Pre-Ramble:  This year, Labor Day coincides with a persistently high unemployment rate … over 9% last time I checked … and an astounding 0% up-tick ( … no-tick?) in jobs created in the month of August.  This unfortunate and frustrating state of affairs will be the topic of President Obama’s upcoming talk on job creation and the languishing economy.

Cut to a recent article in the Atlantic written by Sara Horowitz (and tweeted by business and technology writer, Daniel Pink) — The Freelance Surge Is the Industrial Revolution of Our Time.  As a freelance writer, this title got my attention immediately.

Horowitz describes the “boom in independent work that is changing the way we think about jobs and careers.”  She talks about the Rise of the Creative Class and the Freelance Nation (the first is the title of a book by Richard Florida (2002) and the other should be the title of a book … well, it’s close to Free Agent Nation by the abovementioned Daniel Pink (2002) … ) and the fact that job titles and careers no longer fit into neat little categories – Doctor, Lawyer, Indian Chief.

Crazy quilt – Instead we are seeing a major transition in the workforce where individual workers wear many hats,  piecing together many different types of work and juggling vastly different areas of expertise. Presumably, they do this to make a living wage, maximize their given talents, and exercise a more flexible, balanced  kind of work-style/life-style.  Horowitz calls this transition “profound” and discusses the practical implications of a growing freelance workforce …

“This transition is nothing less than a revolution. We haven’t seen a shift in the workforce this significant in almost 100 years, when we transitioned from an agricultural to an industrial economy. Now, employees are leaving the traditional workplace and opting to piece together a professional life on their own.  As of 2005, one-third of our workforce participated in this “freelance economy.” Data show that number has  increased over the past six years … Entrepreneurial activity in 2009 was at its highest level in 14 years, online freelance job postings skyrocketed in 2010, and companies are increasingly out-sourcing work.”

Nice to know I’m not alone, but that’s about as far as the comfort zone goes.  While Horowitz works her way around the practical matters of policy and job security for independent workers, I find that my day-to-day experience as a freelance worker involves concerns at a more personal level.  As an individual with what I would characterize as a between-the-cracks, non-traditional skill set, I am constantly challenged with the identity issues associated with this “brave new world” of freelance.

I’m a creative thinker/co-creator with a left brain component that likes to corral complex concepts, relationships, processes and/or dynamics and boil them down into a tight, accessible one-page visual overview. I am the conceptual/project development equivalent of Google maps … the GPS … the little rippling wave of blue light that radiates out from the current location as seen in the context of the ultimate destination point …

My dream job is to trot my “curious outsider” perspective into corporate cubicles and corner offices and chat about what folks are working on.  I want to know what they are thinking about, the successes they’ve had, and the unique problems that they are grappling with.  Then I want to figure out new ways to address/clarify/articulate/develop those things with them.

So, what is this job called?  Where on the online job application do these descriptors go?  How will President Obama’s proposal for job creation accommodate me and the rest of the freelance workforce?

The Take-Away:  Freelance workers don’t just represent temporary patches on the fabric of the American workforce — If we play our cards right (and the stakes are pretty high here), the estimated 30% of the U. S. workforce are the very fibers of innovation and enterprise that must characterize a strong, competitive American workforce.  I hope that President Obama’s jobs plan includes a way to cobble all of the untapped expertise represented in misaligned, under-employed or unemployed workers into a nice tight weave that can drive and thrive in the marketplace of the future.  ( … which from where I’m sitting, is the marketplace of the NOW.)

Pre-Ramble:  There’s no denying it – even over a full year out, election season is clearly underway.

And, Minnesota politics has quickly turned into national politics with Tim Pawlenty and Michelle Bachman shuckin’ corn and tradin’ barbs in Iowa over the weekend at the Straw Poll event, and President Obama kickin’ off a Midwest meet-n-greet in the Mississippi River Valley.

The Straw Poll is a “seriously-it’s-just-for-fun” pre-season photo-op where voters pay $30 to put a kernel of corn in a jar with a picture of their favorite candidate taped on the front of it. (New democracies take note.)  This time around, Michelle Bachman got the most kernels in her jar and Ron Paul got the next largest amount.  Somewhat surprisingly, former Minnesota Governor Pawlenty got the third largest number of corn kernels in his jar and dropped out of the race after that.

