What Keeps You Up, Or What Gets You Up?

As my bio explains, I am a career consultant, and most of my career has been spent in areas related to regulatory compliance and risk management. There is a well-worn question that has probably been inducted into the ‘Consultant Cliche Hall of Fame’ that asks, “What keeps you up at night?” This was once a great question to help understand the most troubling problems our clients face so that we, the consultants, could remain mindful of their needs in the business relationship.
For me, a more exciting question is, “What gets you up in the morning?”  I am much more energized by what energizes others – not what worries them.  I want to operate in the conversation of dreams and desires rather than fear.  One mindset touts, “Be careful”, and the other shouts, “Be bold!”.  Both offer value in a society steeped in tradition of commerce.  However, the former seems to be much more an easier sell than the latter.  Organizations seem psychology driven to be less sparing on expenditures for protection almost to the point of prevention.  In my view, the “Be careful” message emerges in a large part from litigation concerns and the “Be bold” message is suppressed by regulatory heavy handedness and a contraction of entrepreneurial support.
In this TED Talk video, Sir Ken Robinson closes off with a very moving plea that we tread softly – for the dreams of children our placed beneath our feet.  While I cannot (dare I even try to) match his inspirational panache, I will assert this much: our nation was founded on the dreams of men and women, not their fears.  I seek to support that which gets you up in the morning and I am proud when dreams are placed beneath my feet – for I shall tread softly.
Have a great day and thanks for reading.  Comments are, as always, welcome.
Matt G.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on What Keeps You Up, Or What Gets You Up?

Who Blinked First?

It is well woven in the fabric of our thinking in this country that loyalty between employer and employee has completely eroded.  The question this post seeks to explore is, “Who blinked first?”
In The World’s Newest Profession, Christopher McKenna provides a comprehensive look at management consulting over the past 100+ years.  It is in this account that I became deeply acquainted with Frederick Taylor (1856 – 1915) and the notion of Scientific Management – also referred to as Taylorism[1].
In short, Mr. Taylor postulates that managing human beings is not so remarkably different from managing the parts of a machine. Even more incredulous, Burrhus Frederic (B.F.) Skinner (1904-1990) promoted Radical Behaviorism and his Stimulus-Response theories of Operant Conditioning – the idea that human behavior can indefinitely be manipulated through deliberately deployed reward and punishment mechanisms. (Think about experiments where laboratory rodents and primates are subjected to external stimuli to coerce their behavior.)
Examining these two approaches to people management[2], we can quickly identify flaws. First, Mr. Taylor might have come close to something in the Industrial Age (which began about one hundred years before his birth).  During this time, the contribution from each individual was quantitative, easily assessed and therefore highly objective. There was little room for argument – you either produced that which was asked of you or you didn’t.  In the age of information and the knowledge worker, evaluations of output are qualitative and making such assessments has become extremely subjective.[3]
Where other aspects of evaluation are routine – such as predefined feedback scores – the selection of a score is at its root a matter of individual opinion.  For example, have we not all either heard of, or experienced for ourselves, situations where an employee receives negative feedback from one manager only to earn high accolades from another manager after having changed nothing about themselves or they way they work.  The criteria by which we evaluate one another are perilously subjective. For more on this idea, see The Myth of Performance Metrics by Dick Grote.
I will further assert that even in the days of “you either produced the prerequisite number of widgets or you didn’t” that subjectivity in evaluations occurred.  There were certainly times when individual targets were missed yet a human-to-human connection – even (or especially) at a subconscious level – evoked a more lenient or harsh assessment for some over others.
