feelings and emotions while vaulting the politician in their campaign, all the while leveraging an issue that the politician doesn’t actually care about?

Ah … I forgot.

That would be politics as usual.

Final thought

Someone told me I was brave for publishing this because I said what they wanted to say but were afraid to do so for fear of backlash.

While I didn’t say anything that was controversial, such a comment reflects the possibility that perhaps the sad day has indeed arrived where differences of opinion are truly not welcome.

What is also sad is that I don’t see the leadership in Washington, either incumbent or challenger, make any comment that would demonstrate their desire to stand with the law and the Constitution on such a sticky matter.

But such wishy washy behavior would be politics as usual also.

Ethics and the Courage To Do What’s Right

On Friday night, I happened to watch Courageous, a powerful movie from the makers of Fireproof about the idea that “honor begins at home”.  I highly recommend the movie although I will warn viewers, even big tough men like myself, that a box of Kleenex will come in handy in a couple of places.

After the movie was finished, I reflected on the importance of honor and ethics in my professional career.  Many times over the years, I had to choose between doing the right thing (potentially impacting myself and my family in a significant, negative way) versus turning a blind eye to a situation in order to “play it safe”.

At one client on Wall St, a household-name in the banking industry, a number of “star players” inside the Bank had been running a significant pornography operation on Bank servers (unbeknownst to senior Bank officers).  So the same infrastructure that ran online banking for customers also provided pornography services to other clients.

When I stumbled upon this, it seemed to me that the obvious thing to do was to point this out and have it shut down.  However, I was immediately cautioned against this by Bank staff, suggesting that since these guys were “the stars” of the organization, the Bank would punish whistleblowers in an effort to cover up the situation while allowing the whistleblowers to go about their business.

So the message was:

It doesn’t matter what you believe is right. Shut up and suck it up like everyone else and everything will be ok for everyone.  If you speak up, the only person who will be punished is you.

It was a time when I couldn’t really afford to be without work and so for a moment, I was stymied as to what to do.  If I did what I knew was right, I risked losing it all and putting my family in financial trouble.

If I chose to do nothing, income would continue to flow but I knew that I would carry an ever-growing burden that I was doing something against my own beliefs.

In the end, my belief in doing the right thing overpowered my fear that I would fall into catastrophic financial disaster and I blew the whistle on these guys.  I stepped out in faith, believing that ultimately good things happen to good people.

The right people heard the message, did the right thing, the pornography sites were shut down, the “stars” were dismissed and I was thanked profusely for having done the right thing.

It also produced many years of abundance, when oftentimes the tie breaker between myself and other candidates competing for the same business was my high level of personal ethics and my courage to do the right thing in difficult times.

As I reflected on this event and other experiences over the years, both my own and those of my colleagues, I realize that the structural tension of “doing the right thing” today is more difficult than ever.

We have many competing pressures in today’s world, not the least of which is taking care of ourselves and our families in challenging times. 

Meanwhile, the professional world is filled with people who use various of intimidation, including reminding people of potential financial or reputational impact if they insist on following their ethics to do “the right thing”.

But as I think back to many situations where I was called to make difficult decisions based on my own ethics and suffered through endless sleepless nights agonizing about “should I do this or should I not”, I realize a few important things.

While the transition through such times was difficult, the long-term rewards were far greater than the short-term “carrot” of keeping the pay check coming in or avoiding a bully who threatened to slam my reputation in an effort to force my compliance to his / her agenda.

Equally important, doing the right thing allows me to stand proud, knowing I did the right thing when many people admitted that they would have “sucked it up” just to keep a pay check coming in, even if they felt guilty about doing it.  I was true to myself, a principle that brings great personal peace to one’s Life.

Thirdly, there were many people who supported my decisions – I was never alone.  Neither are you.

Finally, there are many who look to us for guidance and inspiration.  Our actions not only impact our Life but the lives of many who see us as a model to be emulated …. so we should choose wisely.

Maybe doing the right thing here and there doesn’t mean much to some people.

However, over a lifetime, little things here and there add up to a lot.

It forms the basis for how we will be remembered long after we are gone.

And clients who engage with me know what the rules are before we engage.  I am flexible in every aspect of negotiation and execution except when it comes to my ethics, morals and values.

I’m not perfect by a long shot and have made my share of mistakes.

However, when my end-of-days has arrived, I will have done my best to say that I lived a life with no regrets and I will face my judgement knowing that I did the best I could with what I had.

Are you willing to stand up for what you believe in or are you one of those people who constantly brings the tension home to your family or to your friends at the coffee shop, constantly expressing frustration over a situation while doing nothing about it …..

…. as the structural tension between knowing the right thing and doing the right thing slowly tears you (and potentially others) apart.

In difficult times, it is important to remember that you are never alone nor are you the first person to experience what you are experiencing.  Many people have lived through what you are experiencing and are thriving as a result of the experience.

And knowing this, remember also that the world is waiting for more people to do the right thing, based on a higher level of ethics, morals and values.

The question is …. what are you waiting for?

In service and servanthood,

Harry

PS  I wouldn’t be half the person I am had it not been for great mentors in my Life.  I was thinking about a great mentor of mine, Richard Giordanella, whom I last saw 5 years ago just before he died of cancer.  He was a huge proponent of living by a strong code of ethics.  I share a blog entry here that I wrote about him a few years ago.