Minnesota continues to enjoy political attention as President Obama winds his way through the heartland not campaigning. His first whistle-stop was Cannon Falls, Minnesota. I’ve never actually been to Cannon Falls, but I suspect it’s like a lot of small Minnesota towns … simple, earnest and showing a little bit of wear.

The President, showing a little bit of wear himself, rolled up in a brand-spankin’ new Presidential Bus (not it at right).  Commissioned by the Secret Service, the vehicle – a cross between James Bond and the Partridge Family – cost just over $1 million and is equipped with 5-inch thick armored panels, black-out windows, advanced communications technology, flashing red and blue lights, and lots of other top-secret stuff.  It isn’t easy for a president to be both accessible and bulletproof.

Extra pickles?  President Obama spent a better part of the day hanging with “the people” and talking about issues in folksy terms. The Orator-in-Chief was droppin’ “g”s all over the place … talkin’ about “gettin’ stuff done,” … “doin’ this and that,” … and “makin’ the hard choices.”  I think I even heard him say “betcha” a couple of times (which is soooo Minnesooootan, doooon’t ya knooooww … ).  At one point, caught up in the moment, the President made the down-home suggestion that someone get the grills going … like a backyard barbecue.

The Take-Away:  Mr. President, if given a choice between brats or, for instance, jobs, I’m thinking that American people would pay $30 to put their kernel of corn in the “gainful employment” jar.

Pre-Ramble: I’m sure the producers of The Bachelorette were thrilled when the President of the United States and the Speaker of the House cut into last night’s show to banter about the nation’s debt crisis.  What could be more simpatico than budget talks and one-on-one date night in Fiji? (Can you believe that Constantine??)

So, basically, some of the folks on Capitol Hill want to scootch up the amount of $$$ we as a nation borrow to cover some stuff we want to buy/pay for (like a prescription drug program, missiles, … probably some of those pricy toilet seats, etc.) that we can’t actually afford right now.  If we raise our “debt ceiling” that means we can borrow more $$$ to cover that stuff … and then pay it back sometime in the future.

When the U.S. government is kicking around a plan like that, it seems like it could almost be reasonable.  Sure, we’ll just borrow some $$$ now and figure out how to pay it back … later.

GOP leaders met tonight to discuss what to do, and aides said there were two options:

• They could elect to lower the increase of the debt limit extension. Right now the plan is to extend the debt limit by $1 trillion; they could move that to a number under the $850 billion.
• They could elect to cut more, to push the $850 billion number back above $1 trillion.

“However,” one of the aides said, “the former is a lot easier than the latter.”

Glad we cleared that up.  What’s a billion dollars here or there?  And, why don’t we put the “aides” in charge, as they clearly have this all figured out.

The Take-Away: I want to raise my debt ceiling too.  What a great concept … just borrow a bunch of $$$ from Big Bucks Bank and buy all kinds of nifty things … furs, yachts, jets, cocktail rings … trips to Figi … and then have some of those “aides” figure out the easiest way to pay it back.  Brilliant!

Pre-Ramble: Day eight of the Minnesota government shut-down …

The fact that our governor and legislators couldn’t/didn’t do the job they were elected to do is lame and unacceptable.

The Take-Away: Here’s a list of all of the members of the Minnesota House of Representative and the Senate. Print yourself a copy to take into the voting booth, so you can be sure that you never vote for any of these individuals again.

Pre-Ramble:  It’s been a couple of days since the State of the Union address … enough time for partaisan factions to hold court and the gestalt of the evening to soak in. Enough time to consider and confirm my initial reaction — “underwhelmed.” 

I am generally a big fan of President Obama … a dip into the K. blog archives will more than ratify that. He is smart, strategic, plucky (in a good way), and a brilliant communicator. Obama has set a very high bar for himself. We’ve seen him deliver highly articulate, moving, even artful speeches on the campaign trail and on numerous occasions since he’s been in office. We KNOW he can clear that mark. This is what makes the other night’s performance so disappointing. The message, delivery and even his wardrobe, fell short.

Message – The concepts and words were all there … … characterization of the American legacy and people as “exceptional”  … some Kumbaya around the bipartisan campfire … a carefully laid out (tedious laundry list) agenda … a couple pom-pom-worthy rallies around the old Sputnik watering hole … and a fist-pumping shout-out to ”Win the Future!!”  On paper, all of this stuff probably looked really good.