Looking at Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, we see an interesting parallel between what Abraham Maslow put forth and what we can easily imagine as the evolution of needs in society as we transition from mechanical and analytical production (left-brained work) to creative and cognitive production (right-brained work).
In years long gone by, the needs of the proletariat were akin to the lower parts of Maslow’s Hierarchy.  We were myopic on our primal survival needs and behavior manipulation, while morally arguable, was effective as the desired ends were immediate for all parties involved.  As we evolved socially, so have our needs.  We, as humans are in no way comparable to lab rodents and primates. We are now much more attentive to the dynamic nature of our existence.  As a result, addressing our needs has become much more of an ontological exercise.
Ok, time to ask, “What does this have to do with loyalty between employee and employer?  Good question! Let’s explore an answer.  Both Sir Ken Robinson and Dan Pink have become rather prolific with the idea that we are holding onto a mentality for optimizing productivity suitable for the industrial age and applying it to an age that long ago has come to rely on our cognitive abilities for progress.  The consequences of this are disastrous.
When our cognitive and creative abilities are recruited, we become somewhat more emotionally attached to that which we create.  And, the assessments of others are much more subjective leaving ample likelihood for incongruence between our evaluation of our work and the evaluations of others.  This leads to an erosion of relationships as doubt in motives takes root.  Employees, for their part, are generally not prepared to deal with this mismatch in assessment and employers still operate with a mindset that operant conditioning will yield output that will meet their criteria. What is even more remarkable is such criteria is too often in flux making it even more difficult hit the target.  At the time of evaluation it comes down to trust and the relationship between the evaluator and the person being evaluated.  You can’t get more subjective than that.
Furthermore, since such assessments of output are so qualitative, a reliable and agreed upon compensation model for right-brain work does not, and maybe cannot, exist opening yet further the door for exploring alternate employment opportunities.
The needs of today’s knowledge worker no longer reside at the level of simply income and security.  Instead, we want a healthy relationship where that which we create, and thereby have attachment to, shows up for others as having commensurate value. It is my opinion that businesses – having indirectly helped usher in the environment that necessitated the knowledge worker – was ill equipped, both culturally and procedurally, to adjust to this needs-evolution.  The result was an abrupt misstep in tending to the new emergent relationship with employees.
This post is meant to explore thoughts on who blinked first, not necessarily provide my own definitive answer – one does not exist. I will say that I believe that a confluence of poorly sequenced circumstances gave rise to evocations of questioning the long-standing loyalty among both sides. Who blinked first? It is still hard for me assess but I know this – both sides did. And both sides are still in the dark about how to recapture what was unintentionally lost.
Closing note: As I began to draft this post, I received in the mail the periodic magazine from my alma-mater.  Inside is an article about a recent business leaders forum where there is a quote from one of the panelists assessing “Employees are returning to a 1950’s mentality where there is a desire to stay with the same organization for many years instead of jumping from firm to firm throughout a career.”  I wonder if the person who made this quote has missed a key point. I don’t think there was ever a time when jumping from firm to firm was desired for its own sake. There did emerge a desire to be acknowledged, validated and appreciated, as well as become exposed to a variety of experiences, as we moved up the proverbial hierarchy of needs.  The only way to achieve that – even if only perceptually – was to change employers until we found the relationships and values that felt right to us.
Comments as always, are welcome.
Thank you for reading and have a great day!
Matt G.


