We've all seen on network television expose's on auto repair shops, and their taking advantage of the unknowing consumer, by recommending repairs that are not necessary or even warranted. The latest one that I saw was where the investigators equipped an auto with hidden cameras in every location possible, and took the vehicle to various repair places only to have the repair facilities tell them they needed the transmission fluid changed, and they had a machine called a T-TEC machine which would remove the old fluid and replace it with new transmission fluid.
Unfortunately even though the customer's paid for the T-TEC service, the hidden cameras showed the machine was never even connected to the car and the service was never done. And so it goes, repair shops have a direct input to their impeccable reputations, by taking good care of their customers. However, not all repair shops are like that, and though it is hard to find the good ones they are out there, if you take the me to look for them.
Today consumers have many options to put a little knowledge in their pocket when they go in for auto repairs. With the advantage of the internet they can go to different web sites where there are forums that let one talk with people who have the same vehicle as themselves, and share symptoms and possible solutions to their problems. A lot of these web sites are run by the auto manufacturer themselves. Also, a lot of times a mechanic will be the one answering their questions, and making recommendations as to what they think the problem might be.
The consumer can get info on what the problem might be, how long to fix it, and how much they can expect to pay. They can then go to sites like YOUTUBE.COM enter this information into the search window and view a video addressing their issue or problem and even watch the repair being made.
Now remember, armed with all of this information at their disposal, the consumer is well equipped to talk intelligently with a repair shop to get the proper repairs. And today, this is what happened and how fast I left the repair facility.
All I wanted was a new set of all season radial tires for my truck. Just two for the back, as the ones I had on had a lot of miles on them and I noticed that they were not biting into the snow as I expected them to do. This was causing a lot of slippage that made me uncomfortable. The tires on the front were new in the last month or so, so all I needed were two on the back.
A few months ago when I was searching for tires, I stopped into a brand name repair shop, close to home, and was quoted 93.00 per tire for an All Season Radial tire. This price included installation, balancing but no old tire disposal or sales taxes. When I walked into the same shop today, the person behind the counter was waiting on someone else. As I listened to the conversation the employee told the customer that she was at 103,000 miles and needed her timing belt changed. She said OK but when she got her next check. I did not get the impression that she had a lot of money because she stated she'd have 160 hours on her next check and she'd be able to get it done then. It was stated that this would be the third time they changed the timing belt according to mfr. recommendations. She was there for an oil change and that fee was 41.00, which I suppose at todays rates is not unreasonable, and I am not sure whether this was synthetic or not. I was just listening.....
When she left and it was now my turn, I gave him the dimensions for the tire and he printed out a sheet with three choices. The least expensive was 143.00 per tire. This was certainly OK for the brand of tires on the sheet, all top brands, but conspicuously missing was the tire brand for the shop I was at. INTERESTING....Because in my investigation the brand of tire that was the name of the shop was much cheaper when looking on the internet for similar tires. I am sure the guy did not remember me from coming in before. So I asked him how much he would charge to change an actuator on my four wheel drive transfer case. I also asked him if they could check the voltages going to the actuator to make sure the wiring to it was OK. This is because I am having trouble getting my truck into four wheel drive. My research says it is a part called an "actuator" or the wiring leading up to the actuator.
Now an actuator costs about 67.00 as an after market part for my truck, but that is one made over seas and I want one made here in the US. An original equipment manufactured (OEM), one from the MFR that puts them into GM cars, is about $150.00 or so. The time it takes to replace one is about 1/2 hour. 15 minutes to change it and another 15 minutes to put the truck up and down on the rack.
So their response was "Which actuator? There are two on the General Motors transfer case?" "We change them quite frequently on GM Pick-ups" I told them there was only one on my vehicle, and it was made of plastic, and was operated by the dashboard switch, that's why the wiring and voltages neede to be checked first. So they looked it up in their service APP......"He's right, there is only one on that truck, and it takes a half hour to change it." "How much would that cost?" I said. "$330.00 with an General Motors Original Equipment Manufacturer part". (Now how would you check if you got the cheap one or the good one?) By my calculations for that repair their hourly rate is about three hundred dollars an hour......There is NO repair shop anywhere that can command that kind of hourly rate. I thanked them, said I'd think about it, and let them know on the actuator and the tires. But really, I couldn't wait to get the heck out of there.
Now I certainly can do this job myself. I have the volt meter to check the voltages, and I can change the actuator if need be, but I don't relish doing it on my back, in the winter, and on the cold garage floor. Lets face it, I am getting old. So I'll just have to have it done by someone else......but by someone whom I trust for sure. The moral here......do your homework, and work with someone whom you feel comfortable with and someone you can trust.
Wednesday, December 17, 2014
Monday, December 15, 2014
Intelectual Property, What Do You Really Own?
Recently in the news media was a story about the hacking incident of Sony Pictures. It seems their computers were hacked and at least five movies were stolen and distributed free of charge. On addition to that private emails we also stolen and the distributed to the media who has published and made comment on their contents. A few of these emails contained some pretty embarrassing comments from executives who made some pretty disparaging remarks about some well known celebrities.
With those disclosures this morning lawyers from Sony Pictures sent cease and desist letters to three major media outlets stating that they were prohibited from making comment, posting comment, etc. because the material in their possession is stolen. With that in mind, it is a very interesting argument for certain.
Just as it it illegal and against the law, and we would not allow a person to break into our home or business and take its contents and our personal property to then give the same to someone else, are the contents our our computers similar property? In my opinion, if it matters, is YES, most certainly. And here is my argument as to why.
If I take a concept from MY mind or a thought or idea, and put it down on paper and publish it, I most certainly own it and no one is allowed to profit from it with out my permission. So to, when I write an email to someone else, and send it to them, then I also own that too. The fact that I shared it with someone, does not relinquish ownership. Here is an example: I write an article to be sold and published in a magazine, there is no question as to ownership, until it is sold and ownership passes from me to the magazine. But the fact that I take the same article and send it to my editor for editorial correction or comment, does not pass the ownership from me to the editor. So true is the email I send to a recipient. The ownership is still mine, and does not pass from one to another.
So when the hacker comes into my computer system and steals my material or in the case in point, Sony Pictures, that hacker is in possession of STOLEN material and should be prosecuted for the theft. I am sure that in today's technological world there are many State and Federal laws that cover this. So what about when the hacker puts it out there on a website? Does that give anyone the legal write to take the information and re-publish it? Once they take the information are they in receipt of stolen goods? I would think so. I would also think that these media outlets would also understand that the same is true for them too. Should that hacker get into their computer systems and publish sensitive information, I am sure they would not be too happy about it.
With those disclosures this morning lawyers from Sony Pictures sent cease and desist letters to three major media outlets stating that they were prohibited from making comment, posting comment, etc. because the material in their possession is stolen. With that in mind, it is a very interesting argument for certain.
Just as it it illegal and against the law, and we would not allow a person to break into our home or business and take its contents and our personal property to then give the same to someone else, are the contents our our computers similar property? In my opinion, if it matters, is YES, most certainly. And here is my argument as to why.