• Bring it!  Sorry, but the “Win the Future” tagline is lame and inflammatory. Messaging around the concept of “winning” sets up the very type of contentious binary contest that I thought we were trying to extinguish – both in our polarizing political rhetoric and on the volatile  international stage.  Instead of courting supremacy by striving to “win the future,” how about if we ”Lead the Future” instead? 
• “Exceptional” … this part was exceptionally good. I’d rather be part of Team Exceptional, a generous and gracious effort moving boldly forward into a prosperous future, than engaged in some contrived cage match where one group “wins” and the others are all losers.  This isn’t Gladiator.
• Z-Z-Z-z-z-z … Sputnik was the wake-up call for 53 years ago. All that talk about the need to step-up expectations around math and science education … to grow innovation to be competitive in the global marketplace — we’ve been reciting those lines while punching the snooze button for 30 years. It’s time to jettison that tired, toothless battle cry and DO-SOMETHING-nik.

Delivery – Maybe it was an off-day, … maybe the planets weren’t lined up quite right … but I just didn’t feel the energy and conviction behind the words that I’ve come to expect. You’d think Barack could work up a little more spark and fervor around the inherently peppy concepts of creativity and innovation. Even Speaker Boehner’s golden-toasty laser-focused silence projected more umpf.

NOTE: several folks appeared to be dozing off  …  their eyes closed … heads down. Actually, these diligent sorts were reading along in their programs as the President spoke his speech aloud. One gal, however, (the woman in the burgundy suit with her head flopped to the side  … you know who you are) was clearly NOT reading along. … If you can’t stay awake for an hour-and-a-half to listen to the Leader of the Free World talk about the state of life as we know it, give me your seat and go take your fricking nap out in the hall.

Wardrobe - Ok, the State of the Union isn’t a fashion show, but what was up with that fade-me-into-the-background, monochromatic blue/grayness that the Commander-in-Chief had going on up at the podium? I’m not advocating anything neon, or even flag-y, … But B-Dog — you’re a young, hip, naturally stylish guy, … and you’re THE PRESIDENT.  We know you’ve got other stuff in your closet — give us something!?

The Take-Away:  Except for the part where he was urging young people to become the kind of steady and inspiring teacher-leaders we need in the 21st Century classroom, the President’s 2011 State of the Union speech reluctantly gets a B-.

We know you can do better, young man.  See me after class and we’ll talk about some things you can do to earn extra credit … (we’ll start with the military budget … )

Post-Note:  Notice how everything sounds a little edgier with “nik” tacked onto the end of it-nik?

Pre-Ramble:  Among the many characterizations of the mechanisms behind creative thought, creative thinker and author of the book “Where Good Ideas Come From,” Steven Berlin Johnson suggests that a necessary pre-condition to innovation – one presumably born out of a creative process – is trafficking in the high potential waters of “the adjacent possible.” 

Who’d a thunk it? According to Johnson, at any given point in time, the environment or surrounding landscape becomes synergistic … which is to say that certain thoughts or breakthrough ideas become thinkable/come to light at certain points in time, depending on what has been thought or done prior to and in proximity to it.  When lots of ideas and discoveries in lots of different realms (science, sociology, technology, … ) are being thrown out into the common pool of  “the known,” these seemingly random variables shift and bump into each other in new ways.

I hate that the only example I can think of right now is the Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups ads …

In the 1970’s and 1980’s, a series of commercials was run for Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups featuring situations in which two people, one eating peanut butter and one eating chocolate, collided. One person would exclaim, “You got your peanut butter in my chocolate!” and the other would exclaim, “You got your chocolate in my peanut butter!” They would then sample the mixture and remark on the great new taste … “

Mash-up: So, in the “realm of the known” we have: 1) the heated debate spurred by Chinese ninja-parent, Amy Chua’s new book, “Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother,”  (If nothing else, the ensuing ruckus is a stroke of publishing genius … ); 2) the call from Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar at a recent “Innovation Summit” to make the U.S. more competitive against the rising economic power of China and India by ”jumpstarting innovation”; and 3) an observation from NY Times columnist, David Brooks which turns out to be a point of intersection between #1 and #2.  