[1] Taylorism and Scientific Management are commonly presented as theories.  To uphold the integrity of the word “theory” as I have come to know its meaning, I emphatically refrain from referring to either of these terms as theories.
[2] Personally, I abhor the notion of managing people.  It is my deep belief that things and situations are what we manage and people are those we either lead or support.
[3] Some numbers based metrics such as sales number targets are either achieved or missed.  Yet, there are some aspects of a sales cycle that remain highly subjective such as earning credibility with a prospect. As I am not a salesperson, I concede my limits in full understanding of the benefit of sales metrics.  The July-August 2012 issue of the Harvard Business Review offers some interesting articles in this area.
Posted in Behavioral Influence, Business Relationships, Management, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Who Blinked First?

Stop looking for what was never missing

I cannot recall when this occurred, but at some point in my life I became drawn to books that profess to help with self-image and self-promotion.  Within the business section of the bookstores, these books are regarded as Management or Leadership, elsewhere, they are regarded as Self-help or Inspirational.  Regardless of where you find them, the underlying thesis is always the same – you are on a journey to find yourself.
I admit I have had more than my share of rendezvous with the notion that I haven’t yet found myself.   I think now this is nonsensical. I am “right here”.  I have always been “right here”.  I will always be “right here”.  So is, and will be, everybody.  Let’s parse out the phrase “right here”.  In its most common use, the use of the word ‘right’ is used adjectively to give preciseness to the word ‘here’ one supposes to distinguish from ‘somewhere around here’ or ‘in the general vicinity’.  ‘Right here’ gives exactness to the location to which we refer.
In my use of the phrase ‘right here’ is meant to accentuate that where I am in life is right. And where I am is here.  You too are where you are and for you that is here, and it is right.  Hence, any journey with the aim of finding oneself seems to loose its purpose if at all times we are all ‘right here’.  In contrast to what most self-help and business management / leadership books emphasize, let’s stop looking for ourselves and instead look at ourselves – and accept what we see.
It is said – and I truly believe – that life only begins at the outer edges of our comfort zones.  And for us to venture outward to life’s beginning we must stop looking for what was never missing. We must instead accept who are right here.  In short, we must stop looking for ourselves and begin accepting ourselves!
A closing thought: As I read through what I share above I was at first concerned that this was more on the self-help more then the business or work side of our lives.  Through both personal experience and observation of others, I have become aware of how poignant these thoughts can affect our sense of fulfillment in our work lives as much as, if not more than, our personal lives.  I might dare to postulate further that real self-acceptance can help tear down conflict that exists between any two dichotomous identities we have between who we are at work and who we are at play.
Thanks for reading.  Thoughts and comments are always welcome.
Have a Great Day!
~Matt G.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Stop looking for what was never missing

The guy/gal In the corner office…… is a human being.

During one of my recent consulting assignments, I was in a meeting with the COO of a $3 billion company and a few folks on his executive team.  This was a multi-hour session with lunch, etc.  During the afternoon – after the coma inducing affects of lunch might have otherwise passed or worn off – I excused myself for a trip to the restroom.  The company’s COO must have had the same idea.  A conversation ensued as we walked back to the conference room.  What follows is a rendition of his words that lie somewhere between verbatim and paraphrased.  The point is, his thoughts are clear even if I don’t have it right word for word.

‘Boy, sometimes you just need a break from these things.  The mind wanders and it’s hard to stay focused’

 These words just rolled over the tongue of a very esteemed Ivy League educated, C-Level  executive of a huge –  and handsomely profitable (though privately held) company.

It struck me at that moment that perhaps many people with aspirations of the proverbial corner office might be disillusioned into thinking that career success requires constant demonstrations of superhuman abilities.  On the contrary, as I learn more and more about what makes people sustainedly successful (the adverb is key) it is a clear and present sense of sell-awareness.  They know themselves very well and they are comfortable with that knowledge.

Maybe they do possess a trait here or there that is sometimes considered super-human.  That is not the point.  The point is that they know exactly who they are and they maximize their impact and contribution within those boundaries.

The take-away here is that should you aspire to excel, don’t try to be super-human or the person whose place in which you wish to occupy. Rather, know and accept the person you are and be the best at being that person.   You will excel as the world receives you much more openly for this reason – no one, and I mean no one, dislikes authenticity.

The COO who is the protagonist earlier in this article is, by his pure humanness, the quintessential executive in my view.  He is not super-human, but his humanness is super.

As always, comments are welcome.

Thanks for reading – have a Great Day!

Matt G.

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phZ4W_EzBaI?rel=0&w=425&h=239]

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Can the nation bear what the market can?

Increases in college tuition continue to outpace inflation.  The argument, of course, is that so long as the market can bear the increase, it is economically sensible to continue to raise tuition.  There is a theoretical inflection point where a high enough portion of the market is priced out of being a customer.  It is here that the market size is at a point where college and university revenues and/or margins are at their peak.
That’s the market centric approach to tuition setting decision making. What about nation centric?  Only a decade ago, The United States led the world in the percentage of it’s population with at least an associates degree.  Today, we are 12th.  In only 10 years we have fallen from 1st to 12th in a category that has huge implications for the future of our country as a world leader.  In my opinion, this category might only be second to the efficient and effective administration of healthcare.  (I won’t even go there right now.)
Pricing many otherwise academically and intellectually strong candidates for post secondary education out of the market is not the only factor affecting a decrease in the percentage of the US population obtaining such desirable education levels.  Policies that tie teachers hands and in affect lowering the bar sets many students as ill-prepapred and they become quickly discouraged and disenfranchised once they enter post-secondry eduction institutions.
Where finances are that which drive the “go to college / don’t go to college” decision, a more holistic longer term view with national interest in mind must be taken by U.S. colleges and universities if we are to have any hope at advancing the collective education levels of our citizens.
I believe in the importance of maximizing revenue and profits and the decision-making processes that lead to such outcomes.  And I also deeply believe that focusing solely on such metrics – and nothing else – is simply terminal and does not ultimately lead to a better future for the very environment relied upon for sustenance and longevity.
As always, I welcome all thoughts and feedback.
Thanks for reading – have a Great Day!
Matt G.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Can the nation bear what the market can?