If I take a concept from MY mind or a thought or idea, and put it down on paper and publish it, I most certainly own it and no one is allowed to profit from it with out my permission. So to, when I write an email to someone else, and send it to them, then I also own that too. The fact that I shared it with someone, does not relinquish ownership. Here is an example: I write an article to be sold and published in a magazine, there is no question as to ownership, until it is sold and ownership passes from me to the magazine. But the fact that I take the same article and send it to my editor for editorial correction or comment, does not pass the ownership from me to the editor. So true is the email I send to a recipient. The ownership is still mine, and does not pass from one to another.
So when the hacker comes into my computer system and steals my material or in the case in point, Sony Pictures, that hacker is in possession of STOLEN material and should be prosecuted for the theft. I am sure that in today's technological world there are many State and Federal laws that cover this. So what about when the hacker puts it out there on a website? Does that give anyone the legal write to take the information and re-publish it? Once they take the information are they in receipt of stolen goods? I would think so. I would also think that these media outlets would also understand that the same is true for them too. Should that hacker get into their computer systems and publish sensitive information, I am sure they would not be too happy about it.
Monday, December 1, 2014
The Sledders Bible a new book on snowmobiling.
Well another project bites the dust. I recently finished my latest literary work titled "The Sledders Bible. I have been snowmobiling for many years, all the way back to 1970 when I got my first snowmobile a 1968 Chapparel 440, a low to the ground and very fast sled. This was quickly followed by a 1969 Ski-Doo Nordic model, much less powerful, but it was a two up, and I had a family of four. So here I was with a wife and two kids and two snowmobiles to ride on, enjoying the winter.
In order that we could all go out together, I enlisted the help an old farmer that lived nearby. His name was Wally Marquedt. Wally was an old school craftsman. He built things by hand the old school way. Wally made for us a tow behind sled, kind of like a long dog sled, completely out of oak, so we could put the kids in it, cover them with blankets, and take them every where we went. The two of them were about three and four years old at the time.
The winters were very cold, and the old sleds did not have heated thumb grips or hand warmers on the handle bars like we have today. Snowmobile suits were one piece, and gloves were simply that, gloves. Snowmobile boots, not very well, as far as protection from the cold. I usually wore my Chippewa waterproof hunting boots. Helmets were usually motorcycle helmets equipped with a snap on full face clear plastic shield. If you were fancy, you could get one tinted yellow to help with the sun. Pocket warmers were filled with lighter fluid, lit, and carried around your kidneys in a belt contraption. But they were not reliable and the pouches we know of today were not invented yet. So riding out on the primitive trails for extended periods of time were almost non existent. Short rides, frequent stops usually at a local bar.
When I first hooked up that dog type sled to the back of the Nordic, and put the kids in it and covered them up with a mountain of blankets and took off down the frozen river, I could hear over the roar of the engine the two of them yelling and screaming for me to stop, which I immediately did. When I turned around and looked back at them I could see the entire sled completely filled with snow. They were covered from head to toe. Well, it seems that I did not have a snow flap on the snowmobile hanging over the back covering the track, and as the track picked up the snow it completely buried them.......I never heard the end of that one.....
My first ride on a snowmobile was in the winter of 1969 in Lynn Massachusetts, when we were snowed in after a terrific snowstorm. We got two feet of snow the first day and it was followed with another two feet the next. The power was out, and there was no heat. I had my car parked under a sort of lean too. It took me about four hours to shovel. I started at the road and shoveled back towards the car. Snow had entered into the edge of where the car was parked as there were no doors on the opening of the covering. So I had to shovel out around the car too.
Once I did that, I started the car up and tried to back up, but it would not budge. I got out to look at what the problem was, hindering its movement, only to discover I had two flat rear tires. We were not going anywhere......and to make matters worse, there was no heat, no electric, and my wife was seven months pregnant at the time. The tires were flattened because of the cold and the expansion and contraction of the wheel rims and the seals breaking.
We were living on Sluice Pond, in Lynn Massachusetts at the time. We were both cold and did not know what to do. The snow was so bad that Buffalo NY sent in crews with heavy front end loaders to help clear the streets. The General Electric company was hiring people at $4.00 per hour (good money for me at the time, as I was only making $1.80 an hour at my real job, working in a hardware store) to shovel off the roofs of their buildings. At about ten AM a neighbor came over to our house on his double track, one ski in the front, Ski-Doo Elan, and transported us over to his home to get some warmth. He was my wife's boss at the time, and his home had a fireplace and so we could get warm. He owned a construction company and hired me n the spot to work the GE roofs. It was during that first ride across the lake, that got me hooked on the sport, and except for a fifteen year hiatus, I have been snowmobiling ever since.
So with all that experience, both good and bad, and living up here in the Northwoods of Wisconsin, the snowmobile capital of the world, I got involved with two snowmobile clubs, got a new machine, quickly got a second one, and picked right up where I had left off. But one of the things I noticed, while volunteering at a snowmobile safety class, was that there was not any comprehensive snowmobiling guide for newcomers to the sport that would prepare them for what they were getting in to. There was a booklet the students got during the course, but it mostly covered safety and not experiences, or survival techniques. So I decided to write one of my own and make it available to the masses. It is called the Sledders Bible and it contains most everything I know about the sport of snowmobiling, and I am passing this valuable information along to the readers.
I wrote this book with the intent that anyone who reads it cover to cover would know all of the practical aspects of what can and will happen when they're out on the trails. It contains information on how to survive if stranded, what tools to take with you, the history of the sport and many many other valuable insights, lessons and anecdotes, that you can use to keep you safe and well when you are out there, which allows you to have more fun. Portions of the proceeds of the sale of each copy will be given to the Soldiers on Sleds project. The book is available through Amazon, Kindle, Barnes and Nobel Books, Google Books and from the publisher Lulu.com. The cost is 19.95. It is also available for downloading directly to your tablet, laptop or PC. So get your copy today. You will not be disappointed..... ISBN978-1-312-61248-8
In order that we could all go out together, I enlisted the help an old farmer that lived nearby. His name was Wally Marquedt. Wally was an old school craftsman. He built things by hand the old school way. Wally made for us a tow behind sled, kind of like a long dog sled, completely out of oak, so we could put the kids in it, cover them with blankets, and take them every where we went. The two of them were about three and four years old at the time.
The winters were very cold, and the old sleds did not have heated thumb grips or hand warmers on the handle bars like we have today. Snowmobile suits were one piece, and gloves were simply that, gloves. Snowmobile boots, not very well, as far as protection from the cold. I usually wore my Chippewa waterproof hunting boots. Helmets were usually motorcycle helmets equipped with a snap on full face clear plastic shield. If you were fancy, you could get one tinted yellow to help with the sun. Pocket warmers were filled with lighter fluid, lit, and carried around your kidneys in a belt contraption. But they were not reliable and the pouches we know of today were not invented yet. So riding out on the primitive trails for extended periods of time were almost non existent. Short rides, frequent stops usually at a local bar.
When I first hooked up that dog type sled to the back of the Nordic, and put the kids in it and covered them up with a mountain of blankets and took off down the frozen river, I could hear over the roar of the engine the two of them yelling and screaming for me to stop, which I immediately did. When I turned around and looked back at them I could see the entire sled completely filled with snow. They were covered from head to toe. Well, it seems that I did not have a snow flap on the snowmobile hanging over the back covering the track, and as the track picked up the snow it completely buried them.......I never heard the end of that one.....
