Monday, January 15, 2018

Within 24 Hours and the Apology That is Deserved is Necessary. Next Move Will Be Unliked Corporately...

Within 24 Hours and the Apology That is Deserved is Necessary.
Next Move Will Be Unliked Corporately...
by Nicholas Ashton, CEO/CIO CommSmart Global Group

Today, which is MLK Day has reminded me of many things.  One is how far we have not come in the comments we make about people.

Last Tuesday I was subject matter from a corporate bigot who made an extremely derogatory remark to me and at me.  He thought he was clever, he is not, he is a fool who has shown me and his employers what a problem he really is.

My attorneys are pressing me that we have an extraordinary lawsuit and suggest we move forward.  If I do so, the shit will hit the fan globally.

From this moment of posting, this gentleman, which I use the term loosely, has 24 hours to make contact and discuss what we must do to avert this impending problem for him and his employer.

The clock is ticking...

Failure to do so is not an alternative...

Happy Martin Luther King Day!

Saturday, January 13, 2018

RESPECTISM Vs. RACISM - Now, a very personal experience

by Nicholas Ashton, CEO/CIO, CommSmart Global Group

Respectism there is no such word I thought, but then again, this is 2018 and you can invent whatever you like and someone did!

Sadly, this week I was on the receiving end of more than racism.  It has taken my friends, business colleagues and lawyers to calm me down.  

It personally hurt me deeply and I, like others including the witness who heard this disparaging statement by this corporate individual, whom I have never met, or even wish to.  

I will see this excuse for a man in court with his company and will show at all levels there are bullying and racism by individuals, whose co-workers know his opinions and issues, who should never be in a position of management with such ideology and a concerning cultural attitude.  A video will follow which is being approved by the lawyers.

Crazy fact is, I am White, English and a Jew...

"RESPECTISM is the belief that a respectful society is a pragmatic necessity for survival"

We are told it was created with the following in mind: 

"When we talk about containing pollution or genocide or nuclear weapons, it is surprising that we have not recognized the central truth: 

We are the problem.

Until the truth about the universal need for a respectful society is recognized and addressed by enough of us, we will never be able to solve the perilous riddle of how to survive our weapons, our waste, and the total disrespect for the sovereignty of the basic values, our flag and national anthem.

Respectism defines a respectful society as one in which enough of us are cooperating to help each other balance the three every day, instinctual elements of respect: respect for self, others, and place.

Respect for self-honors the individual will survive and thrive, respect for others honor the humanity of all human beings and honors the life that surrounds us, respect for place honors everything from a shared table to shared earth, water, air and common respect for each other in all that has in past.

The respectism tri-model presents respect as a centering of three values that usually overlap, but which are not the same, honestly admitting that true respect is a skill to be developed over a lifetime.

Not everyone is ready to believe that a more respectful society is essential to our survival.  We saw this on Sunday with disrespectful NFL players taking the knee during the playing of America's National Anthem.

Throughout history, there have been selfish and mean leaders, those who have willingly followed them, and those who have said we will never change. 

This past event by overpaid disrespectful lowlifes is a prime example and those in senior management or ownership are just as bad!

Those of us who believe that a more respectful society is essential and possible will want to do the following:

First, individual and institutional respect for self, others and place will have to be relentlessly advertised.

Second, the abusive must be respectfully kept from power, and the behavior patterns of those who rule through fear, abuse, exploitation of prejudice and distortion of principles must be commonly recognized in order to assist in that endeavor.

Third, fair dealing, based on listening dialogue, honest negotiation, and equality must be promoted as the mechanism for creating a respectful society in public and private settings including justice for all, representative leadership and governance, economic exchange, the meeting of basic human needs, friendship, family, and love.

Fourth, the success of a respectful society must be measured by the decrease of all acts and threats of violence and involuntary detention, including those needed for true self-defense of the individual or society, as well as by the decrease in hunger and homelessness, and in the quality of our air, land, and water.

Fifth, the principles of a respectful society must be kept simple and clear enough for young children to learn, adults to believe and the weak to own as well as the powerful, so that respectism is never confused with an illusion of respectability, or authoritarianism, or made the enemy of liberty.
If a respectful society seems like an idealistic fantasy, please answer this question: "How will we survive without changing our behavior towards one another?"

No one knows exactly how we will create a respectful society any more than the inventors of the first flying machine could have imagined a space shuttle.

We must start performing countless experiments with respect if we are to survive.

We should start now.

"Love is the soul of respect, 
and respect is the language of love."
Telephone: (515) 200.7068

copyright 2018

Wednesday, January 10, 2018

Lobbyist Bombshell...

Politics, Lobbyists, Corporations,
the Inner Cultural & Ideological Concerns

It is the season of provocation, suggestions, and corporate money changing hands with our elected politicians.

In researching politics and lobbying one statement from 2015, stood out on how far the change has occurred.

"Something is out of balance in Washington. Corporations now spend about $2.6 billion a year on reported lobbying expenditures—more than the $2 billion we spend to fund the House ($1.18 billion) and Senate ($860 million). It’s a gap that has been widening since corporate lobbying began to regularly exceed the combined House-Senate budget in the early 2000s.

Today, the biggest companies have upwards of 100 lobbyists representing them, allowing them to be everywhere, all the time. For every dollar spent on lobbying by labor unions and public-interest groups together, large corporations and their associations now spend $34. Of the 100 organizations that spend the most on lobbying, 95 consistently represent business."

"One has to go back to the Gilded Age to find a business in such a dominant political position in American politics. While it is true that even in the more pluralist 1950s and 1960s, political representation tilted towards the well-off, lobbying was almost balanced by today's standards. Labor unions were much more important, and the public-interest groups of the 1960s were much more significant actors. And very few companies had their own Washington lobbyists prior to the 1970s. To the extent that businesses did lobby in the 1950s and 1960s (typically through associations), they were clumsy and ineffective. “When we look at the typical lobby,” concluded three leading political scientists in their 1963 study, American Business and Public Policy, “we find its opportunities to maneuver are sharply limited, its staff mediocre, and its typical problem not the influencing of Congressional votes but finding the clients and contributors to enable it to survive at all.”

The concern was amplified for me yesterday whilst at the Iowa Capitol on the day Governor Reynolds gave her first State of the State speech.

In discussions which I was involved in, comments being made and the enthusiasm of the start of a new legislative session something became interesting after the fact.  

Fear of someone who was not offering money, just stating facts and being open about the issues and concerns of the State of Iowa and certain Iowa departments with those that have the directors positions and not honestly supporting the citizens of Iowa's best interest.

A corporate employee made a statement that he did not want me talking to anyone in Iowa Government.  In this email which was very direct in the message.  

Foolish and in a conversation I had with him, which I cannot offer at this time as it is now part of a deposition that will be part of a legal move, was derogatory, demeaning characterization and more.  

Lobbyist, in general, have my backing when they are passionate about their subject matter and present professionalism. I know several and commend them.  We know they have an important message to reach those legislators who are difficult to meet one on one.

Others, not so much, they are manipulative in their manner, position and mainly overpaid attorneys, who like judges failed at the defense or prosecution tables, failed in their cases and now sit, listen and in many cases rule, which sadly does get overturned.

Not only did I witness, I am now part of an issue of manipulation by a major global corporation representative.

Will I let this go?


This is an ongoing issue and will continue, I am expecting some further conversation, maybe, if not, this will become a very open conversation if my attorney allows.

Nicholas Ashton
(515) 300-6130


Tuesday, December 19, 2017

All I Want For Christmas Is A Quiet Microwave Door!

All I Want For Christmas Is A
Quiet Microwave Door!

Nothing is more annoying than the microwave door!

It is impossible to open quietly and without waking the whole house at 3 a.m. in the morning!  I make my French Press Coffee, which is a relatively silent operation.  

When I want a second cup, I need to reheat the coffee and that is when the clunks, clinks and microwave door sounds like a 12" steel door opening, clunking and slamming shut!

What is this simple change?  We have all the technological abilities to Bluetooth this and open that, but the microwave door is a damn annoying operation!

Foam around the door or earplugs is not an option...

Someone, please change this, I, and many others demand it!


Monday, December 18, 2017

Desire or Hate – Fire or Ice? The Deep Thematic Ideas…

Desire or Hate – Fire or Ice?
The Deep Thematic Ideas…

Change brings both Fire & Ice to the forefront and is as dangerous as each other. In anger, many have stated that the hate toward someone or thing as they believe ‘you will burn in hell’.  Of course, again with hate or dislike, many have received the ‘cold shoulder’.

The meaning of words, phrases, and actions vary on which side of the fence one sits. It comes down to the communication of the subject matter.  The perfect example is the dumb advertisements for car insurance, which in most cases are purely for entertainment with a twist of remembrance.  You know Geico, Farmers, AFLAC and Progressive, all using humor for a very serious subject, insurance and the gamble for if something or someone goes wrong.

The way we are now able to communicate has dramatically changed.  The Smartphone, which as a label is a misnomer in itself, is the most powerful means of ‘touching’ with information, marketing messages and importantly, educational statements.

So, what are our desires for the ‘NOW’?  Is the world in that much trouble? 
I turn to Robert Frost and his poem, ‘Fire & Ice’.

The poem itself does not require much explanation as to the meaning of his words or phrases, due to Frost’s attentiveness on making the poem decipherable and fathomable by all.

Notwithstanding the straightforwardness of the language use, the poem transmits with its very profound thematic ideas

Fundamentally, Frost is providing observation upon two of the darkest traits of humanity: the capacity to hate, and the capacity to be consumed by lust. Of the two, he features the greater of two evils to desire, saying “From what I’ve tasted of desire / I hold with those who favor fire.”

In giving desire to the primary place in regards to the obliteration of the world, Frost is providing a commanding declaration on the subject of greed and jealousy, saying that above all else, even hatred, this is the trait of humanity that is most likely to lead to its passing.

To Frost, desire represents the utmost problem that the world faces. In light of the fact that this was written in regards to the Great War (1914-1918), this account is essentially ascribing the cause of the war to human greed and lust, in doing so providing an up-to-date and applicable warning against this conduct in the future. Following his statement upon fire and desire, Frost then features hatred with almost the same capacity to do harm as desire, saying “I think I know enough of hate / to say that for destruction ice…would suffice.”

While this diminishes the comparative standing of hatred in regards to the poem as a whole, it is still offered as having the ability to lead to the destruction of the world if it were to happen for the second time, which it did and today the concerns for a third, again providing an influential caution against this human misconception. Overall, then, the intention and meaning behind the poem is a basic desire on Frost’s part to warn, in his own style, against what he sees as the two extreme problems fronting civilization.

So, visit one of the websites on your Smartphone and find out for yourself
why smart communications are everchanging!

Telephone: USA: (515) 200.7068

CommSmart Global Group – A LexisNexis Risk Solutions Partner