A Terrific Bad Mood Buster

Closing off this first day of May, 2012, I am a bit grumpy following just “one of those days”.   Self doubt had momentarily captured me in its tight embrace.  We’ve all been there and this one is getting a bit too deep for comfort.
I think I found something that can actually help when these things overcome us. Jokes!  That’s right, I Googled jokes and within seconds I was reading some pretty funny stuff that help bring me in from the proverbial ledge.
Next time your feeling down and seeing joy in anything seems an impossibility, look up a few jokes and remember, all things are temporary – especially the setbacks.
Thanks for reading, Have a great day!
Matt G.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on A Terrific Bad Mood Buster

Where do you see the world in five years?

“Where do you see yourself in five years?” is a question that is often asked of  younger people earlier in their careers.  (It is sometimes asked of those later in their careers as well.)  I have never felt comfortable with this question, and yet I understand its intent.  It seeks to learn of the the vision or goal setting abilities of the individual – all good things.  My concern with this question is that by focusing on the individual’s goals and visions for their own future, it encourages a very self-centered view of the future.  When we focus only on our own goals and visions for sometime hence – without inclusion of our social environment and impact in our formulations – we perpetuate a social order rife with conflict.
Rather than contemplate the individualistic view of the self in the future, think about a future view in the broader context of the social organization – be it a company, organization, neighborhood, nation or the world – and what your role in arriving at the desired state could be that is both impactful to the larger community as well as fulfilling to you as the individual.  In everything I read, and have ever read, about that which distinguishes leaders whose legacy endures the test of time, this one single trait of placing the progress of humanity above the progress of themselves individually is unmistakably woven within their character.   Dare I go one step further to argue that a reversal of such priorities by anyone is, at some level, an abdication of responsibility in being a member of a community.
It is also important to distinguish that of which I am speaking and the act or showing of commitment by working long hours that routinely infringe upon our time with those most important in our lives.  When this happens, we might tell ourselves we are serving the greater good of an organization – and in a very limited number of occurrences, this might be true.  Much more often than not, such actions are serving our own needs more than those of the organization – be it in pursuit of recognition and extra compensation or more emotionally treacherous, a want for martyrdom as a management technique for our insecurities.
In closing, my thoughts about putting community above self is in no way meant to suggest that self-awareness is not important. On the contrary, it is probably the most important first step in best defining our roles in the creation of a social group’s future.
Feedback and comments are, as always, welcome.
Thanks for reading. Have a Great Day!
Matt G.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Where do you see the world in five years?

Invention: The Mother of Necessity

There is a well-known saying by the Greek philosopher Plato (427 BC – 347 BC) that tells us that Necessity is the Mother of Invention.  Plato, I assure you, never owned a Blackberry or an iPhone.  Today, technology is being advanced at a clip faster than our ability to comprehend it, much less optimize its use.  Consequently, the creator and created have been transposed.
Ever since human communication evolved to where some form of medium was necessary (i.e. not face to face), responses where generated and transmitted at some future time.  The time that elapsed permitted three very important things to occur. First, it allowed us to retrieve the message on our schedule, not the senders.  Second, it allowed us time to fully process the received message and to thoughtfully formulate a response that is clear and purposeful.  Taking time and care greatly reduces the likelihood our responses will be misunderstood.  Third, it allowed us to maintain integrity with everything else going on in our lives – especially at the moment the incoming message arrives.  When we drop what we are doing to respond to an “urgent” message, we are irrefutably saying that what we are doing at that moment is less important.  This becomes especially atrocious when what we are doing at that moment is engaging in face–to–face communication with another person.  In any and all cases we are implicitly trying to satiate our desire for instant gratification anyway we can.
Imposing upon ourselves a belief (and make no mistake, all such beliefs are always self imposed) that when someone communicates with us remotely and leaves a message, we must respond immediately – this includes all communication where the parties are not simultaneously engaged.  This is ludicrous.  One of the key elements of motivation and happiness is a sense of self-direction and autonomy.  We voluntary (nowadays maybe involuntary for some) have surrendered our right to these when we willingly allow our lives to be put at the whims of others and controlled by our communication devices.
It seems that we have permitted the ability to do something to morph into the need to do something. Invention has become the mother of necessity.
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9g5mq–PN4?rel=0&w=425&h=239]