My first ride on a snowmobile was in the winter of 1969 in Lynn Massachusetts, when we were snowed in after a terrific snowstorm. We got two feet of snow the first day and it was followed with another two feet the next. The power was out, and there was no heat. I had my car parked under a sort of lean too. It took me about four hours to shovel. I started at the road and shoveled back towards the car. Snow had entered into the edge of where the car was parked as there were no doors on the opening of the covering. So I had to shovel out around the car too.
Once I did that, I started the car up and tried to back up, but it would not budge. I got out to look at what the problem was, hindering its movement, only to discover I had two flat rear tires. We were not going anywhere......and to make matters worse, there was no heat, no electric, and my wife was seven months pregnant at the time. The tires were flattened because of the cold and the expansion and contraction of the wheel rims and the seals breaking.
We were living on Sluice Pond, in Lynn Massachusetts at the time. We were both cold and did not know what to do. The snow was so bad that Buffalo NY sent in crews with heavy front end loaders to help clear the streets. The General Electric company was hiring people at $4.00 per hour (good money for me at the time, as I was only making $1.80 an hour at my real job, working in a hardware store) to shovel off the roofs of their buildings. At about ten AM a neighbor came over to our house on his double track, one ski in the front, Ski-Doo Elan, and transported us over to his home to get some warmth. He was my wife's boss at the time, and his home had a fireplace and so we could get warm. He owned a construction company and hired me n the spot to work the GE roofs. It was during that first ride across the lake, that got me hooked on the sport, and except for a fifteen year hiatus, I have been snowmobiling ever since.
So with all that experience, both good and bad, and living up here in the Northwoods of Wisconsin, the snowmobile capital of the world, I got involved with two snowmobile clubs, got a new machine, quickly got a second one, and picked right up where I had left off. But one of the things I noticed, while volunteering at a snowmobile safety class, was that there was not any comprehensive snowmobiling guide for newcomers to the sport that would prepare them for what they were getting in to. There was a booklet the students got during the course, but it mostly covered safety and not experiences, or survival techniques. So I decided to write one of my own and make it available to the masses. It is called the Sledders Bible and it contains most everything I know about the sport of snowmobiling, and I am passing this valuable information along to the readers.
I wrote this book with the intent that anyone who reads it cover to cover would know all of the practical aspects of what can and will happen when they're out on the trails. It contains information on how to survive if stranded, what tools to take with you, the history of the sport and many many other valuable insights, lessons and anecdotes, that you can use to keep you safe and well when you are out there, which allows you to have more fun. Portions of the proceeds of the sale of each copy will be given to the Soldiers on Sleds project. The book is available through Amazon, Kindle, Barnes and Nobel Books, Google Books and from the publisher Lulu.com. The cost is 19.95. It is also available for downloading directly to your tablet, laptop or PC. So get your copy today. You will not be disappointed..... ISBN978-1-312-61248-8
Saturday, November 29, 2014
Life in the Northwoods!
So here we are, with the last days of November quickly bringing the month to a close. The temperatures today were in the mid thirties, much warmer than it's been previously. With the warmth being generated on top of the snow it's causing a slight melt, and boy that melt makes it very slippery when you're walking in the yard or the driveway. But what makes matters even worse is that with the early snow we've received at the beginning of the month, totaling 16 inches, it was followed shortly there after with another eight inches of fresh powder. Now that means a total of twenty four inches on the ground. The yard has been plowed multiple times, but the tire tracks have now glossed over from frequent driving in and out. But the underneath the ground is still not frozen, and this makes for a slippery mess.
Now a while ago, in September, I took delivery of a new ODES 800 Pro Utility Vehicle. It also came equipped with a snow plow. So I thought I was all set for this winter, and last winter, the volume of snow was just too much for my small snow blower, rendering it totally ineffective and useless. Because of that, I got my four wheel drive pick up truck stuck in the driveway twice. I had to call in some favors from friends to dig it out, and then tow it out. Thank God for great fiends.
So this year I thought I was all set.......WRONG! Even though my driveway is plowed, it's not plowed down to the road gravel. There is still a couple of inches of snow that we leave purposely to cover it. The reason for this is to allow us a good foundation for when we take the snowmobiles out in and out of the yard. We need some snow to drive on, and that is where my problem started today. I couldn't get out of the driveway with my truck. I just kept sliding and sliding up the ever so slight hill to the road. Finally it happened, I was stuck and there was no getting it out. So now what?
ODES TO THE RESCUE! Now this is the second time I have had to do this this year, and it's and inconvenience, I know, but it's also a life saver. What is it? Well would you believe that little 800cc UTV is strong enough to pull out the truck when it's stuck. Yup! Just a 20 foot tow strap hooked onto the front tow hooks of the truck and the other end to the winch of the UTV on the back, and with one person behind the wheel, and me driving the UTV, ZOOM!. We were out in a flash.
So for all my retired friends who move South during the winter, you might be thinking, why in the world would you want to do this? Well, we'll never be stranded, with the truck, UTV and two snowmobiles we have at the ready, we're well equipped transportation wise, and money can't buy the beauty we have to enjoy, and the large group of good friends we have up here. Friends who enjoy the same things we do, and who are always there to lend a hand should you need one.
Now a while ago, in September, I took delivery of a new ODES 800 Pro Utility Vehicle. It also came equipped with a snow plow. So I thought I was all set for this winter, and last winter, the volume of snow was just too much for my small snow blower, rendering it totally ineffective and useless. Because of that, I got my four wheel drive pick up truck stuck in the driveway twice. I had to call in some favors from friends to dig it out, and then tow it out. Thank God for great fiends.
So this year I thought I was all set.......WRONG! Even though my driveway is plowed, it's not plowed down to the road gravel. There is still a couple of inches of snow that we leave purposely to cover it. The reason for this is to allow us a good foundation for when we take the snowmobiles out in and out of the yard. We need some snow to drive on, and that is where my problem started today. I couldn't get out of the driveway with my truck. I just kept sliding and sliding up the ever so slight hill to the road. Finally it happened, I was stuck and there was no getting it out. So now what?
ODES TO THE RESCUE! Now this is the second time I have had to do this this year, and it's and inconvenience, I know, but it's also a life saver. What is it? Well would you believe that little 800cc UTV is strong enough to pull out the truck when it's stuck. Yup! Just a 20 foot tow strap hooked onto the front tow hooks of the truck and the other end to the winch of the UTV on the back, and with one person behind the wheel, and me driving the UTV, ZOOM!. We were out in a flash.
So for all my retired friends who move South during the winter, you might be thinking, why in the world would you want to do this? Well, we'll never be stranded, with the truck, UTV and two snowmobiles we have at the ready, we're well equipped transportation wise, and money can't buy the beauty we have to enjoy, and the large group of good friends we have up here. Friends who enjoy the same things we do, and who are always there to lend a hand should you need one.
Thursday, November 27, 2014
Thanksgiving, what does it mean to you?
Thanksgiving, what does it mean to you? For some, it is a time to get together with family and friends, raise a glass, and enjoy each others company over a good meal. For others, it is a day off of work, a day to enjoy a day of eating and merriment, or for others, it's a day to watch football.
Some people will travel great distances to make this happen. They'll travel the crowded highways, they'll "enjoy" the hustle and bustle of crowded airports and other transportation complexes. All in the quest to be there with their family and friends to celebrate a great meal and great company.
But for some it is just another day, another day to try and cope with the everyday struggles that some people go through, through no fault of their own. Nobody actually asks to be poor, homeless, or lonely. It is those people who we have to think about.
Did you ever think that the first Thanksgiving was just that. That the participants, the Pilgrims, were the lonely, the homeless, and the dissolute? Think about it? First of all they came to the continent with nothing but what they could carry with them. The only food they had is what they brought. They stepped off the Pinnace that brought them ashore and onto the rock to assist them getting their feet on the new land.
Did they land in Plimoth (old English spelling)? Well not really, they actually landed in Provincetown on the tip of Cape Cod in November. They could not make it there so they set sail again and traveled farther North finally landing in Plimoth in December, 1620. So here they are standing on the beach and looking at the forest ahead of them. No shelter, no streets, no roads, they were now homeless. They were in dire need of help. Oh sure, they could chop down a few trees, and build a shelter. But anyone who has ever seen what these shelters looked like, with amazement, and wonder, "how did they survive the harsh winter?" Well the fact of the matter is that they did not do that well after all. A typical dwelling for the first Pilgrims was a simple structure comprised of sticks and twigs. It was not the log cabin one would have thought, there was not time enough to fell a tree, hand hewn the log and put together a sturdy structure. If anyone has ever been to the New England coast in December, it is brutal. The wind comes off of the ocean and travels right through a person. Winter coats, well not for them. There certainly was not any clothing that provided warmth like clothes of today. So they were forced to move inland.
There were 102 passengers on the Mayflower when it landed, and 45 would meet their demise in that first winter. Seven of those were children ranging in age from four to seventeen. There were thirteen woman and twenty-eight men. The first Native American to make contact with the Pilgrims was Samoset who would not make contact until the following March, so until that time, the Pilgrims were strictly on their own. So here we are, the Pilgrims, Americas first homeless.
If Samoset did not make contact with them they surely would not have survived at all. The Pilgrims were very surprised that Samoset greeted them speaking English. Samoset was a Sagamore (stature) and was relocated from Maine by some English sailors. He was from the Eastern Abernaki tribe, which was not the natives of the Plimoth area. The local tribes were the Wampanoag and their chief was Massasoit. Samoset was on a journey to meet with Massasoit when he came across the Plimoth colony. He simply walked straight into the center of the village which certainly surprised them as they did not think there was anyone else living in the area. But back to the December time frame.......
They landed on December 16th and three days later after some exploring the local area, they came across an abandoned Indian village which was known as Pawtuxet. During those first three days they stayed aboard the ship as their place of shelter and they needed a more permanent place, and winter was setting in and the temperatures were dropping rapidly. In the village, there were a few dwellings there and they immediately took advantage of them and quickly moved in. Although they wondered where the inhabitants had gone, they were unaware that the entire village had been wiped out by a small pox epidemic that occurred earlier. This is a typical Wompanoag dwelling.
As you can see, it would have been a very cold place to spend a winter. So with that in mind, be thankful for what you have, not what you want. Think, that there are many people on the streets, who wish that they had what you have, no matter how small it is. What is their day going to be like today? Think of those elderly who have no one in their lives or family anymore, how their life is today, and how they will be spending this Thanksgiving day. Extend a hand, invite them in, provide a meal, and give thanks, thanks for what you have, thanks for your family, and thanks that you are not where they are and give help while you can, and when you can..........
Some people will travel great distances to make this happen. They'll travel the crowded highways, they'll "enjoy" the hustle and bustle of crowded airports and other transportation complexes. All in the quest to be there with their family and friends to celebrate a great meal and great company.
But for some it is just another day, another day to try and cope with the everyday struggles that some people go through, through no fault of their own. Nobody actually asks to be poor, homeless, or lonely. It is those people who we have to think about.
Did you ever think that the first Thanksgiving was just that. That the participants, the Pilgrims, were the lonely, the homeless, and the dissolute? Think about it? First of all they came to the continent with nothing but what they could carry with them. The only food they had is what they brought. They stepped off the Pinnace that brought them ashore and onto the rock to assist them getting their feet on the new land.
Did they land in Plimoth (old English spelling)? Well not really, they actually landed in Provincetown on the tip of Cape Cod in November. They could not make it there so they set sail again and traveled farther North finally landing in Plimoth in December, 1620. So here they are standing on the beach and looking at the forest ahead of them. No shelter, no streets, no roads, they were now homeless. They were in dire need of help. Oh sure, they could chop down a few trees, and build a shelter. But anyone who has ever seen what these shelters looked like, with amazement, and wonder, "how did they survive the harsh winter?" Well the fact of the matter is that they did not do that well after all. A typical dwelling for the first Pilgrims was a simple structure comprised of sticks and twigs. It was not the log cabin one would have thought, there was not time enough to fell a tree, hand hewn the log and put together a sturdy structure. If anyone has ever been to the New England coast in December, it is brutal. The wind comes off of the ocean and travels right through a person. Winter coats, well not for them. There certainly was not any clothing that provided warmth like clothes of today. So they were forced to move inland.
There were 102 passengers on the Mayflower when it landed, and 45 would meet their demise in that first winter. Seven of those were children ranging in age from four to seventeen. There were thirteen woman and twenty-eight men. The first Native American to make contact with the Pilgrims was Samoset who would not make contact until the following March, so until that time, the Pilgrims were strictly on their own. So here we are, the Pilgrims, Americas first homeless.
If Samoset did not make contact with them they surely would not have survived at all. The Pilgrims were very surprised that Samoset greeted them speaking English. Samoset was a Sagamore (stature) and was relocated from Maine by some English sailors. He was from the Eastern Abernaki tribe, which was not the natives of the Plimoth area. The local tribes were the Wampanoag and their chief was Massasoit. Samoset was on a journey to meet with Massasoit when he came across the Plimoth colony. He simply walked straight into the center of the village which certainly surprised them as they did not think there was anyone else living in the area. But back to the December time frame.......
They landed on December 16th and three days later after some exploring the local area, they came across an abandoned Indian village which was known as Pawtuxet. During those first three days they stayed aboard the ship as their place of shelter and they needed a more permanent place, and winter was setting in and the temperatures were dropping rapidly. In the village, there were a few dwellings there and they immediately took advantage of them and quickly moved in. Although they wondered where the inhabitants had gone, they were unaware that the entire village had been wiped out by a small pox epidemic that occurred earlier. This is a typical Wompanoag dwelling.
As you can see, it would have been a very cold place to spend a winter. So with that in mind, be thankful for what you have, not what you want. Think, that there are many people on the streets, who wish that they had what you have, no matter how small it is. What is their day going to be like today? Think of those elderly who have no one in their lives or family anymore, how their life is today, and how they will be spending this Thanksgiving day. Extend a hand, invite them in, provide a meal, and give thanks, thanks for what you have, thanks for your family, and thanks that you are not where they are and give help while you can, and when you can..........
Monday, November 24, 2014
Another Good Man Bites the Dust!
Well if you have not heard by now, I'll break the news for ya. Today Chuck Hagel, Secretary of Defense was forced out of the White House. This is the third Secretary of Defense that have left the Obama administrations since he has taken office. He looks for good people, appoints good people, gets bipartisan approval on his appointments, and then as soon as he hears something he does not like, they are out of there. Obama has done this with a lot of his "advisers" that come from the military side of the house, especially the Pentagon and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Many top level military generals have been put out to pasture since he has come into office.
So just who is left to advise him on matters of National Security? Well when he calls together his National Security Council, There isn't one person who has any experience in protecting you from enemies.
So let's start with the National Security Council who are they and what is their history when it comes to protecting us. The Chairman of the National Security Council (NSC)is the President. Regular attendees (both statutory and non-statutory) are the Vice President, Joe Biden, the Secretary of State, John Kerry, the Secretary of the Treasury, Jacob Lew, the Secretary of Defense, Chuck Hegel, but now vacant as of 11/24/2014, and the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, Susan Rice. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is the statutory military advisor to the Council, and the Director of National Intelligence is the intelligence advisor. The Chief of Staff to the President, Counsel to the President, and the Assistant to the President for Economic Policy are invited to attend any NSC meeting. The Attorney General and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget are invited to attend meetings pertaining to their responsibilities. The heads of other executive departments and agencies, as well as other senior officials, are invited to attend meetings of the NSC when appropriate.Starting with Obama himself, he has no military experience or foreign affairs experience.
Joe Biden was a Senator before becoming vice-president. Most of his life after college and law school was involved in politics. Jo Biden has never served in the military. During those early years, Biden received five student draft deferments during this period, with the first coming in late 1963 and the last in early 1968, at the peak of the Vietnam War. In April 1968, he was reclassified by the Selective Service System as not available for service due to having had asthma as a teenager.
Susan Rice, one of Obama's top advisers. This is the woman who gave wrong statement regarding the Benghazi fiasco. According to Wikepaedia:
"Rice served in the Clinton administration in various capacities: at the National Security Council (NSC) from 1993 to 1997; as director for international organizations and peacekeeping from 1993 to 1995 and as special assistant to the president and senior director for African affairs from 1995 to 1997.
At the time of the 1994 Rwandan Genocide, Rice reportedly said, "If we use the word 'genocide' and are seen as doing nothing, what will be the effect on the November election?" Rice subsequently acknowledged the mistakes made at the time and felt that a debt needed repaying. The inability or failure of the Clinton administration to do anything about the genocide would form her later views on possible military interventions. She would later say of the experience: "I swore to myself that if I ever faced such a crisis again, I would come down on the side of dramatic action, going down in flames if that was required."
Islamists took control in Sudan in a 1989 coup d'état and the United States adopted a policy of disengagement with the authoritarian regime throughout the 1990s. After the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, however, some critics charged that the U.S. should have moderated its policy toward Sudan earlier, since the influence of Islamists there waned in the second half of 1990s and Sudanese officials began to indicate an interest in accommodating U.S. concerns with respect to 9/11 mastermind Osama bin Laden, who had been living in Sudan until he was expelled in May 1996. Timothy M. Carney, U.S. ambassador to Sudan between September 1995 and November 1997, co-authored an op-ed in 2002 claiming that in 1997 Sudan offered to turn over its intelligence on bin Laden but that Rice, as NSC Africa specialist, together with the then NSC terrorism specialist Richard A. Clarke, successfully lobbied for continuing to bar U.S. officials, including the CIA and FBI, from engaging with the Khartoum government. Similar allegations (that Rice joined others in missing an opportunity to cooperate with Sudan on counter terrorism) were made by Vanity Fair contributing editor David Rose and Richard Miniter, author of Losing Bin Laden.
Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, a longtime mentor and family friend to Rice, urged Clinton to appoint Rice as Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs in 1997. Rice was not the first choice of Congressional Black Caucus leaders, who considered Rice a member of "Washington's assimilationist black elite". At a confirmation hearing chaired by Senator Jesse Helms, Rice, who attended the hearing along with her infant son, whom she was then nursing, made a great impression on senators from both parties and "sailed through the confirmation process".
Rice supported the Rwandan, Ugandan, AFDL and Angolan invasion of Zaire (later known as the Democratic Republic of the Congo) from Rwanda in 1996 and overthrew dictator Mobutu Sese Seko, saying privately that "Anything's better than Mobutu." According to Gérard Prunier, a staffer to the Assistant Secretary said that "the only thing we have to do is look the other way", with respect to Rwanda's continued intervention. New York Times correspondent Howard W. French said that according to his sources Rice herself made the remark. It should be noted the Congo Wars spearheaded by Rwanda led to over five million deaths. In 2012 when serving as U.N. ambassador, Rice opposed efforts to publicly censure Rwandan President Paul Kagame for again supporting a Congolese rebel group, this time in the 2012 Congo conflict Despite the sacking of the regional capital of Goma. The Rwandan government was a client when Rice worked at Intellibridge in 2001–02.
On July 7, 1998, Rice was a member of an American delegation to visit detained Nigerian president-elect Basorun M.K.O. Abiola. During this meeting, Abiola suffered a fatal heart attack.
Although Rice supported the Lomé Peace Accord, some observers criticized the Sierra Leone agreement as too indulgent of the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) and for bringing the war criminal Foday Sankoh into government, leading to the adoption of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1313, which blamed the RUF for the continuing conflict in the west African country." So it is no wonder that we have a person advising the President to stay clear of ISIL issues in the mid east.
Secretary of State John Kerry. A lot of people may or may not know of John Kerry's military service. he enlisted in the Navy Reserve in 1966, and went on active duty to Vietnam for an abbreviated four month tour aboard a swift boat. He received the Silver Star, Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts. However, upon his return and release from the service he joined the Vietnam Veterans Against the War and demonstrated at various protests. He has been in politics ever since.
Secretary of the Treasury Jacob Lew, another career politician. Harvard Law School and Georgetown University for his law degree.
Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel According to Wikipaedia, "volunteered to be drafted into the United States Army during the Vietnam War, rejecting a draft board recommendation that he go to college instead. He served in the United States Army infantry in Vietnam from 1967 to 1968. As a Sergeant (E-5), he served as an infantry squad leader in the 9th Infantry Division. Hagel served in the same infantry squad as his younger brother Tom, and they are thought to be the only American brothers to have done so during the Vietnam War. They also saved each others lives on separate occasions. Hagel received the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry, two Purple Hearts, the Army Commendation Medal, and the Combat Infantryman Badge." He went from an enlisted man in the Army to the Secretary of Defense. He was the only one of the members of the NSC to have served on the ground with the troops as an enlisted man, and after returning became a news broadcaster and reported on the war.
There is going to be a tough nomination process for the next individual to be nominated by the Obama administration. They certainly do not want to listen to issues and advice on foreign policy where it might involve putting any troops into the picture, whether on the ground or in the air. It seems like a slap in the face to all those who fought and those who died when this administrations takes a pacifist attitude towards other countries walking all over us. The President more than likely already has a replacement in mind and we will see in the next few weeks as the person is put up for the position. Obama will surely try to get this all done before the next Congress is seated, where he will surely have a much tougher time getting his nominee seated. Meanwhile ISIL continues to kill......... The new Congress will not be here soon enough for this person to enjoy the future encounters.......
Monday, November 17, 2014
Observations of the Recent Elections!
Is it just me, or do others see the humor in some of the analysis that is going on in the media with regard to the results of the recent elections, where the Republicans have, or will, now assume the majority rule in both houses of Congress?
