Rex M Rogers - Discerning What Is Best

Discerning What Is Best
With Dr Rex Rogers

Two New eBooks at Amazon Kindle!

Details: Written by Rex M. Rogers; Published: 17 January 2012

During the 2008 presidential campaign then Senator Barack Obama’s website “won” the beauty pageant with other candidate’s websites hands-down.

And it wasn’t just “beauty” in the sense of a good style and look. It was a fantastic landing page that brought you immediately into a backstage video one on one with the candidate. Then you heard him announced, got a glimpse of the raving crowd, and “followed” him up the stairs to the podium. You were there. You experienced the excitement. How could you not get enthused and vote for this candidate?

President Obama’s 2008 campaign also set new standards in using the Internet to raise funds and get out the word. In 2012, the current crop of Republican Party presidential candidates is pushing the Internet’s political envelope again.

Clearly, one way to get to know presidential candidates is to visit their websites. Obvious enough.

But you learn more than what the candidate thinks about given issues. You learn something about either their creativity/vision or perhaps the creativity/vision of their webmasters. Of course some of this is a function of available resources. But whatever the source, presidential candidate websites are a lot alike yet can vary dramatically.

Of 7 Republican candidates (counting Michele Bachmann and Jon Huntsman who’ve now dropped from the race) and President Obama, 5 websites used Landing Pages, 6 offered a Store where campaign items can be purchased, and 3 presented some kind of blog.

Most Interesting:

--Ron Paul’s site features a large inset box in which a counter works continuously before your eyes tallying gifts to his campaign. In addition, donors’ names and residences are listed as in Rex Rogers, Grand Rapids, MI. Both the dollar total and the names change rapidly. Eye-catching.

--Another Ron Paul distinction: his site includes a fairly lengthy Statement of Faith, like one might find on a preacher’s, author’s, or Christian college president’s website.

--President Obama’s site not only asks for volunteers to host events, the site lists numerous examples of the kinds of events a Vol can sponsor. Good seed-sowing. And, like 2008, the site is classy and well organized.

--Mitt Romney’s site uses a landing page, features more space as opposed to overwhelming text which makes the site more visually appealing, and creatively uses icons.

Most Uninteresting:

--Rick Perry’s site, Rick Santorum's website, and Jon Huntsman's site are for me least attractive. Rather basic and not visually exciting.

--Newt Gingrich’s website is text-heavy…which is to say, wordy. Surprised? So is the candidate.

Most Self-Promotion:

All candidates promote themselves, of course, but some candidates promote more than their political experience. Some promote their books.

--Michele Bachmann’s now suspended campaign website is basically selling her book.

--Newt Gingrich’s site features his wife in a section called “Callista’s Canvas.” Actually, Newt has a couple of sites marketing both his campaign and also his books and their company called Gingrich Productions.

Most Kids:

--One interesting thing about this bunch of Republican presidential wannabes is the number of children the candidates have:

Michele Bachmann, 5 along with 23 foster kids;

Rick Santorum, 7;

Jon Huntsman, 7 including 2 adopted;

Mitt Romney, 5;

Ron Paul, 5;

Newt Gingrich 2;

Rick Perry, 2.

That’s a lot of kids. The Obamas have 2 girls.

Candidate videos telling their personal stories range, at least the ones I identified, from about 1:00 minute to well over 5:00 minutes.

So, when it’s said and done I give the website creativity prize to Ron Paul. Stands to reason, I guess. He is the maverick in this campaign.

*This blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact Rex or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com or follow him at www.twitter.com/RexMRogers.

Details: Written by Rex M. Rogers; Published: 16 January 2012

Aging usually isn't on people's top ten list of things they want to do, or experience. But as they say, "It's better than the alternative."

Aging comes to us all, great and small. Ancient and wise King Solomon spent a lifetime thinking about what mattered in life. One of his conclusions? "Gray hair is a crown of splendor," (Proverbs 16:31). In other words, he thought advancing age came with some benefits. So do I.

Here's at least one:

This blog may be reproduced in whole or in part with a full attribution statement. Contact Rex or read more commentary on current issues and events at www.rexmrogers.com or follow him at www.twitter.com/RexMRogers.

Details: Written by Rex M. Rogers; Published: 13 January 2012

I wrote an article that was just posted this week. It's called Why America Should Revisit Civic Education. I sincerely believe we're going to pay a severe price if we do not resurrect civic education.

Learning about one’s country and what makes it a distinctive nation, learning about this nation’s ideals and achievements past should be a key part of an American youth’s upbringing. And it used to be, but not so much anymore. Yet learning to act like a citizen does not just happen.

Survey after survey demonstrate that each generation of American citizens understand less of what it means to be a citizen, as opposed to simply a subject. We no longer grasp the essentials of republican government, we can’t list president’s names, let alone explain who did what and why it was important. Worse, as a culture we no longer have a clear sense of what it means to be an American, which creates problems for us at home—for example, the immigration issue—and abroad—for example, knowing who and who not to befriend.

Civic education that once played a prominent role in elementary and secondary education needs a transfusion of support and passion. We need to help our youth rediscover the beauty of America’s founding ideals. We need to help them reinvigorate the hope that it is possible to design a government in which free and thinking people can decide what is best and pursue it.

Without this effort, at risk is a nation of, by, and for the people. Without meaningful civic education, at risk long-term is life, liberty, freedom of worship, and the pursuit of happiness.

To me these ideals are too rare and too precious to risk them further. We must teach America’s wonderful heritage. This is not civil religion. It’s civic education for the good of all.