Posted in Behavioral Influence, Uncategorized | Comments Off on Invention: The Mother of Necessity

Joy and Hunger

Thank you to all who are following my stories about my trip to Rwanda in December.  In my December 13th post, I shared my sensations from witnessing enormous faith in the people who traveled great distances (mostly by foot) to Kibeho for the anniversary celebrations of the Marian Apparitions in the early 1980s.  Here, I want to tell a story of joy and hunger.  These two physiological domains are not only unrelated but we deem them unable to co-exist.  And yet, these two seemingly dichotomous human experiences are in fact what I witnessed.  In the next post on my trip to Rwanda, I will share what I learned about the Rwanda genocide 1994. I will cap off my blog series on my trip to Rwanda by talking about the future prospects for not only Rwanda, but also Africa as a whole.
At the conclusion of the celebrations for the anniversary of the Marian Apparitions, we remained in Kibeho for one more day.  In so doing, we had the amazing opportunity to interact with the pilgrims who also were staying there a little longer.  We were also now able to interact with the residents of Kibeho.   To say that Kibeho is among the poorest villages in one of the world’s poorest countries is not too far off the mark.  One might be inclined to think that violence and mayhem would be the norm in such a place.  What I witnessed was purely peace and order.  The title of this blog is Joy and Hunger.
On the notion of hunger, my preconceptions proved to be inadequate.  Not far from where we were lodging while in Kibeho, there was a bakery that made rolls and the wafers used as Eucharistic communion in Roman Catholic services.  Some among our traveling companions purchased a couple hundred rolls to feed to the few dozen young people who were just beyond the perimeter of the bakery property and watching us with great curiosity.  (We were charged about $20 USD for 250 rolls – about eight cents each.)   As we approached the group they gathered closely around us and once we began handing out the rolls it was like tossing a french fry on a beach with a heavy seagull population[i].  The people simply swarmed us.  It almost felt like we were being attacked but there was no hostility or violence.  They simply wanted a roll.  They would eventually stop waiting for us to hand them the rolls and instead they would just grab it since so many hands were in competition.  One roll dropped on the ground – in the mud – and two children both grabbed it, tearing in half and each one ate what they got from their small tug of war.  This was simply the authentic response to address a human need at the most fundamental levels – nourishment – something they too often lacked.
On the notion of joy, my preconceptions proved to be flat out wrong.  Since returning from my trip, my one sentence summation of the experience of interacting with the Rwandan people has been this. I have never seen a people who possess so little in material belongings all the while hold such a complete joy for life.
While I remain committed to never being pontifical in my blog hosts, I will use a biblical analogy that I feel well describes the resonance that befell me.  In the first book of the bible, we are told of the story of Adam and Eve and their exercising of free will in opting to indulge in the forbidden fruit from the tree of knowledge.  The story tells us that this indulgence was driven by man’s desire to become knowledgeable of the difference between good and evil.  Prior to this we were, if I may, blissfully ignorant to any such difference.   We were able, as many spiritual gurus guide us towards, to just ‘be’.
So, here we have a people who, save outside visitors like us, have no exposure to any degree of modernity.  They are without the capacity to recognize any difference between having and not having.  In my analogy, they have not taken a bite from the fruit of the tree of knowledge.  Is that bad or is that good?  In my view, an assessment here adds no value to the discussion.  My assertion is simply that this exists and may explain how ‘not having’ – including basic nourishment – can in fact exist with joy.  Simply put, the people of Rwanda  “get it” when it comes to being grateful for what they have.  This is something that those of us in the land of wealth used to get as well but we have completely lost it over the past 25 years as a sense of entitlement has taken over.  And this has pushed us into a divided nation where even our cultural identity is tearing.
It is in mass struggles and collective suffering that a people will band together and rise up.  But what happens when the people of a nation become tranquilized by the obviousness of their success? Our individual pursuits diverge and become fragmented.  We are no longer united.  We become divided and fall down.  Living in a land of opportunity is a tremendous gift.  Taking it for granted is both shameful and a usually a foreteller of ruin.
What I have shared here is my mental and emotional response to witnessing people living with an ongoing need for nourishment and yet are wholly bound together and truly grateful for their opportunity to experience the joy and grace of living the human experience in its purest form.
I welcome thoughts, comments and feedback.
Thank you for reading. Have a Great Day!
Matt G.