But let's take a look at what really happened. There were many positions in both houses that were up for re-election. The President campaigned for some Democrats who were running for election, and then there were statements in the news media, the talk show circuits, and on radio, that some Democrats running for election did not want the President campaigning for them because of his low ratings in the polls. They were trying to distance themselves from the President. They felt that if it were seen that they were in favor of the President that they would somehow lose perspective votes, because a no vote for them was a vote against the President and his policies. On the other hand there were those who felt that Congress was going nowhere, could not get anything done, and were simply fed up.
So the Republicans won the election and will assume power soon in both houses of Congress come January. As of right now, we don't know what their agenda will be.We have some preliminary indications, but what ever they pass, unless it is passed with a 2/3rds majority, the President is sure to veto it if it is not in his best interests. On the other hand if the bill is a bi-partisan bill and the Democrats vote in favor of it there should be no problem in getting it passed and becoming veto proof. However.........would the President implement the new law in the same fashion that he would if it was a new law he was in favor of?
It is so fascinating that the Democrats say that they did not win because their voters chose not to vote, and if they had voted the Democrats would have won. That's exactly right, and if the entire voting population voted Democrat they would have won too, and if those who DID vote voted Democratic instead of Republican they would have one too. HOW LUDICROUS! The Democratic party is fooling itself if they think that their apathetic vote was not sending a message to them. They need stop thinking the American voter is stupid! I am not talking about the recent MIT professor who stated on three occasions that the voters are stupid, or the fact that Nancy Pelosi denied knowing him and lied to the public about it only to be caught later in the lie. What I am talking about is their arrogance in thinking that THEY know what is best for the American people. I do not believe there is one elected official in Congress that can empathize with the lower and middle class, and how the economy affects them. The salaries they earn takes them right out of that class immediately. People are simply fed up, period!
There are three branches of government. A lot of people forget that. There is the Executive Branch where the President is the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), and when he is sworn in he takes an oath of office to uphold the United States Constitution, and the Laws of the United States. Then comes the so called "Executive Order". Which in itself is OK, as long as the order does not conflict with the current laws on the books. The President cannot make his OWN laws. He cannot choose which ones to enforce and which ones to ignore. If he does he is in violation of his oath of office and is breaking the law himself and can be charged and tried for it. This is the process of Impeachment.
According to WIKIPEDIA: "Impeachment in the United States is an expressed power of the legislature that allows for formal charges against a civil officer of government for crimes committed in office. The actual trial on those charges, and subsequent removal of an official on conviction on those charges, is separate from the act of impeachment itself." (See more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_the_United_States). In other words look at impeachment as when a Grand Jury (Congress) indicts the offender. Just because someone is impeached (as in the case of Bill Clinton)does not mean they are tried for the crimes they President Obama, then surely President Biden would do the same. And.....are you ready for "President Biden"?
Will there be a government shut down in the next two years? The founding fathers when drafting the Constitution put in there protections so NO President would EVER have the powers of a Dictator or a Monarch. The way they did this was to give all of the purse strings to the Congress. So when this is ever exercised as it was in the past during this Presidents term, it is not a bad thing, but a good thing. Yes we all know that folks were financially hurt by the shutdown, and services were certainly cut, and the folks in the executive branch did some pretty nasty things that were not necessary, like closing the war memorials to veterans, among other things, but the Executive branch could have also sat down with Congress and iron things out as they finally had to do. If Congress has NO powers in this area, as some would like, then we might as well just throw the Constitution out the window.
The arrogance of this administrations was demonstrated from the very beginning when newly elected President Obama stated to the Republicans in the oval office "WE won the election!". It was evident then that his entire term would be nothing but a battle. Some Democrats would like to make all differences with this President about race, when race has nothing to do with it. It is a difference of policy, about where the country should be, and where it is headed. When people like to point out all of this Presidents accomplishments, these were a lot of accomplishments that would have happened, no matter who was in office. Folks like to give credit to the Clinton administration of balancing the budget and economically good years. But they forget this was all put into place by President Reagan with his Reaganomics. I remember him sitting there with charts and graphs, back then, and looking at the dates these were all going to com to fruition and it was way beyond the end of his term. The Arabs and OPEC had placed oil embargoes on the US. The Arab nations wanted a minimum price for a barrel of oil, and we had to deal with it. Today, we have plenty of oil reserves, and are not worried of another embargo, and a lot of that can be directly attributed to Presidents Bush, and the things he put into place. As consumers use more and more oil throughout the world the supplies will certainly diminish and prices will continue to rise. One of the solutions to curb this is to implement the Keystone Pipeline, which will bring raw oil to the refineries we have. This will be oil from Canada, but also oil from the fields in South Dakota. The last time a refinery was built in the US was in 2008 in Wyoming with a capacity of 3000 barrels per day. This is very small considering the one in Louisiana built in 1977, which is the last time a large capacity refinery was built, will do in excess of 200000 barrels per day. So it is in the countries best interest to get the keystone pipeline built. Just this past week both houses of Congress, passed a bill Okaying the pipeline. It is now on the way to the President. Will he sign it, or put us behind the rest of the world.............Time will only tell!
But let's take a look at what really happened. There were many positions in both houses that were up for re-election. The President campaigned for some Democrats who were running for election, and then there were statements in the news media, the talk show circuits, and on radio, that some Democrats running for election did not want the President campaigning for them because of his low ratings in the polls. They were trying to distance themselves from the President. They felt that if it were seen that they were in favor of the President that they would somehow lose perspective votes, because a no vote for them was a vote against the President and his policies. On the other hand there were those who felt that Congress was going nowhere, could not get anything done, and were simply fed up.
So the Republicans won the election and will assume power soon in both houses of Congress come January. As of right now, we don't know what their agenda will be.We have some preliminary indications, but what ever they pass, unless it is passed with a 2/3rds majority, the President is sure to veto it if it is not in his best interests. On the other hand if the bill is a bi-partisan bill and the Democrats vote in favor of it there should be no problem in getting it passed and becoming veto proof. However.........would the President implement the new law in the same fashion that he would if it was a new law he was in favor of?
It is so fascinating that the Democrats say that they did not win because their voters chose not to vote, and if they had voted the Democrats would have won. That's exactly right, and if the entire voting population voted Democrat they would have won too, and if those who DID vote voted Democratic instead of Republican they would have one too. HOW LUDICROUS! The Democratic party is fooling itself if they think that their apathetic vote was not sending a message to them. They need stop thinking the American voter is stupid! I am not talking about the recent MIT professor who stated on three occasions that the voters are stupid, or the fact that Nancy Pelosi denied knowing him and lied to the public about it only to be caught later in the lie. What I am talking about is their arrogance in thinking that THEY know what is best for the American people. I do not believe there is one elected official in Congress that can empathize with the lower and middle class, and how the economy affects them. The salaries they earn takes them right out of that class immediately. People are simply fed up, period!
There are three branches of government. A lot of people forget that. There is the Executive Branch where the President is the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), and when he is sworn in he takes an oath of office to uphold the United States Constitution, and the Laws of the United States. Then comes the so called "Executive Order". Which in itself is OK, as long as the order does not conflict with the current laws on the books. The President cannot make his OWN laws. He cannot choose which ones to enforce and which ones to ignore. If he does he is in violation of his oath of office and is breaking the law himself and can be charged and tried for it. This is the process of Impeachment.