Details: Written by Rex M. Rogers; Published: 10 January 2012

It won't be cyborgs or some other-worldly yet-unknown entity that'll overcome us someday. It'll be our "Stuff." It's all the, well, stuff, that we keep, save, forget about, and allow to have birthdays in our over-"stuffed" closets, attics, basements, garages, and temporary storage units out by the interstate.

Comedian George Carlin has gone to his reward, but he's well-remembered for an ingenious riff on "Stuff." Thing is, though, he never looked at stuff other than as things we own that soon own us.

But for some of us who are really "stuffed," holding onto things far past their usefulness is a matter of our worldview. It gets back to what we think about life, things, security, and wellbeing. "Stuff," after all, is a philosophic matter.

Here are a few more thoughts about "Stuff" and what to do with it.

Stuff-overload is something I've called being "suffocated." It's an avoidable malady.

Details: Written by Rex M. Rogers; Published: 09 January 2012

In Memphis April 4, 1968, James Earl Ray assassinated Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr, unelected but indisputable leader of what today we call the Civil Rights Movement. In Hellhound On His Trail: The Electrifying Account of the Largest Manhunt in American History (Anchor Books, 2010, 2011), Hampton Sides tells the pre and post-assassination story of the strange, smart but disturbed James Earl Ray aka Eric S. Galt aka Harvey Lowmeyer aka John Willard aka Ramon George Sneyd.

Sides writes a quite readable book, a kind of combination biography and historical novel. He digs deep on Ray: the man’s odd flophouse life, prison terms, and seeming creativity in finding ways to escape prison. Sides also uncovers Ray’s racism, a longtime part of his life but interestingly not often blatantly expressed—until he took one minute standing in a dirty bathroom tub to end the life of one the more gifted American orators of the 20^thCentury.

Conspiracy theories rage on to this day. Just google it and you’ll see. But Sides lays out the overwhelming amount of evidence that points to Ray and concludes without reservation that Ray acted alone.

I was in high school in April 1968. It was a challenging year for America, to say the least. A few months before MLK, Jr succumbed to a bullet, the Tet Offensive was launched in Viet Nam. In March, LBJ said he would not run for a second term as President. A few months after MLK, Jr died, Robert F. Kennedy, RFK, joined him when Sirhan Sirhan took his life in a California hotel June 6, 1968. In August, the Democratic National Convention in Chicago was marred by violent protest. The Counter Culture Movement had not yet reached its zenith. All of this is seared in my memory.

MLK, Jr, was a flawed leader, as Sides doesn’t hesitate to note, but MLK, Jr’s essential message from his most well-known speech continues to resonate: “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

If it’s true that racism is not what it once was in the United States, it is also true that it yet exists. So books like this remind us we've yet got work to do.

This book is not “fun” to read because its topic is serious and sad, but I recommend it highly.

Details: Written by Rex M. Rogers; Published: 06 January 2012

We know that good people do good things and bad people do bad things. That’s common sense based on experience born out everyday.

So it seems logical to say that leaders with good character will be successful, will choose and achieve (good) goals, and in the end leave positive legacies. It seems equally a no-brainer to conclude that leaders with bad character will be unsuccessful, will choose bad goals, likely will not achieve them, and in the end leave negative legacies.

But reality is not so simple. Truth be told, sometimes leaders evidencing good, even exemplary, character do not choose wisely, do not achieve, are not successful, and leave tarnished legacies. Meanwhile, strange as it may seem, leaders who are “bad people” back and accomplish good goals and eventually leave their leadership role lauded for success.

FDR apparently conducted at least one affair until the day he died; yet he is regarded as one of America’s great presidents. JFK apparently “carried on” in the White House in more ways than one, including with Marilyn Monroe; yet he is remembered for his vision and for his strength in staring down Khrushchev during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

LBJ was a womanizer, and he was arrogant and crude. But LBJ helped enact both the Civil Rights and the Voting Rights Acts of the mid-1960s, changing race relations for the better at long last and forever. Nixon campaigned as the “Law and Order” candidate, than orchestrated a break-in and cover-up precipitating a constitutional crisis. Finally, the law and order man resigned in disgrace.

Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush are clearly men of deep and abiding Christian faith. They are men of good character. But both, though accomplishing some things, walked away from what many consider failed presidencies.

So people of lesser character sometimes accomplish good to great things and people of higher character sometimes accomplish very little or even falter or fail. Hmmm. Why?

Character is still a predictor. It’s just not alone in its influence. Too many other variables are at work to isolate on character (which the Right and which religious voters tend to do) and use it as our one and only assessment of a leader’s potential.

Another reason character is not in itself a predictor is that leaders are not “all good” or “all bad.” All human beings are made in the image of God; yet all possess a sin nature. We are capable of nobility and ignobility. We are an enigmatic mix of good and evil and, under pressure, in the wrong moment, who knows what will come out?

In addition, to state the obvious, God is sovereign. He works in mysterious ways. The heart of the king is in his hand and God turns it wither he will. Sometimes what we call lack of success or utter failure fits within the plan of God. Sometimes he allows leaders with bad character to flourish, and sometimes God allows leaders of good will to endure hardship. Why? Only God knows.

So it’s possible that a would-be president with multiple divorces and affairs on his record just might turn out to be a good leader. It’s equally possible that a would-be president with an exemplary reputation just might turn out to be a poor president. It’s hard to tell based on our finite assessments of their perceived character—and that’s another consideration: “perceived” character is not always “actual” character. Things are not always what they seem.

Don’t get me wrong. Character matters. But using it as a predictor of leadership success is just not as easy as we might wish.