Swickard: President’s Day Best and Worst

Michael Swickard

© 2019 Michael Swickard, Ph.D.  February is President’s Month. Recently I noticed on Social Media quite a few posts about current and former United States Presidents. Over two-hundred thirty years there are only forty-four men in that exclusive club.

            One post proclaimed Barack Obama worst president ever. There was as usual a vigorous battle of emotions. I believe it takes at least thirty years to get a real historical feel for the value of a President. The jury is still out for me on Bush 41 to Trump.  

        My response to that post: Lyndon Johnson was the worst president ever. There were some good results during his presidency. However, his legacy is the damage to Social Security for political purposes, micromanaging the Vietnam War including not understanding our military technically won the war in 1968.

            Additionally, Johnson pushed a welfare system that incentivized single parents. Over his political life he was very corrupt. Yes, many U. S. Presidents were corrupt in one way or many. In my opinion, LBJ was worst. My post on LBJ was divided by partisans so LBJ either sat on the right hand of God or of Satan.

            If you study U. S. Presidents, you find they are all flawed human beings. Some Presidents control their flaws better. Question: what is the lasting good and lasting harm of each of them?

            Most harmful: Polk, Bucannon, Wilson, both Roosevelts, LBJ and Carter. You might have a different list. I can talk hours why those seven Presidents left our nation much worse off.

            Best Presidents: Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Coolidge, Truman, Eisenhower and Reagan. Each, despite flaws, left our nation better for their time as president.

            All must grow into the job. Even George Washington had growing pains throughout his presidency since he had to take each crisis as a new learning activity.

            George Washington previously served as General of the Army. Being President is vastly different. He learned and left our nation better. The same can be said of Eisenhower. However, President Grant did not leave a lasting good though he was very popular in his lifetime.

            Take Abraham Lincoln, an awful President his first year but grew into the Presidency and left our nation better off. Maybe one of Lincoln’s contemporaries would have grown into the presidency like Lincoln but we will never know.

            Both Calvin Coolidge and Harry Truman were trust into the Presidency and left the nation better off. Both did not want the office but took it when the then President died in office.

            We can use the same logic for Governors and Mayors but again about thirty years or so must go by before any real historical decisions are appropriate.

            At New Mexico State University in 1970 I drew the ire of then President Roger Corbett while I was in the Student Senate. At the time I thought him an awful president.

            After years of reflection I believe the top five NMSU President were Hadley, Foster, Kent, Thomas and yes, Roger Corbett. The academic world of NMSU is ever so much better for each of them being the President.

            I cannot make a judgement on my fellow Class of 1968 Alamogordo High School graduate Danny Arvizu, who now leads NMSU. I liked him in high school, but I do not know if he will lead NMSU in turbulent times to a better place than he finds it.

            When government leaders are elected, and leaders of academic institutions are appointed it will be decades before we really know the total results of that decision. However, we can learn much by those who came before, if we want to learn. 

Email: drswickard@comcast.net

Swickard: President’s Day Best and Worst

Swickard: Not in my backyard

© 2017 Michael Swickard, Ph.D.  Jet engines make lots of noise, especially military jets. It seems several communities in New Mexico are bothered by the thought that jets from Holloman Air Force Base may fly over their towns and surrounding lands while they are training for the role of combat pilot.

            The Air Force leadership at Holloman has announced that the jet pilots they are training need more area to practice what they do before they get into actual combat. Naturally it goes without saying that when you are in combat is a bad time to learn some things that should be taught before they get into combat.

            The rub is that many people in these towns don’t want to hear military jets flying over their homes. The very thought of it annoys some people. They are writing angry letters and protesting having to hear the noise of jets. They say that the pilots should fly somewhere else. What they are saying is don’t fly over my backyard.

            When I was much younger I was working on a barbed wire fence one day about twenty miles south of Carrizozo on my grandfather’s ranch. It was a warm quiet day and I was almost falling asleep on my feet while I worked on this fence. Bees were buzzing and birds were singing. Then it happened.