According to WIKIPEDIA: "Impeachment in the United States is an expressed power of the legislature that allows for formal charges against a civil officer of government for crimes committed in office. The actual trial on those charges, and subsequent removal of an official on conviction on those charges, is separate from the act of impeachment itself." (See more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_in_the_United_States). In other words look at impeachment as when a Grand Jury (Congress) indicts the offender. Just because someone is impeached (as in the case of Bill Clinton)does not mean they are tried for the crimes they President Obama, then surely President Biden would do the same. And.....are you ready for "President Biden"?
Will there be a government shut down in the next two years? The founding fathers when drafting the Constitution put in there protections so NO President would EVER have the powers of a Dictator or a Monarch. The way they did this was to give all of the purse strings to the Congress. So when this is ever exercised as it was in the past during this Presidents term, it is not a bad thing, but a good thing. Yes we all know that folks were financially hurt by the shutdown, and services were certainly cut, and the folks in the executive branch did some pretty nasty things that were not necessary, like closing the war memorials to veterans, among other things, but the Executive branch could have also sat down with Congress and iron things out as they finally had to do. If Congress has NO powers in this area, as some would like, then we might as well just throw the Constitution out the window.
The arrogance of this administrations was demonstrated from the very beginning when newly elected President Obama stated to the Republicans in the oval office "WE won the election!". It was evident then that his entire term would be nothing but a battle. Some Democrats would like to make all differences with this President about race, when race has nothing to do with it. It is a difference of policy, about where the country should be, and where it is headed. When people like to point out all of this Presidents accomplishments, these were a lot of accomplishments that would have happened, no matter who was in office. Folks like to give credit to the Clinton administration of balancing the budget and economically good years. But they forget this was all put into place by President Reagan with his Reaganomics. I remember him sitting there with charts and graphs, back then, and looking at the dates these were all going to com to fruition and it was way beyond the end of his term. The Arabs and OPEC had placed oil embargoes on the US. The Arab nations wanted a minimum price for a barrel of oil, and we had to deal with it. Today, we have plenty of oil reserves, and are not worried of another embargo, and a lot of that can be directly attributed to Presidents Bush, and the things he put into place. As consumers use more and more oil throughout the world the supplies will certainly diminish and prices will continue to rise. One of the solutions to curb this is to implement the Keystone Pipeline, which will bring raw oil to the refineries we have. This will be oil from Canada, but also oil from the fields in South Dakota. The last time a refinery was built in the US was in 2008 in Wyoming with a capacity of 3000 barrels per day. This is very small considering the one in Louisiana built in 1977, which is the last time a large capacity refinery was built, will do in excess of 200000 barrels per day. So it is in the countries best interest to get the keystone pipeline built. Just this past week both houses of Congress, passed a bill Okaying the pipeline. It is now on the way to the President. Will he sign it, or put us behind the rest of the world.............Time will only tell!
Thursday, July 10, 2014
Wednesday, April 23, 2014
Paid Leave?
I just read this morning that there was a case of a police officer, who was doing "on field" security at a championship girls soccer game, and who, in his infinite wisdom when the game ended, and students ran onto the field, decided to trip them as they approached. In a couple of instances he also grabbed students by the throat.
Now I am not writing this to either chastise or condone these activities but I am writing this article to bring attention to the resultant actions that were taken because of it.
According to news reports the officer in question was placed on administrative leave with pay. Isn't that also like a reward for the action he took? I mean it's like getting a paid vacation. All too often we hear about these actions taken in the public sector where an employee does some kind of misdeed and is placed on an administrative leave with pay. We see it in the school systems with teachers, in City government with other city workers and in Federal government situations all the time.
However, in private industry this NEVER happens. The employee is simply suspended or fired, right there on the spot. Yes I will agree that in some cases the firings were unwarranted, or the employee was innocent of whatever infraction he was accused of, but the employer simply puts an end to it and lets the employe go. Right or wrong, the employer does not have to deal with it anymore.
Now if you are in a large union represented company you might have the same situation occur, and you might even get your job back and your pay back through the grievance process. But while your on suspension, your not being paid. But in the municipal sector, the employee is being paid while the investigation is going on. If the employee is proved wrong and is terminated does he have to give the money back while he was off? Just something to think about???????
Now I am not writing this to either chastise or condone these activities but I am writing this article to bring attention to the resultant actions that were taken because of it.
According to news reports the officer in question was placed on administrative leave with pay. Isn't that also like a reward for the action he took? I mean it's like getting a paid vacation. All too often we hear about these actions taken in the public sector where an employee does some kind of misdeed and is placed on an administrative leave with pay. We see it in the school systems with teachers, in City government with other city workers and in Federal government situations all the time.
However, in private industry this NEVER happens. The employee is simply suspended or fired, right there on the spot. Yes I will agree that in some cases the firings were unwarranted, or the employee was innocent of whatever infraction he was accused of, but the employer simply puts an end to it and lets the employe go. Right or wrong, the employer does not have to deal with it anymore.
Now if you are in a large union represented company you might have the same situation occur, and you might even get your job back and your pay back through the grievance process. But while your on suspension, your not being paid. But in the municipal sector, the employee is being paid while the investigation is going on. If the employee is proved wrong and is terminated does he have to give the money back while he was off? Just something to think about???????
Sunday, April 6, 2014
Politics and Blogging
Ever wonder why we have a two party system in our government? The reason we have a system as such, is because there are always going to be differences of opinion, and there needs to be a system in place to help resolve those differences. There will be on the one side, those who will have an opinion about something, and there will be an opposing view to that very same opinion.
Another point of view or way of looking at our system of rules and laws is through our process of law. Which is also basically a two part system. Whereas there are the lawmakers, who are elected to represent the people and make the "rules", and then there are the people themselves. Where the lawmakers state what the rule of law will be, and put it out for the people to follow, and then there will be the people, who are required to follow the new rule, and who either agree with it, or don't. When they don't agree they have a mediation process to resolve the differences, our court system.
The deciding factor in our governmental system when these disagreements occur is the Judicial Branch who are normally appointed for life, and will judge both sides, their positions, analyze both opinions, and then render a decision of which one we will follow as a rule of law. I am referring to the Judicial Branch of Government and not the State or Municipal level of the court system. This happens all the time in our society, and the courts make decisions on a regular basis to resolve these differences. But why does it work this way?
Well, when the forefathers who founded this country, they developed a system of rules, laws, and governing documents, such as the Constitution. The founding fathers were "learned" men, chosen by the people to represent their interests in developing this new and young country. Most, if not all, attended colleges both here and abroad, some were trained in English Law, or others got their learning here on the continent, by many means. You see in order to draft our governing documents they had to know something about the English rules of law. And in doing so they modeled our governments after the English hierarchy of government. Such as the King of England is similar to the President, but the president is not a monarch. You see, the founding fathers wanted a leader to carry the new country forward, but what they also did not want was a Monarchy, and a limited term for the new leader of our country. The law makers of England were the Parliament and the House of Lords. Our House of Representatives, and the Senate are models after that. The house of Lords were members of the Royal family, while Parliament was comprised by representatives of the people. It is Parliament who controlled the taxation and funding of the English government, similar to our own House of Representatives, who also hold the purse strings and funding of our government. For judicial matters, in England they were handled by the Kings Court, and our federal court system is modeled after that. Whereas in a Monarchy, the King himself can overrule any of his courts decisions, here in our form of government the President cannot over rule the courts decisions. The whole form of government here in the US was formed with a system of checks and balances. The only real power the President has in that area of over rule would be to grant pardons to offenders of law, but he cannot overrule or ignore any legal decisions made by the courts.