Adjacent impossible – So, … Chua brings her extreme, beyond-no-nonsense parenting style that preaches laser-focused academic rigors and take-no-prisoners perfection, while Klobuchar recites the now requisite (and misguided) strategies for bringing about innovation … more math, science and engineering for high school students … blah, blah, blah.  (How long have we been investing in that strategy?  Since Sputnik maybe?) … We’ve got desperate Americans ”soft” and in decline trying to compete with the hard lined practices of the Chinese education factory (e.g., Amy Chua “and a billion more parents just like her”) … heading for total domination of the global marketplace …  These two ideas may be swimming in the pool of “the known” at the same point in history, but tying a kid to a chair until they complete calculus equations while playing the violin is no guarantee of success or innovation and it is not the magic bullet to America’s education/innovation problem.

David Brooks to the rescue, raises two great and relevant points: First, he cites Chua’s critics who righteously claim that these over-controlled, socially stifled children may be skilled and compliant, but ”can’t possibly be happy or truly creative” … And second, he cites compelling  research which suggests that a highly functioning collaborative effort trumps singular, nose-to-the-grindstone slogging every time.

Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Carnegie Mellon have found that groups have a high collective intelligence when members of a group are skilled at reading the emotions of others, when they take turns speaking, when inputs of each member are managed fluidly, and when they are able to detect each other’s inclinations and strengths … This skill set is not taught formally, but is imparted through arduous experiences … exactly the kinds of experiences Chua [denies] her children by making them rush home to hit the books.

The Take-Away:  If being competitive with a highly-regimented, straight-A Chinese workforce is the goal, … and innovation is the strategy (?) … then creating an environment that fosters creative/innovative thinking is the solution. 

I think Steven is right.  If you want innovation to happen, you need to be actively dangling near the “adjacent possible.”  You have to create an environment that fosters dabbling around in the messy, non-linear playground of openness, communication and collaboration … where ambiguity, tinkering and making mistakes rule the day. I’m not saying we should be running with scissors, or forgoing challenging coursework in math, science and engineering, but there needs to be room to get our kids and/or ourselves out to the “edges” on a regular basis to troll for some random synergy. 

Post-Note: Personally, I exploit the “adjacent possible” as often as possible, particularly in writing the blog. Granted, what I have to say isn’t always well-reasoned or insightful, but it always comes out of a fun mash-up of thoughts, ideas and situations that I encounter on the edges of my sphere.

Pre-Ramble: This week’s WSJ ”Off Duty” section, a new weekly bid to demonstrate that they too can be jovial and trendy (topics include “an insider’s guide to Istanbul,”  “reawakening your passion for bordeaux,” and “festive finery” for the holidays), posed a scampish, holiday-themed query: 

If you had $6,500, would you spend it on a very cool cocktail ring  … OR, would you rather spend it on one great party? 

The article then listed twelve must-have items that would be procured for the hypothetical $6,500 party along with their respective costs:

• 20 Vee champagne flutes, $1,600 (steuben.com)
• 60g of Alverta President caviar, $240 (petrossian.com)
• 8 Maine lobster pot pies, $144 (neimanmarcus.com)
• 1 case of Veuve Clicquot Yellow Label champagne, $600 (melandrose.com)
• 40 bags of Chocolate Coal, $100 (blueribbongeneralstore.com)
• 1 six-antler chandelier, $2,200 (mattermatters.com)
• 1 one-of-a-kind wreath, $225 (barneys.com)
• 2 raspberry and black magic rose bouquets, $300 (bellefleurny.com)
• 4 boxes of skier cards, $200 (thornwillow.com)
• 1 Raymond bar cart, $825 (plantationdesign.com)
• 1 Savoy Cocktail Book, $20 (anovabooks.com)
• 2 boxes of Meri Meri Crackers $46 (cheftools.com)

What? No meatballs and root beer?  That’s a nice list and all, but before you go out and spend $2,200 on an antler chandelier, I’d make sure necessities like ice and toothpicks are covered … And, I’d totally rethink that mirrored bar cart and spring for a couple boxes of fun-fetti cupcakes instead. It’s a party — your guests are going to be looking for cupcakes.

The Take-Away:  I get it. This is a flip, fun, festive little romp around the comparative value of up-scale indulgences. The concept is engaging and it’s well-articulated in a clever, quasi-equation format. I enjoyed every minute of thinking about that party,… the sparkly and sophisticated outfits that people would be wearing, … jazzy background music, … champagne bubbles on my tongue, … the energy in the room, … and the fabulous view of the city from the 20th floor window.