            Four F-4 Phantom jets from Holloman AFB came over me doing about 400 knots at two hundred feet above the terrain. Instantly I went from being almost asleep on my feet to throwing the hammer and running over the fence in a panic. Then it was quiet again.

            It is much worse for those cowpokes on horseback. There can be quite a difficulty for a rider when a horse is spooked this way. That said, I am not troubled by the military jets. To me that is the sound of freedom and I normally look up appreciatively.

            The syndrome is called, “Not in my backyard.” Be it jets overhead or highways or power lines, people will object and demand that these things not be in their backyard, they should be in someone else’s backyard.

            How do we decide who has a backyard that should be protected from things that annoy and who does not? In 1965, I lived in Aurora Colorado under the landing and takeoff pattern of Stapleton Airport. It was often very loud but we got used to it. The airport moved after we left.

            What we are dealing with is volunteers to our nation’s military who put their lives on the line for our freedom. They must have a place to train. The rigors are such that some pilots will not survive the training. And we should worry that the noise bothers some people?

            Every effort should be taken to not annoy people up to the point that the pilots are not able to get the very best training preparing them for real combat. At that point, we should take their training as more important than our convenience.

 Email: drswickard@comcast.net - Swickard’s novel, Hideaway Hills,is available at Amazon.com 

Swickard: Not in my backyard

Swickard: When the price is wrong

© 2017 Michael Swickard, Ph.D.  It happens often that a local business closes. We have enjoyed years of that business in our community but now it is closed. Rarely do we understand what happened.

            There is a popular show, “The price is right” where contestants must know the correct price of items. When a local company goes out of business one explainer is that they didn’t charge enough for their products. Not always. There are other explainers.

            Restaurants are one type of business I notice when they close because several have closed even though I was a regular customer. Businesses come and businesses go. It is a natural happening in our free enterprise model of capitalism.

            The popular notion is that anyone in business for themselves are rich. Nothing could be further from the truth. The one commonality is most local businesses are started by risk-takers. They put up the money and their own time to see if we will vote for their ideas with our wallets.

            The first danger for sustainable businesses is that their prices are too low for the cost of doing business. So, they can be in business for a while before they run out of money. If that happens then they go out of business.

            The most important issue is the return on investment for someone in business. There are ways to change the bottom line such as quality and efficiency. But ultimately the buyer is the judge and jury of that success. Except for when the government gets involved.

            The government regulations are a component in the price and bottom line. They require the business to do things they may not want to do such as pay more for employees than would allow for a profit. At times.

            This is not good for either the employees or the customers when businesses close. Then the businesses that are left leave less choice and price pressure to support customers.

            Sometimes the loss of profit is obscured by inventory only to eventually kill the business. The patron of the business pays the asked price or they go somewhere else. The lure of going to a bigger town means that money leaves which does kill businesses.

            The economic pressures on local businesses include competition, cost of goods and the changing needs of our population. In the computer business, it used to be a value-added store where the customer knew little and the store experts were needed to walk customers through getting a computer up and running.

            Then it all changed and those stores closed. The new online option for purchase makes it harder to be in local business if you sell some items. The same is true for local restaurants. But there is one thing that local businesses do that the big ones do not.

            The local business owners spend their money in the local economy. The nationals ship the money out of your town quickly. Will losing money out-of-town close local businesses? Of course. That price is always wrong for your town.

 Email: drswickard@comcast.net - Swickard’s novel, Hideaway Hills,is available at Amazon.com 

Swickard: When the price is wrong

Swickard: Solving problems with guns

© 2017 Michael Swickard, Ph.D.   Every year for decades there have been students bringing guns to school to “fix a problem.” In the days after the school shooting many people speculate on how the kid obtained the gun and got it to school along with many more how-it-was-done questions.

            I never hear the question: why did this kid think using a gun would solve any problems? Rather, it causes more problems than can be imagined. So where did that student get the notion that bringing a gun would make things better?

            What this something the child learned in school? Of course not. It is not part of the public school curriculum. Further, it is not modeled behavior by teachers to shoot problem students, regardless of how irritating students can be.