The men, who put this all together were very astute with their knowledge of law and other areas, which demonstrates why there is a difference between the educated gentleman and the common man. If you look at any one of the thirty-nine signers of the Constitution and check their biographies, you'll see clearly why the people chose them to represent them.
The two different systems that are pointed out herein, the US and England, as stated earlier, are very similar in nature. This is not to say that as a concept, either one is better than the other. But with an over powerful Monarch in place the people can be slighted, something the founding fathers surely wanted to avoid given their stare decisis' of previous rule. But when it comes to competencies, and the testing thereof, there is one branch that might be better than the other for addressing the given task at hand. This is also true when it comes to human interaction.
Now one of the first things that the founding fathers thought was so important to this newly formed document was a Bill of Rights, and some of them thought so strongly of this point that they refused to sign the new Constitution document because a bill of rights was not initially added, and was put forth later, after much debate and discussion. But when they did draft the Bill of Rights in 1789, they put as number one on their priority list (The Bill of Rights, New York 1789) the First Amendment which states as follows, and is commonly referred to as the right to freedom of speech, but it also states much more. Here is the exact wording:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech! What this basically means is that we, as Americans, have the right to say, write, or publish just about anything we want, whether you agree with it or not. When you disagree with it you have the right to do the same.
People have the right to their own opinions, they can write about it, they can state it, and they can publish it, period. But if you're going to disagree with something, and you make it personal, and your wrong about another individual, causing them harm, whether it be to them or their reputation or other, and it is proven in a court of law, you might be convicted or found guilty of committing an act of Libel, and you will be held responsible and accountable for it, and it could cost you dearly. There are some who use written media as a way to bully others. Presently there are many states that are enacting laws against this and a new term has been coined called "cyber bullying".
When this takes place it is one of the easiest ways to demonstrate the difference between a learned individual and one who is uninformed and in danger of committing Libel. The learned man would not use a public forum to brandish his bullying tactics. Ignorance of the law, is not a defense, and you could be charged, or sued in the courts for doing such. You need to walk a fine line when publishing your comments in a public forum.
So what is libel anyway? Libel is a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation of that person. When you say it in a public forum or write it down in a public forum, you can be held libel for it and you might have to suffer the consequences of your actions. It's a little different than slander. .
Now going back to the previous, were we stated that there were differences between the learned gentleman and the commoner, lets examine the following, because there are those who have issues with the learned person and lash out every chance they can to make that person feel inferior. It's just another form of cyber bullying. Here is an example of why we need the learned individual. If you went to the doctor because you were sick and to get a diagnosis, would you trust what the doctor says? Why? What makes him better than just looking it up on the internet? Why, you could do the research yourself, and self treat. But would that be the smart thing to do? Need some blood work? Why not do it yourself? Are you asking yourself why I am being so absurd yet? How about getting the neighbor to act as your lawyer at trial? Hey, why not bring in a big pile of law books and defend yourself? Remember the saying, only a fool has himself as his lawyer. How about medication, why not just go to the pharmacy, look at all the over the counter drugs, mix up your own concoctions and take them to relieve your ailments? Why get a prescription and use a pharmacist? Can you see where we are going here yet? We don't do those kinds of things because we trust the experts in a particular area of expertise to represent our interests to handle the matter, or treat us, or give us the proper advice.
How do we know one is an expert? How about that shingle they hang on their wall, demonstrating that they have pursued a course of study for their chosen field. Is that what most of us use as that measure of competence? People who are educated have specific areas of expertise in their fields. They studied real hard, attended schools, training etc., and learned everything they could about that subject matter. And because of those accomplishments they were awarded by a review board of their piers a Degree, Certificate, License, or Professional accreditation, which demonstrates they have completed a field of education in their specific field making them competent to practice in it. AND THEY ARE PROUD OF IT!
Now some of you might be saying, "That Degree does not prove anything". Might I point out the examples above again? Hello! Tell that to your Doctor, Lawyer, Pharmacist, Civil Engineer, Chemist, Dentist, Architect, Teacher, Accountant, Broker, Financial Adviser, etc. Keep telling yourself that it's OK if they never went to school or graduated or received their license or certificate to practice. After all it's just a piece of paper hanging on the wall. Shall I go on?
OK, lets go a little further. How about that truck driver, that carpenter, electrician, Nurse, Real Estate Broker, plumber, computer technician, computer repairman. Do they have Degrees? Some do and some do not, but for those positions, it is not a requirement to have the formal degree, but the proper training and certification and course of study, is required. And the resultant testing and licensing is the proof or award for that accomplishment.
But lets explore this further! To get a Bachelors Degree you need a minimum of 120 credit hours of study in specific areas. And the school has to be certified by the state it is located in. A three credit hour course of study is about 20 actual contact hours of classroom work. So 120 credit hours equates to about 800 hours of study. A hair dresser by contrast needs a thousand hours of contact work to be licensed. An electrician, it's a six year program of 40 contact hours for a Union worker per week to get the position of Journeyman (12 thousand contact hours), or they can go to school on their own, pass a state examination and be awarded a license to practice in that field. But it still has to be tested to prove that measure of knowledge and competency. Do you get my point yet? Just as some of us understand what it takes to "EARN" that degree and are proud of it, that non-degreed individual should also be just as proud of his accomplishments, and so should that Truck Driver who trained to get his CDL, or who just got his Hazardous-Materials endorsement. He should be just as proud. He now has increased his earnings potential. But neither of them should be trying to demonstrate any expertise when it is outside of their field. They are not trained in that area, and usually do not know what they are talking about. So when an Electrician as example speaks, we listen and we learn. When the carpenter talks, we listen and learn. We don't get personal, and contradict what the expert is saying. We don't have the training or knowledge to speak on the subject intelligently. It's kind of like building a house completely out of code because we thought we could do it better a different way, when we might not even know how to use a rafter square or other. If you do that then when it's inspected you fail, then you'll never get an occupancy permit, and will have to correct all of the errors, whereas the learned person in that field would have known how to do it right in the first place. So why? Why would you not want to listen to those who have more experience in certain matters, and why would you not want to embrace their input when it is offered. Instead some want to criticize it. But most of all why would someone want to make it maliciously personal in a public forum when they don't agree, or the person miss-speaks, or states the wrong facts and does not do it with malicious intent but does it out of being misinformed, and they are looking for clarity? Their errors are easily corrected by providing the correct information. But the unlearned one does not see this or understand it. He just talks and attacks. Why not just calmly and patiently get him aside and talk to him. Why do it in a public forum? Not much different than cyber bullying if you ask me. It is the non educated that resort to those kind of tactics, and because of that, they will make a public mistake and pay for it dearly, through the courts our founding fathers thought so seriously of putting into place.
In today's world where anyone with a computer and access to the internet, it happens all the time via blogs and other forums open to the public for reading and interactive posts. There was a recent case of a gentlemen in England who had a blog. One of his subscribers made a false statement on his blog about an individual in Canada. The blogger was sued for 50K. Because he did not retract it from his page. So the message here is you better be real careful with what you write, especially when it is in the public domain.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)