THEN: Secretary of State (KY), 1996-2004; Candidate for Lieutenant Governor, 2007
NOW: JYB3 Group (Owner) -public affairs consulting firm; Miller Wells law firm (Of counsel)
Full Biography:link
By John Y. Brown III, on Mon Jan 7, 2013 at 12:00 PM ET
Being sick with the flu is a double curse.
You feel awful physically, of course.
But you also view everything in your life through the same miserable, feeble, nauseous lens…making everything around you less beautiful, special, worthwhile or even tolerable.
====
I have cursed at my cold/flu (whatever it is) to no avail.
I’ve tried using rare curse words I haven’t used in months –or even years. I’ve tried new combinations and several hyphenated curse words
I’m not sure even exist. And, of course, I’ve used the standard fare curse words we are all familiar with and often turn up in
ordinary distressing situations –that aren’t cold/flu related.
But not a single curse word, hyphenated or otherwise, or any combination thereof has helped one whit!
D*****t!
====
Does anyone know what keys to press to Restore the Brain to Factory Settings?
====
You know your case of this cold/flu thing going around is bad when you see the old Bon Jovi “Dead or Alive” video and your first response to it is, “Dead? Alive? Why such a big deal about the difference?”
By John Y. Brown III, on Fri Jan 4, 2013 at 12:00 PM ET
One of the greatest gifts a parent can give a child is not being a role model for achievement (although that is important), or being present at many of their activities (although that is very important, too), or being actively engaged in molding their child to be a good citizen (although that is needed), or being a good financial provider (although that is expected).
Rather one of the greatest gifts a parent can give to their children, in my opinion, is regular transparent glimpses into that parent’s humanness. Not showing flaws or foibles for the sake of exposure—like showing off a war wound. But an honest reflection of what that parent is thinking, feeling, and experiencing (to the extent the parent really knows him or herself). In other words, not playing the role of “Father Knows Best” or “How I Became the Queen Bee” But rather the daily role of “Father (or Mother) Tries Hard Most Days and Gets it Wrong about as Often as he (or she) gets it Right.”
The other qualities listed in the first paragraph teach children how to “appear” and be perceived by others as successful. But a parent who is consistently transparent can help set an internal barometer for children that will serve them well—helping them to know themselves and trust their instincts. Not just seem to be holding it together.
Of course, it’s important for children to grow up to exemplify model behavior, to be consistent and active and responsible. But I believe it is even more important for them to have the confidence be be real. To be authentic…..and not be confused about how to do that. And if they haven’t learned how by watching their parents it’s like expecting a child to know the native language even though it was never spoken in the home.
No one strives to be merely authentic as an end in itself. Or the related traits of transparent and self-aware. We strive instead to be successful, great, courageous, and a dozen other various forms of “achievement.” But authenticity is often the precondition for these so called achievements. And even when it’s not, it is the greatest consolation. A person who has a long resume but isn’t comfortable in his or her own skin, isn’t self-aware or genuine, is a shell of the person who has these attributes but, for the moment, possesses a slimmer resume.
The former is more like an automaton–a robot. A well trained animal who performs on cue and is applauded.
But the latter is someone who is worth getting to know and who has something meaningful to say. And is leading a life worth living. Not merely seeking to perform a life worth applauding.
By John Y. Brown III, on Thu Jan 3, 2013 at 12:00 PM ET
I just found out my identity has been stolen and there are over a dozen fraudulent charges on my credit card that are now being investigated.
Thankfully, I’m not as frantic as I thought I would be if my identity got stolen. I am covered by insurance and should be reimbursed for the fraudulent charges within the next 30 days.
But what really got to me is the notion that my identity was stolen nearly 3 weeks ago. That’s 21 days. And no one. Not friends, not family, and not a single colleague ever noticed.
I’ll eventually recover the money. But my confidence has been shattered beyond repair.
And here’s the kicker. I fully recovered my identify about 15 minutes ago with a new card being issued. And I deliberated but casually struck up a conversation with my wife to see if she even noticed my identity was back. Well, guess what? She never said a word. And sthe still hasn’t commented on my haircut which I got nearly a week ago.
Whoever stole my credit card identity thought they were stealing money from me. Maybe they did. But what they really stole was something much deeper than that. Or apparently, based on the lack of notice by others, they stole something much shallower than money.
My identity.
As soon as I get my new card, I’m not only checking charges daily. I’m also considering developing a loud, over-the-top and obnoxious new identity.