            Yet, students are bringing guns to school apparently with the belief that the guns will solve their problems. If they do not learn that notion in public school, they must learn it somewhere else. Is it in the home?

            Most parents reject that premise. “I certainly do not teach my children that shooting someone will solve problems.” But they do. The message is transmitted repeatedly to their children. Under their supervision kids watch hour after hour of television and movies where the solution to problems is to shoot someone.

            The average school age student watches hundreds of “shootings to solve a problem” a week. Heroes as well as bad people, all larger than life, solve their problems with guns.

            Research strongly suggests a correlation of behavior in children exposed to violence. Kids in one research project were observed with fellow students for an hour. Then they watched violent cartoons for an hour and were observed with students for the hour afterwards.

            In the second and third hours, the incidence of aggressive behavior increased dramatically. The research is compelling that watching television influences behavior. That is why advertisers spend millions on commercials. It influences behavior.

            The responsibility lies with the parents to protect their children from these influences. The copycat syndrome has been established by the police in some types of crimes. It is seen on television and then replicated in society.

            Television and movie violence is so pervasive because it is the most easily created form of drama, “Is someone going to die or not?” I’m not saying kids should be kept completely away from all television, but it should be screened.

            The issue is not to stop television from showing the use of guns as a solution to a person's problems, rather, the issue is that parents must stop letting impressionable kids watch hour after hour of this guns will solve problems message.

            It is like planting a tree. The best time to plant a tree was ten years ago, the next best time to plant a tree is now. The best time to screen television programs was ten years ago. The next best time is now. No, we do not need a law, we need a culture that understands the influences on children.

 Email: drswickard@comcast.net - Swickard’s novel, Hideaway Hills,is available at Amazon.com 

Swickard: Solving problems with guns

Swickard: Assuming our way to school change

© 2017 Michael Swickard, Ph.D.   Let us look at assumptions. They are the building blocks of change. American public schools provide an example. Not everyone agrees that they are broken; some just think they should be improved.

            As to public schools: in the past and now, there are calls for educational change by political leaders wanting to make political hay and get votes. Some say we need to innovate while others say we must reform the schools. What is the difference?

            Innovation assumes things can be better. Reform assumes things are so bad that they must be changed. Now assumptions do no harm so long as no one acts upon them. Unfortunately, people are acting. There are many attempts to reform schools when what is needed is innovation.

            Worse yet, many attempts to reform schools are not tied to research. One of the most problematic assumptions people make is that educational research is not essential. The truth is that any school change not research-based will be a disaster.

            Want proof? Every politically driven reform movement in the last fifty years has not been research-based. Constantly some politician has an idea for changing schools and everyone jumps on to the fad.

            The change may not make things better or the change will make things worse. It is like when an airplane is flying along and the pilot finds something isn’t working quite right. The pilot may fiddle with it to the point the aircraft quits flying completely.

            The standards and accountability movement is not research-based. Someone thought, hey, let’s try this. The public schools are busy accounting for themselves without a clear notion what it means when the accountability numbers vary.

            The general assumption is that the schools did something wrong when the numbers are poor. However, research assures us that schools can only teach students who want to learn. No one is attending to this truth.

            So, what is the accountability movement really measuring? The school’s effect is comingled with out-of-school influences. Do the people in the accountability reform movement realize this? No, they assume poor scores are automatically the school’s fault.

            A change should be made in the way we change our schools. Since students ultimately benefit or are harmed by educational change, those political leaders changing the schools should have to put something in escrow before making sweeping changes.

            Then, if they are right, we should reward them well. If they are wrong, they should pay a penalty. Make them risk their retirement. Then we will see how sold they are on school uniforms or quarter hour math ladders or whatever new fad.

            There would be a rush to use research. It would then be more dependable than just driving down the road, running over a turtle, and thinking that Flat Turtle Math Programs are the answer.

            That is not to say that the public schools are not ripe for innovation. Schools can be made better or worse. It completely depends upon the research assumptions. And please ignore the political school change fads.

