Cupid keeps on striking

I have unabashedly proclaimed my undying love many times in this forum, and I guess I'm promiscuous because the objects of my affection range from presidents to pariahs, from pundits to geeks, from economists to actors, and from comedians to guide dogs.

Nevertheless, I will risk my reputation once more and go to bat for yet another mensch: the (cross all body parts) next governor of "we're our own worst enemy" State of California.

So I love Tom Campbell a lot. But love, unlike affection, must be earned. So here's why I love Tom Campbell so much:

• I love him for his breadth and depth of public service: this includes, but is not limited to: serving in the U.S. Congress, the California State Senate, the Federal Trade Commission, the University of California system, and as Director of Finance for the State of California.
• I love him for his adaptability: he's lived in Berkeley and in the O.C. He was a prof at Cal and at Stanford. (only the coolest of peeps can hang in both schools).
  
• I love him for his finesse: "I'm most concerned about the dropping educational attributes of our population." (whereas I would have cried: "BEWARE THE IDIOCRITAZATION OF OUR SOCIETY!")
  
• I love him for his ethics and class: when I raised the issue of smear tactics, he took a total Nash Game Theory approach to explain why such tactics are ineffective. Nice way to get out of the implicitly-smearing-by-saying-you're-not-the-one-smearing rathole.
  
• I love him for his consistency. When asked why he didn't run as an independent because he is so balanced (aka "moderate"), he replied that he believes in personal liberties with respect to both governance *and* social issues. Thus, a conservative in the most classic liberal sense. He added that independents tend to skew election results to the extreme candidates, and cited Perot and Nader as recent examples (clearly he's not loyal to the GOP then.... another point in his favor for me!).
  
• I love him for his raw intelligence. Last night when he talked about the budget - which is really the main job of any governor (allocating the state's resources) - he decried simplistic, soundbyte-appeal responses such as "eliminating waste, fraud and abuse" (as in, duh?) and instead did the heavy lifting that a complex environment like California's requires and drew from finance/monetary policy, history, law, economics and legislative rules to develop comprehensive solutions. Not soundbyte-y but way more credible.
• I love him for his unabashed humor: "I'd like to be more optimistic than the facts permit me to be. Go Bears." He also humored an alum last night who begged him to recite some salty Irish chants. You may have had to be there, but it was priceless.

Susanne's a lucky woman! Let's hope the State can be so lucky.

Must I?

When I was about 4, I received a gift from a generous relative. Upon opening it, I was cajoled to respond. Complying, I stared directly into her eager, inquiring face and flatly declared:

"I don't like it."

...and to this day, her crestfallen response is indelibly marked in my memory.

But as adults, we've developed the super-ego to ensure we adhere to social mores. As such, we often find ourselves in situations where we are forced to effuse.

Two common settings for this cruelty include:

1) Admiring friends' offspring. When this pertains to homo sapiens, I can buy in. People warrant respect. And infants all the more: I can totally get behind the awe of procreation.

However, my line is crossed when I am obliged to ooh and aah over a canine or feline. How much excitement can one be expected muster over a yelping, unhygienic slobbering animal unable to dialogue? Over what period of time is such feigned enthusiasm sustainable? Inhumane expectations.

2) Staff meetings. These are undoubtedly the most egregious examples of enforced enthusiasm*; particularly when they are kicked off by asking all participants to share with the group just what it is they love -- the most -- about Company A. The ensuing applause most often invariably owes to the fact that the employee has finished, rather than reflecting what s/he has actually shared.

But, being the solutions-oriented businessperson I am, I felt it was important end on a positive and constructive note:

Ways To Avoid Coercive Engagement (drawing off of real-life experience)

• Never use campy parables ... unless good. Really good.
• Don't regift the giveaways. If you must, do not disclose.
• Contain all meetings to 1.5 hours - max. If you have the choice of longer meeting with food, or shorter meeting without food, go without food.
• Make sure your schwag is dogfood you would eat, too.

* You can further reference the gem by Mike Judge at the bottom of this post for a lucid depiction of why this is just so wrong.

Euphemisms (cntd.)

Lying Loopholes and, as such, I simply can't get enough of them: they are so useful!!!

• "So, what are the takeaways?" = Please please please please do not go into detail.
• "I'm processing all of this" = I am stalling on a response b/c I think you are a nutjob and am wondering how to most effectively filter
  
• "I want to be true to myself" = I don't care about anyone else (this isn't always 100% true but often is).
• "The ways to search, find and evaluate people on LinkedIn are architected entirely differently than on Facebook." = sophisticated stalkers know how to leverage multiple platforms.

I used to reserve most of my geek love for economists....but rhetoricians are starting to move up!

Talk. To. Me.

Smile And Nod

I learned the value of this Standard Operating Procedure from a colleague of mine at Schwab. It entails never pushing back regardless of how unreasonable the request, and only later surfacing the constraints. That way you become the invaluable go-to person and never get pegged as a naysayer.

This morning I embraced the SAN SOP when I agreed to join my friend's running group.

Let's clarify: I run. I just don't do "endurance" runs. But, I figured, how hard can a little extra distance be?

Only in the car - en route, committed - did John throw out these remarks:

• "If you studied the trail posted online..." ("study" the trail? ah...right...)
• "The grade ascends consistently for the first 6 miles." (note the use of "first")
• "There is an extension option because the main course is only 11 miles." (note the use of "only")
• "The fact that it's trail running sort of selects out who will be there." (I had no idea what this specifically referred to, but got the sense that trails must be scary)

Smile And Nod. Smile And Nod. No problem!

But, in merciful face-saving fate, the Running Demon of Sun*Sans*Shade led even the "ultra" runners to condescend to their own humanity and join me in stopping at various points along the way.

So really, I am just like them. I could do a 50K in my sleep. Dreams, that is.

This is not me.

May I have some opiods to chase my dopamine, please?

My highly social nature + my incessant need to uncover truth has traditionally been a source of pride, enabling me to be a journalist, sleuth and master of no trade (aka "generalist").

But pride cometh before the fall: thanks to current networking technology, I can now feed my social and search beasts at alarming rates. It started slowly with email....escalated with Facebook....and was fueled to whole new levels by IM, Skype messaging and Twitter. Now I have services like FourSquare which text my phone to immediately notify me who is going where and subsequently permit me to research, add tips, stalk others ... the ADD possibilities for those seeking external stimulation are endless!

Specifically, I'm noting that my capacity for reading and writing beyond a short email or tweet is eroding; that my Facebook activity steps up considerably when I am forced to read through a document longer than one page; and that I must multitask with my human-computer interface when encountering a simple human interface, lest I neglect my extroversion of any possible input.

So it was with great relief that I had the patience to read all of this piece (yes, first seen as a friend's post on Facebook but actually a normal-length article from Slate...which still writes articles vs. being pure post redux). It neutralized my neurosis by stating it in concrete and physiological terms.

And that's good enough for me. Just proud that I finally finished this post!

This very post is a cry out for intervention. Sponsored by AT&T.

The eye of the tiger

I've never been sure if it is simply unsettling or outright rude when people over the age of four transgress their social boundary with a hovered gaze. Only recently has this led to some real confrontation.

1. Yesterday I shamed my spinning student when I announced to the class that I was staring her down. That did the trick and she looked away (note: she explained later that she often just "zones" by staring at the teacher...but, still....).
2. Later in the day in a cafe, I found myself unable to listen to my friend catch me up because the woman next to us - while pretending to eat her Waldorf salad - overtly stared at us each time one of us uttered a word. Remember, this was a cafe folks - not a library. So I kept looking back at her and mercifully, she would back down. However....every time we resumed our conversation, she jumped right back in, compelling me to simply stare her down. Result? She let out a nervous smile, got up and left 1/3 of her salad there. Mission accomplished! (Of course, this was a Seinfeld moment that only video can fully capture).
3. The coup de grace came today in Sausalito when I failed to notice one of the thousands of self-entitled cyclists crowding up the (AUTOMOBILE) route. Alas, my blissful Sunday afternoon happy place was interrupted by an abrupt, childish fist thump on my car accompanied by some choice expletives and accusations. My natural response immediately kicked in: gleefully smile back! But, this didn't lead to victory; rather than use his endorphins for their stress-relieving purpose (come on: Sausalito, sunny Sunday afternoon with a clear blue SF Bay view?), he proceeded to ride up to my car, scream at me and threaten to call the police. Which only drove me to smile at him more.

While I technically "lost" this third face-off, it somehow felt the most gratifying.

A brush with extinction

Much to my chagrin, my inordinate need for self-expression has been slowly migrating away from this beloved, cherished forum to Twitter. This entropic pull away from organizing my thoughts in a systematic, comprehensive manner and instead towards regressing into simple, visceral reactions has begun to diminish and impoverish me.

Fortunately, my liberal arts formation was jolted back from hibernation today:

She also wants to ... continue to speak her mind on the social networking site Twitter, one of her favorite venues to reach out to supporters.

"She"...yes....."she"...ummmm....the human being that can reduce me to a mass of inarticulate, suppressed and frustrated energy of stellar (think black hole level) proportions. For all its value it has introduced, Twitter is undoubtedly her favorite venue for the same reason I lament it becoming mine: it is but one of the many roads taking us to Idiocracy today.

Thus I assure you that, as long as she is in the public square, this blog will continue... if only for the sake of preserving subject-verb-object communications and the cerebral cortex as we know it.

However, I am too dumbfounded at this point to say anything more specific on today's news.

Still trying to warm the super-ego back up.