By John Y. Brown III, on Wed Jan 2, 2013 at 12:00 PM ET
I am coming to the conclusion that all human relationships are a variation of parasite-host.
That’s not as bad as it sounds. And often can work. For a while.
Some hosts don’t know they are the host and once they find out are appalled and demand change.
By contrast, a parasite always knows (or suspects) he (or she) is a parasite. And if they learn they are acting like a host, they are appalled and demand change immediately back to their original role exclusively as parasite only.
The stages of most human relationships seem to follow this course:
Stage 1: Host —Host
Stage 2: Parasite–Host
Stage 3: Host–Parasite
Stage 4: Parasite-Parasite.
It’s usually during stages two and three that problems start to occur. But not until stage four before the parties realize these problems. And by the time both parties are behaving like a parasite, it is too late. Hosts can become parasites. But parasites almost never become hosts.
There are instances of this happening with medication, group therapy and behavioral modification. But takes a long time and changes are unstable. It is usually more efficient for each party (each parasite) to instead find a new host to befriend than try to change or get the partner to change.
By John Y. Brown III, on Mon Dec 31, 2012 at 12:00 PM ET
Disclosure and children.
How much is too much?
How little is not enough?
As with most things, it’s a delicate balance and specific to the situation. One never should like to ones children. But one should probably never disclose gratuitous details that weren’t specifically requested.
For example, a few weeks ago my son and I were on the topic, somehow, of Christmas song and which ones were probably best known.
I told him that Bing Crosby’s White Christmas was recognized as the greatest Christmas son ever –and had sold more records than any other Christmas song by far.
That was an “appropriate, informative, and measured response” to share with my 18 year old.
What I didn’t share with him is that my favorite Christmas song of all time is Christmas in Hollis by Run DMC.
I just can’t resist the lyrics,
“It’s Christmas time and we got the spirit
Jack Frost chillin, the orchas out?
And that’s what Christmas is all about
The time is now, the place is here
And the whole wide world is filled with cheer”
And
“My name’s D.M.C. with the mic in my hand
And I’m chilling and coolin just like a snowman
So open your eyes, lend us an ear
We want to say: “Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!”
But to have shared that, in my view, would have been a “parental over-share.”
Even thought its true.
By John Y. Brown III, on Fri Dec 28, 2012 at 12:00 PM ET
iSoap
We so live in an iWorld. iPads with iTunes and iPhones with iNews (the news as I want to read it).
The 70s were called by se the Me Decade. But the 2010 will likely be known as the iDecade.
Why do I say this?
I just left Walgreens because I was out of “Body Wash.”
I know. Look….I had used soap for 48 years and it worked fine . But soap wasn’t personal enough for me in our new iWorld. So when I was offered a chance to switch to something hipper and cooler sounding , like “Body Wash, ” I went for it. In retrospect, I was simply at a weak and susceptible point in my bodily hygiene regimen. But mostly looking for something more tailored to me and my generation than an old fashioned bar of soap could provide.
But I find myself standing in Walgreens tonight and taking over 5 minutes to pick out the “right” body wash for me–because now there are too many choices. There is Relax, Energy, High Energy, Sensitive, Vibrant, Extreme Comfort, Secret Wonderland, and many, many others.
And I think I picked the wrong one now to fit my mood tomorrow morning. I thought I would feel “vibrant” but now worry I may feel like “secret wonderland” –and I don’t have the right body wash for that mood.
Which made me wonder if maybe I never should have given up that simple yellow bar of Dial soap I used for 48 years.
By John Y. Brown III, on Thu Dec 27, 2012 at 12:00 PM ET
Thought for the day.
A friend admonished me for not planning well. She’s right. Up to a point.
The keys to any plan are to 1) plan ahead; 2) plan strategically and 3) execute that plan flawlessly.
If you can only do two of those three things, pick planning strategically and executing flawlessly. You don’t have time for the most thoughtful plan, but a strategic plan developed on the fly is better than no plan at all.
If you can only do one, there’s not much of a point. You could choose executing flawlessly a non-plan but that’s not really possible. You could choose creating a strategic plan but if you can’t execute it, what’s the point? And you could plan to plan, but why bother?
However, if you are a “planner” and can only choose one, you’ll probably choose one anyway because planners like the illusion of being organized and often-times like to simply plan for planning’s sake. And that’s fine. If you are one of these types and not very flexible, pick whichever one of the three makes you most feel like you are actually doing something constructive and “planning” —since they are all equally useless. At least you’ll feel better about yourself and be less frantic about your non-plan.