 Email: drswickard@comcast.net - Swickard’s novel, Hideaway Hills,is available at Amazon.com 

Swickard: Assuming our way to school change

Swickard: The need for vocational education

© 2017 Michael Swickard, Ph.D.  Imagine that a wave of brown smelly sludge starts pouring over the edge of your toilet. Oh no! That is not the textbook way brown sludge should be handled by the toilet. When you press the handle the “product” should just disappear out of sight, mind and smell.

            But it is overflowing and coming down the hallway. There is the immediate necessity to find someone competent in plumbing. We are not looking for conversations about academics. We need plumbers, not professors.

            I was thinking about this because many public schools, starting even in kindergarten, are pushing all of their students to go to college. No exceptions. But someone needs to be trained and ready to fix the biffy along with other repair professions.

            If every child goes to college there will be a huge problem. Millions of young adults can look at the human waste coming down your hallway and comment on the Peloponnesian War of 431 BC which had minor similarities to the crisis you are facing.

            When they are through talking about Greek history you still have a mess unless you find a plumber. The brown stuff will just keep on keeping on down your hallway.

            So many young people will know right where to put the comma, but nothing vocational. When trying to fix things you ask: what about using a screwdriver? No, not the liquid kind. And plumbers are not the political leak finders in Washington, they are those professionals who make the plumbing work as advertised.

            I was lucky that vocational education was for all students in the 1960s so that I am mildly competent in most repair situations. Even better, I know when not to tackle a problem other than tackle it with my wallet and someone who will fix the problem correctly.

            As a society, we are looking down our academic noses at those people who work with their hands and come home occasionally smelling like low tide at the swamp. The only thing we will know in the future is what we know now: everything will break at the least useful moment.

            We should bring vocational education back and put every public-school student through some of it so that minor things can be fixed by each of us. The wave of crud backing up from the toilet will take a real plumber. I hope we still have them in the future.

            It is wrong to push all students to college. Rather, we should make students aware of the possibilities without pushing what we think and let them decide what interests them. I understand colleges are worried by dropping enrollment.

            Partly this is due to the incredible increase in college costs plus a stagnate job market. They need skills that our world will support financially.

            Many young people do not want to go deeply in debt. Be a plumber first and then use those dollars to explore other professions. When the brown sludge overflows you will know what to do other than worry.

 Email: drswickard@comcast.net - Swickard’s novel, Hideaway Hills,is available at Amazon.com 

Swickard: The need for vocational education

Swickard: Taking money to lose games

© 2017 Michael Swickard, Ph.D.  “Ethics is knowing the difference between what you have a right to do and what is right to do.” Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart

             On page C5 of the Sunday, October 1, 2017 Albuquerque Journal is a headline: Aggie offense shows well in money game.” While some weak football programs do it, I object to the ethics of selling losses in “money games” to national powerhouses.

            It is certainly the right of NMSU to engage year after year in this ethical morass of selling losses. But it is not right for them to do so. The football team plays mostly unwinnable games a couple times a season for money.

            Over the last forty years NMSU has sold losses in a sport entirely judged by the team’s win-loss record. I have spent those forty years complaining about this to no avail.

            In the modern NCAA Football era comes an unethical practice of strong national teams spending millions of dollars for an easy week while weak teams collect millions providing a loss. This last week the University of Arkansas paid NMSU $1.35 million to go there and lose.

            Over that forty years NMSU has won twice and lost more than a hundred times. Many Aggie Football coaches have been fired because of their win-loss record.

            Three concerns: first, it appears giving two losses a season keeps the Aggies from going to Bowl Games. NMSU hasn’t gone to a Bowl Game since Eisenhower was the President in 1960. I see a trend.

            Secondly, smaller teams playing physically larger teams often get players hurt. This is not a strong team in your conference, these are national teams.

            Finally, it is a thumb in the eye of home fans. Not going to Bowl Games because of selling losses makes selling season tickets harder.

            Partly personal: I have watched NMSU football for fifty years. My first year was with legendary coach Warren Woodson in 1967. I have had season tickets most of the time including this year.

            The NMSU Athletic Department have spoken to me over the years due to my criticism. They say I don’t understand Higher Education. I always respond I have a Ph.D. in Higher Education from NMSU. But they don’t listen to me.

            Former NFL Head Coach Bill Parcells wrote, “The only way to change people is to tell them in the clearest possible terms what they’re doing wrong. And if they don’t want to listen they don’t belong on the team.” This is true at NMSU where the same old strategy has failed for so many years.

            The way to change the fortunes of the NMSU Football program is: first, never ever sell a loss. Secondly, play teams you can beat. Finally, with enough wins go to Bowl Games. Any Bowl Game The program will pick itself up and success will follow.

            As Bill Parcells said, “Success is never final, but failure can be.” The NMSU Football Program will be shrouded in failure so long as they continue to sell losses.

 Email: drswickard@comcast.net - Swickard’s novel, Hideaway Hills,is available at Amazon.com 

Swickard: Taking money to lose games

Swickard: Political disrespect and making positive change

© 2017 Michael Swickard, Ph.D.   “I think Dr. King, if he were alive today, he wouldn’t disrespect the flag or the anthem; he would use his words and his voice to send a message for positive change.” Kimberly Guilfoyle

             The National Football League has players who are taking a knee during the national anthem. They are expressing their displeasure with American injustice. Worse, young people who are just imitating these icons are being disrespectful to our country without understanding the issues.

            My response has been to shun them. For this reason, I am not watching NFL games this year. Know this: if a high school or college team has players disrespect our flag and anthem, I will be out of that stadium quickly.

            It is the right of those athletes to make these gestures. And it is my right to not give them any money or attention. Should there be a law against disrespecting our country? No, each of us has free speech rights but we cannot exercise those rights without responsibility for our actions.

            There is only one of me so just one person shunning the NFL will have no effect. Still, it is my choice to respond. They don’t have to even acknowledge my actions.

            I am curious why they think this will address their perceived injustices and make changes. It would seem that we as a nation must make positive changes if our nation is to prosper.

            The world is so much better because of our country and the leaders of our country including the founders. As I wrote previously in this column they were all imperfect people. However, we are better off because of them. But, of course, we can always improve our country.

            In the above quote, there is the thought that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. would have used his words, his voice to make a positive change. I like that. We do need positive change in this society that has fallen into the grasp of hate speech and fake news.

            Dr. King died in 1968. Unfortunately, his greatest thought seems to be forgotten: “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.”

            These protests and much of the politics of our society today is about the color of skin and not the content of character. We do have voices telling us the way to make our country better.

            Morgan Freeman said, “Dr. Martin Luther King is not a black hero. He is an American hero.” He also said, “I am going to stop calling you a white man and I’m going to ask you to stop calling me a black man.”

            That is a direction for change that will make a difference. Let us not divide our country and the people of our county. Rather we need to come together as a nation. We must do so one citizen at a time.

 Email: drswickard@comcast.net - Swickard’s novel, Hideaway Hills,is available at Amazon.com 

Swickard: Political disrespect and making positive change

Swickard: More money attracting festivals

© 2017 Michael Swickard, Ph.D.   One morning in my coffee shop, we convened our own Chamber of Commerce. Business has been slow in our little slice of heaven so we needed to come up with some ways to induce folks to come and spend dollars.

            We really didn’t want lots of people to move here and clog up the roads and stores. Rather, we would like people to come, spend money and then go home.

            I took out a piece of paper to jot down ideas. One person said that the way to make money was to have all sorts of festivals such that out-of-towners came and spread cash around.

            I mentioned that Roswell had the Aliens Festival. We pondered that moneymaker. When I mentioned to one of the leading citizens in Roswell that the alien story was suspect, he said, “But they bring hundred-dollar bills.” Then he smirked.

            Many years ago I wrote a column about that Roswell Smirk. We could have that smirk if we could just invent a good festival.

            First, there could be Dust Day in March and April. Southern New Mexico is noted for the dust storms, maybe we could get people to come. Probably not. I have thought that instead of a Rain Meter, I should invent a Dust Meter. After a two-day windstorm, it would show 1.3 inches of dust was in the air.

