The best actor training, right here in Kansas City!

Have you ever thought you might enjoy acting in front of a camera? Do you have to make professional presentations in front of groups, or even make speeches to crowds? Would you find it beneficial to lose your self-consciousness when the spotlight is on you for any reason?

If you answered yes to any of those questions, you might want to consider taking on-camera actor training. This is very different from stage acting and has many useful applications for those who are or want to be in ‘performance’ roles of any kind.

Did you happen to notice that in the questions above I left out the obvious, that being your friends ever told you that you should ‘be in pictures’? I left that one out on purpose. Don’t listen to your friends. They are telling you that for all the wrong reasons, none of which have anything to do with learning the craft of acting. Because if you think acting is all about how you look, you need to pay more attention to TV commercials, movies and TV programs. Every look you can imagine is represented there.

If this idea is interesting to you are in luck if you live in or near Kansas City. One of the finest acting studios in the nation is located right here! It is called Commercial Actors Studio (CAS) and it is owned and operated by none other than Brian Cutler and his wife Jill. If Brian’s name doesn’t ring a bell, visit IMDB and it will start clanging for you.

Brian is a lifetime actor and he studied many years under Charles Conrad, one of the most acclaimed acting teachers in the profession. The Conrad method is uniquely effective and this Kansas City studio is one of only two in the nation that features it. The other studio is in the LA area and is operated by Steve Eastin. Steve also trained in the Conrad school for many years and happens to be a close personal friend of Brian’s.

CAS fees are very reasonable. Brian wants dedicated students to be able to afford the training, so he keeps the cost within reach of almost anyone who is has a job. If you decide to check it out and give it a try, he encourages you to come by and visit a class to watch the process. If you enroll, leave your ego home when you come. It won’t be welcome or happy there. Just come ready to learn, have fun, work hard and learn a new discipline that just might open some wonderful new doors for you that could lead to positive changes in your life beyond anything you can imagine. It won’t be easy, but if it was everyone would be doing it, wouldn’t they?

How many nukes is enough?

The following is excerpted from article in KC Star published 12-7-09, author Kevin Collison. Topic was recognition of receipt of the Malcom Baldridge award for excellence in innovation, the highest award given by the POTUS for performance and excellence.

"Honeywell operates the Kansas City plant for the National Nuclear Security Administration and U.S. Department of Energy. The facility, which employs 2,700 people, supplies 85 percent of the non-nuclear parts that go into a typical nuclear weapon.

The sprawling complex was originally built as a World War II defense plant, and plans are under way to build a 1.4 million-square-foot replacement campus at Botts Road and Missouri 150 by 2012.

“This is a very proud moment for Honeywell,” said Dave Cote, chairman and CEO of the corporation, which is based in Morristown, N.J. “Our employees are committed to doing a superb job every day … receiving the highest honor for organizational innovation and performance excellence is validation of this work.”

Let’s try to look at this from several perspectives. To list them, there are the viewpoints of the city fathers, the military industrial machine, the financial community, the U.S. D.O.D, the Honeywell shareholders, and finally the currently employed and future hires. This group could be considered the cheerleading squad.

The U.S. government currently stockpiles about 5000 nuclear weapon devices of various configurations and designs, down from a peek inventory of over 23,000 before the disarmament treaty of 1992. We have also been told by multiple sources over the last few decades that it would take only a fraction of that stockpile to complete obliterate the planet and render it uninhabitable by our species. If we never manufacture another single nuclear WMD again, we will still always have the power and resources to end life for our kind anywhere or all over the planet as far into the future as can be imagined. Can we all agree that as of this very moment, the moment you are reading this, that we have overproduced these devices that are only intended for a single purpose, that being to kill huge numbers of humans in seconds, to an absurd extent? Does that idea stretch our thinking capacity?

As the article excerpt above boasts, an even more ‘sprawling complex’ than the existing one is about to be constructed to replace the relic now in operation. To do what? We need this? We can afford this?

The commonly accepted efforts to rationalize this by the cheerleader group tend to go something like this:

“The tax revenues to the community to support schools, roads, infrastructure, countless small business will be a wonderful boon to the city!” – City fathers

“It is vital to our national safety and world defense position that we continue to develop and produce state of the art weaponry and maintain constant vigilance against today’s world threats!” – D.O.D spokespersons

“Honeywell is excited about this wonderful new growth opportunity for our shareholders and we are looking forward the value and equity it will contribute to their ownership!” – Honeywell P.R. spokespersons

“This is a much needed shot in the arm to the Kansas City area economy. Thousands of businesses and citizens will benefit and prosper from this great enterprise!” – Financial community

“These will be great paying jobs with great benefits! We will be much more likely to buy nice houses, cars, and build college savings for our children!” – Current and future workers

Anyone or all of these statements have positive merit on the surface. What could possibly be anyone’s objection to more jobs good paying jobs, more national protection, major economic shot in the arm, better city infrastructure and on and on? Isn’t that what the city fathers and chamber of commerce work hard to acquire for any city every day?

But aren’t we ultimately fooling ourselves? From a very myopic viewpoint these benefits might come true, but do the benefits truly exceed the true costs? If the gross product value of this specific enterprise were redirected to countless other existing social problems wouldn’t that ultimately serve everyone far better?

Clearly I am approaching this issue from the perspective that there is no possible justification stockpile and maintain such large quantities of nuclear WMDs or the spare parts needed to keep them at the ready. I am calling on everyone in the community to just give some serious thought to how such decisions are made and ask you if this is really the best way to build our city’s economy and future? I’ve not heard anyone ask questions of this type regarding this specific project.

Are unions still a good idea today?

Unions are a really bad idea! They are identified by the conservative business community as the primary reason for the collapse of American manufacturing.

But wait! There’s more!

Unions are the natural result of an even worse idea, such as the belief that businesses can mistreat their workers endlessly without compunction or undesirable consequences.

Because company management went too far with treating workers as just another device or machine that could be upgraded and disposed of, workers organized and rebelled against their employers.

We all know that story too well. We all know that company management piously states that if a worker doesn’t like his or her job, they are free to leave and go find another one. After all this is America, the land of the free! Of course workers retort that is not a solution because they simply end up at another manufacturing facility that treats them just as poorly. And managers know that if all mistreated workers took their advice and left they would not have a manufacturing business. And round and round it goes.

In a perfect Randian world (as associated with Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand) there would be no need for unions because everyone would treat everyone else fairly regardless of relationship or hierarchy. If a business mistreated its workers, or workers were derelict in their official duties there would be hell to pay immediately. All business inequities would justly and neatly sort themselves out for the betterment of all concerned.


Alas, that is not the world we live in nor is it the world we will ever see. Those who have the power cannot resist using it and those without power become used. That is the way of the world and neither America nor American business invented that practice.