[i] The use of seagulls as an analogy is no way intended to dehumanize anyone with whom we interacted, but rather to convey an appreciation for being witness to human behavior under the influence of extreme hunger.
Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

At Least Acknowledge the Star to Which Your Wagon is Hitched… Otherwise Unhitch Your Wagon

I am taking a break from blogging about my Rwanda experience to share something that is rather timely – while also giving me the chance to try my hand at satire.
At this very joyous time of year where celebrations and good cheer abound, we have concocted many ways to express our wishes for a pleasant holiday to one another.  The traditionalist will say Merry or Happy Christmas, while others will acknowledge Hanukkah.  And then we have those that are entrenched in the more secular forms of well-wishing with simply ‘Happy Holidays’ or ‘Seasons Greetings’.   (Based on my experience, this December secularity in mostly a U.S. centric thing.)  I imagine, church and state separation and/or exercising the right not to acknowledge the tenants of any religion are behind these intentions.  Let’s get on the same page about what we are talking about though.  Christmas is the recognition of the birth of a historical figure of some measurable significance and Hanukkah is the commemoration of the rededication of the Holy Temple in Jerusalem at the time of the Maccabean Revolt.  Both are celebrated this time of year.  These are the reasons “the holidays” came into existence.  Let me be clear – I wholeheartedly support the right of all to believe in or not believe in whatever one wants.  I have no desire to convert anyone.
In both Christianity and Judaism, this time of year has very deep meaning.  For those not in these two camps and claim a breach of civil liberty and point to political correctness as a valid argument that the more secular “Happy Holidays” or “Seasons Greetings” are more appropriate, may I respectfully request that you cease and desist.  You are not only a party crasher, but also a rude one. You don’t even acknowledge the host, guest of honor, or party planner. You just show up and start drinking the egg-nog.
As an alternative, if you really want a festive gift-giving holiday, I have an idea – create your own somewhere else on the calendar, have it mean something, and give it a real name.  Let’s look look at some options:

  • January has New Year’s and is too close to Christmas
  • February has Valentine’s Day
  • March has St. Patrick’s Day
  • April looks available (save my birthday)
  • May has Memorial Day
  • June looks like an option
  • July has Independence day (again, this is a U.S. remedy)
  • August  is another possibility
  • September has Labor Day
  • October has Halloween
  • November has Thanksgiving

Find one that works well and have at it.  Feel free to use the gifts under tree idea or the eight candles (nine if you count the shamash) – they work well for us.  I know Hallmark and American Greetings would just love the new new market opportunity.  And retailers would have another day a few weeks prior to open their doors at midnight for the rash of bargain hunters.  That leads to expanded advertising – oh the possibilities go on and on.  Heck, you might even put the economy back on track.
My point is simply this, if you wish to get caught up in the joys of a festive time of year, please have the decency to recognize why this time of year exists and how it came to be. Say “Merry Christmas” or “Happy Hanukkah”. Otherwise your place is on the sidelines and when you wish to exchange pleasantries, simply say, “Hello” or “Have a nice day”.  If you wish me a “Happy Holiday”, I will ask you to clarify the Holiday to which you are referring.
Your thoughts and comments are always welcome.
Thank you for reading.  Merry Christmas and Happy Hanukkah!
Matt G.
AFTERWORD:
I am aware of Kwanzaa’s inception in 1966-1967.  This is an example of proactively establishing one’s own alternative – though this is honoring a culture and a heritage rather than a historical event.  December is getting a little crowded now, so others may refer to my list above of suggested available months.  And, my message is geared more to those who just jump on the holiday band wagon and deny the reason the band wagon was built.

Posted in Christmas, Faith, Hanukkah, Holiday, Religion, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on At Least Acknowledge the Star to Which Your Wagon is Hitched… Otherwise Unhitch Your Wagon