            We were going well and the ideas flowed like coffee. There was Waffle Days on the first Tuesday of November to coincide with the elections. The agricultural members offered: Pig Days, Chicken Days, Cow Days, Goat Days… the group paused.

            From one table over a vegetarian offered Tofu Days which was followed by Road-Kill Days. No interest in either. More practical was Rusty Old Cars Days, Bow Tie Days, Halitosis Days which brought out Onion Days.

            Two months of every year about fifty percent of the onions consumed in our country come from Southern New Mexico. That festival could be sponsored by one of the many mouthwash companies.

            Horned Toad Days were offered along with Siesta Days. I was in favor of that. I have never been disappointed in a good old afternoon nap. There was Nothing Much Happening Days but that didn’t get a second.

            One of the coffee drinkers pointed out, “We don’t need days, we need nights for festivals. During the days, we are all working other than our coffee breaks.”

            That caused the conversation to slow down because one person pointed out that having something at night was fine as long as they could get home by nine, which is their bedtime. There was an early to bed, early to rise comment which we all knew was true.

            Let us reason together as to more festivals in our area to pick up any stray tourist dollars. Send me via this news outlet your ideas.

            Something like Geezer and Geezerette Days might just be the money ticket. I would fit in. Consider that the fifty-yard amble could make the evening news.

 Email: drswickard@comcast.net - Swickard’s novel, Hideaway Hills,is available at Amazon.com 

Swickard: More money attracting festivals

Swickard: That fine barnyard smell

© 2017 Michael Swickard, Ph.D.   American agriculture, which a hundred years ago was where many people worked is now just a very small sliver of the overall workforce. Consequently, many people occasionally notice the smell of barnyard animals and find the smell objectionable.

            Likewise, many agricultural colleges are shunted off to far corners of universities since frankly those Ag Colleges have that fine barnyard smell which offends people who are not from an agricultural background. Yet, everyone likes to eat. Everyone needs agriculture.

            In the year 1900, about a third of all Americans were living on farms and ranches. Those people knew that fine barnyard smell and were not put off by it. In fact, if you are like me who has spent plenty of time on ranches, cow flop smells just fine.

            The petroleum industry says their smell is the smell of money. Well, the smell on farms and ranches is organic and is in my humble opinion much better.

            You might ask: what does this have to do with the price of steer manure? You see New Mexico’s Land-Grant University, New Mexico State University, is fixing to select a new president.

            The very real danger is that the NMSU Regents might select someone who doesn’t know and like that fine barnyard smell. Don’t laugh, it has happened several times and New Mexico State University suffered.

            The selection of University President establishes the identity of the University. Every institution of higher learning has an identity and for Land-Grant institutions, that identity is unique for their state.

            For more than a hundred years NMSU was and is the Land-Grant institution in New Mexico. There are five pillars of a Land-Grant institution: Agriculture, Engineering, Military Science, Education and Service to New Mexico. No other institution of higher learning in New Mexico has this mission.

            The problem is that some sophisticates in the head shed have been appalled and dismayed by the fine barnyard smells that’s just upwind of them. One NMSU President was overcome with disgust by the smell and complained bitterly. Wrong president and that person did leave.

            The current NMSU President grew up on that fine barnyard smell and often has had bits of organic material on his boots. It never has bothered him. This was true for most of the other NMSU Presidents through the years.

            I have a test to put potential NMSU Presidents through before we should take them seriously as a replacement for outgoing NMSU President Garrey Carruthers. They must be able to really talk agriculture before they talk anything else.

            If they can’t tell a steer from heifer I don’t want them anywhere around NMSU. Yes, the hoity-toity sophisticated crowd would never participate in a cow-chip throwing contest. So what?

            A real agriculture person, male or female would. It is the identity of NMSU. I pray that the NMSU Regents and the smarty-pants consultants understand the difference between NMSU and all of the other institutions of higher learning.

            The next NMSU President had better like that fine barnyard smell.

 Email: drswickard@comcast.net - Swickard’s novel, Hideaway Hills,is available at Amazon.com 

Swickard: That fine barnyard smell