But then, I guess it’s the grantwriter in me that goes to the comparative value of some other less frivolous considerations. I’m compelled to wonder how many bags of rice, buckets of fresh water, sturdy shoes, mittens, goats, micro-farms, or scrubbed pelicans can be had for $6,500 this Christmas.

Pre-Ramble: The next in a tidy little series of blog posts I had planned about the Project Zero conference  was going to feature the power of the learning environment. I was going to talk about how inspiring, and reverent really, it was to partake in lofty discussions around the imperative of education with such a cast of renown experts and among such ”historically significant” works of art. 

As is the case with most museums of mention, Washington’s National Gallery is a splendid receptacle for artwork of all sorts. The playful interior atrium hosts a variety of works … from the spindly Giacometti sculpture striding across an upper walkway, to the gnarly human bust made of roots and branches (at right), to a colorful Calder mobile dangling overhead. This  environment provided a rich backdrop for our various explorations into the critical dynamics of teaching and learning for the 21st Century.

“Global competence” – Our lectures were filled with theoretical views on the optimal “mindsets” for teachers and students. We addressed the role of education to not only facilitate employability for a competitive global marketplace, but also to impart a sense of  actual “global competence” in future generations. We talked about the need to nurture students … to prepare them for the world they will inherit and the issues they will be called upon to resolve –economically, culturally, environmentally, … digitally. In the moment, this line of reasoning made complete sense. It felt important, valuable, proactive and scholarly.

Cut to a rickety, threadbare seat in an urban movie theater in the heart of uptown Minneapolis. The vintage venue was sprinkled with patrons who had come out on a cold November evening to see a documentary about education called “Waiting for Superman.” (Two yahoos who mistakenly came dressed in tights and a cape walked out after the opening credits.) Awarded audience honors for best documentary at the Sundance Film Festival, Waiting for Superman portrays a dramatic account of a “broken” education system as seen through the experience of five low-income students and their families.

“Filmmaker Davis Guggenheim reminds us that education “statistics” have names: Anthony, Francisco, Bianca, Daisy, and Emily, whose stories make up the engrossing foundation of [the film]. As he follows a handful of promising kids through a system that inhibits, rather than encourages, academic growth, Guggenheim undertakes an exhaustive review of public education, surveying “drop-out factories” and “academic sinkholes,” methodically dissecting the system and its seemingly intractable problems.” – Sundance

Other reviews include:

“… powerful, passionate, and potentially revolution-inducing.” – Lisa Schwarzbaum, Entertainment Weekly

” … the film is never less than buoyant, thanks largely to the dedicated and effective teachers on whom Guggenheim focuses.” – Variety

“ … a stunning liberal expose of a system that consigns American children who most need a decent education to our most destructive public schools.”  – William McGurn, WSJ op ed

“It’s hard to deny the power of Guggenheim’s lingering shots on these children.” – Scott Bowles, USA Today

“What struck me most of all was Geoffrey Canada’s confidence that a charter school run on his model can make virtually any first-grader a high school graduate who’s accepted to college. A good education, therefore, is not ruled out by poverty, uneducated parents or crime- and drug-infested neighborhoods. In fact, those are the very areas where he has success.” – Roger Ebert

“I urge you all to drop everything and go see the documentary “Waiting For Superman” at the earliest opportunity.” – Melik Kaylan, Forbes

The Take-Away: The contrast between education theory and education reality is striking. On the one hand, we’re mingling among Monets and Harvard academians to consider, in hushed tones, various analyses, syntheses and matrices. While on the other, we witness the breathless angst of defiantly hopeful parents as they wait in a crowded chaotic gymnasium to see if their child has been plucked up by fortune  – a lottery with very remote odds – to receive an opportunity to attend a “good” school, … an opportunity for a ”good” education, … a good life.

Where is the disconnect?  Superman?  Are you out there? Or, are you sitting in a classroom at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, waiting to finish up a few straggling classes before commencing to swoop in and save the American education system?  Hopefully, you are not struggling in a supply room somewhere, overcome by the evil educational kryptonite.

Pre-Ramble:  Election returns are so festive … and, even amidst all of the drama around who will be elected in this precinct or that, so predictable … (particularly in Minnesota where the decision between Tweedledum and Tweedledee isn’t complete without a massively expensive and time-consuming recount).

Such a patriotic scene … the huge furling American flag backdrop; … tidy color-by-number map to designate states that voted red and states that voted blue; …  goofy mascots; … the big scoreboard with a running tally of percentage of votes in; … and, the requisite quasi-diverse panel of  “experts” wearing red and blue striped ties and offering up continuous color-commentary.

Pass the Cheetos - What a fun game this is!  … ”Shellacked” Democrats, heads hanging, make barely-audible conciliatory sounds about faulty listening skills and aggressive agendas … Emboldened Republicans point told-you-so fingers and exchange high-fives, using words like ”The American people have sent a message!” … Referendum … and, Two more years, succa!!! … The only thing missing here are dread-locks hanging over a couple of collars, scantily-clad dance teams, and fans in face-paint.  Go Red!!! Go White!!! Go Blue!!! My team wins, your team loses!!! We are so going to bury you!!! Nah-nah-na-boo-boo!!!

Except, this isn’t a game.

We don’t get to just dust ourselves off, pack up the pom-poms and fire the coach when it’s over. This entrenched political exercise has some very real consequences in the lives of ”ordinary Americans” — those people that candidates keep pandering to, but really don’t know how to define or reach. While the victor du jour is busy printing up new calling cards and changing the name plates on the revolving door, who is doing any meaningful work for the American people?  The fall-out from of this volley of fist-pumping and hand-wringing is that neither team actually has the time or traction, nor, I fear, intention, to move the ball forward in any meaningful way.

The Take-Away: BOTH PARTIES are “misunderstanding the message” of this election. The dynamics of this repetitive, binary, zero-sum-game have become exhausting and dysfunctional. The last thing we need in our precarious economic recovery period is another round of trash talk and celebration in the end-zone. We need some important stuff done around here. 

We need to get this house in order so we can have jobs to do and actual houses to come home to. (Never mind clean air and water, decent healthcare, and a competitive edge in the global marketplace.)  We need the politicians who have been granted the honor of public service to buckle down, roll up their sleeves, and GET THEIR WORK DONE. As far as I can see, the only way they are going to do that is to stop playing partisan games (are you listening, Representative Boehner?) and work t-o-g-e-t-h-e-r. 

Seriously. The American people aren’t some arm-chair quarterback — WE ARE THE COACH. And, unless I am mistaken, the coach gets to call the plays. It’s TEAM AMERICA we’re working for, so damn it, … get out there … one … two … three … break!

Pre-Ramble: ‘Twas the night before voting day and all through the land …

I don’t know why I’m always surprised by political campaigns, and why I tend to tune them out. It’s weird, because, if you’ve read my blog for any length of time, you know that I am a fairly politically engaged gal.  I pay attention, and I care, which makes it even more dichotomous to me that I refuse to watch political ads on television and delight in actively tearing every piece of politically charged direct mail in half before tossing it directly into the trash.

Bring in the clowns – On the other hand, I so wish I had been able to attend Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert’s “Rally to Restore Sanity and/or Fear,” last Saturday on the National Mall in Washington D.C.  According to a follow-up story in Sunday’s NY Times, the event was, “part circus, part satire, part holiday parade, … a political rally without politicians.” There were flags and bands and speeches, and Stephen Colbert wore a sweet pair of navy blue pants with white stars all over them. I mean, these guys are political satirists, right? Comedians?

But there was something more.  Thousands of people (or Colbert’s estimate of 6 billion … ) don’t travel across the country to hear a couple of jokes …

“For many who came, the rally was an opportunity to take control of the political narrative, if only for one sunny afternoon … Beyond the goofiness, the rally seemed to be channeling something deep — a craving to be heard and a frustration with the lack of leadership … less by President Obama than by a Democratic Party that many described as timid, fearful, and failing to stand up for the president’s accomplishments.”

I actually think Steve ‘n’ Jon are only half right. Foreshadows of this frustration were present way before the ink had  dried on Obama’s Audacity of Hope. The American people are frustrated because they aren’t being heard by any party on Capitol Hill. Things are a mess and there’s a huge disconnect and people don’t know what to do with that. 

The Take-Away: Here’s a thought – In solidarity with the call to “be heard,” step out into your own little rally and deliver a few punch lines at the ballot box today.