On the other hand, if you can’t do any of them at all (and are cool with that), find me and we’ll hang out and find a way to have a better time than those crazy planners,
Just to spite them.
Of course, we don’t really want to spite them because we’ll eventually need their help in getting a ride back to wherever we started since we didn’t plan on having a car or write down the address of where we were staying or where we are going. So if you aren’t a planner, at least keep a planner nearby.
By John Y. Brown III, on Wed Dec 26, 2012 at 12:00 PM ET
Metric for the perfect mate
Analytics is all the rage in business and government. The hot new tool of the year—decade maybe—to help organizations make better data-driven decisions.
The movie Moneyball brilliantly depicted the powers of knowing and playing the numbers to get the results you want in more than just business and budgets. You can even use analytics to create a championship level pro baseball team –on the cheap.
So, why not use analytics on a more personal level by individuals seeking “better data-driven decisions”? And why not something more important and personal to you than budget forecasting or sports pastimes. How about an algorithm for finding the ideal mate? Or just a tolerable one? I think it’s doable.
Of course, you say, eHarmony and other dating websites already use these tools to match people for dating. Yes, they surely do. But that’s dating. And it’s a business. If eHarmony only offered a one shot algorithm telling you that you should or should not marry someone, there would be nothing much to advertise because it’s a one-shot business model. Instead, eHarmony wisely held out expertise for the dating marketplace which provides endless opportunities for selling, buying, re-selling and re-buying .
Dating involves behavior that economists refer to as “elastic” (subject to changing over time, even if only temporarily) as opposed to marriage, which involves behavior that is “inelastic” (only subject to changing in the imagination of one’s spouse). And besides, dating has far too many variables to derive a truly reliable forecast of dating success because much less is on the line. For example, where dating only is involved, literally thousands of faux pas are grounds to refuse a next date….but that same activity if applied in a marriage context would merely become “this week’s topic” in counseling or a cute story to tell at a cocktail party (twice but not that third time when you embellish) or simply viewed as an opportunity to catch up on some reading by sleeping all week on the couch downstairs.
So, what would such an algorithm look like? I can’t say what one for the ideal female partner should look like. I’m not a woman and am not comfortable guessing. I only know it will be far more complex and require a mind capable of revising relativity theory to complete, whereas for the male model, merely having a high school familiarity with algebra is adequate to the task.
I’ll let one of the truly brilliant and accomplished analytics organizations in education, business or public policy (or dating or baseball) take on the task.
My only request is a simple one that will be eagerly provided. If such a formula is ever developed that I’m given credit for promoting the idea. How do I know this credit will be eagerly provided to me? C’mon, it doesn’t take a high school algebra level understanding of analytics to know such a formula would never really work. And that whoever claims otherwise will immediately be looking for someone else to blame for coming up with the foolhardy idea. That’s just common sense.
(See pic below of male professor explaining the overwhelming empirical evidence that the female graduate student should date him if she wants to be truly happy. Who said analytics types don’t have street smarts too.)
Postscript: They have now been married 6 years but the former grad student (now Phd) has since revised the formula to eliminate errors and “kinks” in assumptions in the original formula. I’m joking. I think)
By John Y. Brown III, on Wed Dec 26, 2012 at 10:00 AM ET
#TeamJYB3:
My New Year’s New Dietary Math Resolution.
Or what dieters can learn from economists
“Constant dollars” is terms describing income after adjustment for inflation, as opposed to “Actual dollars.”
Inflation (monetarily speaking) is about 2-3% a year. Weight increase follows a similar metric throughout life.
So, for example, if someone weighs, say, 190 pounds and gains, say, 4 pounds for the year….when adjusted for weight inflation, there is no “net” weight gain.
In terms of “real pounds” Sure, there may be some additional “actual pounds” but those have to be accounted for properly and haven’t been by most dieticians in the past—who obviously lack an understanding of econometrics.
So, for example, this year, I actually lost one pound (when adjusting for inflation). I’m not commenting on “actual pounds” because they are no longer relevant to a more realistic and obviously much more sophisticated understanding of human weight measurement.
====
After spending the first three weeks of my diet traveling and celebrating the holidays, I got ready to weigh myself.
Stepped on the scales.
And decided that “It could be worse” should actually be result that should register on my scales .
I’m not sure even exist. And, of course, I’ve used the standard fare curse words we are all familiar with and often turn up in
So, for example, this year, I actually lost one pound (when adjusting for inflation). I’m not commenting on “actual pounds” because they are no longer relevant to a more realistic and obviously much more sophisticated understanding of human weight measurement.
Follow John Y: