Thursday, November 17, 2011

Students at PVMCFL Mother's Day Dinner

It struck me when I read a comment from abortion activist, Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL, when she commented about the March for Life in Washington: “I just thought, my gosh, they are so young,” she told Newsweek. “There are so many of them, and they are so young.” The thought of course, is the great strength of young people in the Pro-Life movement. If we ever are going to completely turn this situation around and end abortion in America it has to involve the great strength of youth so that the "Life-Torch" can be carried by the next generation.

For several years I operated a business where we employed several young high school and college age females. They were all very nice and intelligent girls. After I got to know them I would gently ask them in conversation what they felt about abortion. When they were asked the question, and put in a position to answer, they would seem to hesitate, not quite sure...but would mostly say that they were "Pro-Choice". The reason, I believe, is that they had been through the system of indoctrination with all the false propaganda of "it is a woman's right"; a fetus is just a mound a flesh, not a life; women die if they don't have access to an abortion, etc., etc. You know all the false lies. When I explained to them, however, about the actual existence of life according to REAL medical science, and the brutal procedures, especially with partial birth abortion, they were horrified. Unbelievably they had never been informed of the real facts nor understood what abortion actually is...the taking of a life.

I firmly believe that education, truth...and youth are the answers to turning the situation around in favor of Life.

To this end, the following is recommended:

* Each year the Pioneer Valley Massachusetts Citizens for Life (PVMCFL) has a wonderful and very successful Mothers Day Dinner. In this event they have recognized and involved students...young people, and that is good.

* What is recommended, however, is that this be expanded to specifically include MANY tables of high school students that are part of any Pro-Life groups at the high schools. High school students are at an age where they are mature and intelligent enough so that they can understand the issue of "Life". All they need are the facts and truth.

* In order to accomplish this, it is recommended, under faculty guidance, that student to student contact be made in order to encourage many student groups from various high schools in the region to attend the PVMCFL Mother's Day Dinner. It is also recommended that effort be placed in order to grow this student involvement from year to year.

* As part of this proposal we look for ways, through financial contributions, so that we can assist the students to attend the Dinner at a reduced rate, and so that the PVMFL Mother's Day event does not lose money while doing so. It can be done.

*If agreeable, it is suggested that we start NOW in preparation for the 2012 PVMCL Mother's Day Dinner where we look to significantly expand student involvement in the Dinner this coming year, and go from there.


Again, if we are ever going to end abortion in America...then the youth of our country HAVE TO be a strong part of the mission to accomplish this. What is suggested is that we take this one positive step with the PVMCFL Mother's Day Dinner.

Wednesday, November 9, 2011

Outrageous! Another Bail Out of Fannie Mae???

On the back page of USA Today, in a small article, it is mentioned that Fannie Mae is looking for still another $7.8 billion bail out (USA Today Nov. 9, 2011). This should have been on the front page. This is after Fannie Mae had ALREADY received a $113 billion bail out of taxpayer money. Fannie Mae has operated as a quasi government agency with the purpose "to expand the secondary mortgage market by securitizing mortgages in the form of mortgage backed securities." This became a major contributor to the crisis of the U.S. economy by offering home mortgages to people who obviously could not afford them. Default on mortgages leading to a financial crisis was easily predictable.

The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) was put into effect in 1977 during the Carter administration. The purpose was to require banks to loan money to low income people so that they could purchase a home. The intention sounds good, but this led to the misery of many who purchased homes that they could not afford and ultimately contributed heavily to the financial crisis in America. CRA was placed into high gear during the Clinton administration with actual overt threats to banks in attempts to make these types of loans, and it continued into the Bush administration. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac became the instruments to make this all happen.

Before we go any further it should be stated that before the pressure of CRA banks used a simple formula of affordability in regard to home mortgages and this worked fine for many years. It should also be stated that many of us lived very comfortably and happily in rented apartments until we were able to afford to buy a home. Still further, you don't help people with low income by encouraging them to buy homes that they cannot afford, placing them in financial stress only to end up in foreclosure.

During this period of time Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were not only instruments used to make this all happen, they, to this day, are fraught with mismanagement if not outright corruption. Congressional oversight of these two institutions were not only lacking, but actually misleading to the Congress and the American people. To this point here we have Fannie Mae asking for an additional bail out of $7.8 billion while at the same time CEO Michael Williams has received a bonus for his "good work" of $2.4 million! What could be more outrageous? Further demonstrating the outrageousness of the whole situation CEO, Ed Haldeman of Freddie Mac received a recent salary of $900,000 and a bonus of $2.3 million!

What we need to do is shut down both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The government should not be involved in banking and the bundling of securities. Banking should be a private, not a government industry. We should go back to basic simple formulas for the affordability of home mortgages. You don't help people by encouraging them to buy a home that they cannot afford...you hurt them.

Hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars have gone to those who have mismanaged Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. These Institutions continually compound our financial crisis. This needs to stop. NOW!

Saturday, November 5, 2011

Beware of Polls

As the 2012 elections approach polls are frequently issued. Various media sources use them and report them as reflecting the truth regarding public opinion. Before you put faith into the reported polls and what the media tells you that they mean it is strongly suggested that you consider the following:

* The voting eligible population of the United States is 218 million people. (United States Elections Project; The U.S. Census).

* The typical number of those polled is 1,000 people.

* This sample represents 0.000005 of the voting population or 0.0005% of the voting population.

* Little to no information is offered on what specific questions were asked; in what context the questions were asked; who was asked; the demographics of those asked and political affiliation; how the questions were asked (by phone, in person, by E-mail, written form, etc.); where the questions were asked; and the timing of when the questions were asked vs. other events.

* Many of the polls issued are conducted by those who have a definite bias toward a desired outcome. Many of the frequently reported polls are in fact of this sort.

* Although the sample size used may be statistically correct (although extremely small vs. the population as shown above), polling people is MUCH more complex than sampling widgets off a production line, as an example. In fact it is extremely complex with people. Such things as the precise wording, voice inflections if in person, and a whole host of human factors enter in. For all the reasons given above I would venture to say that the sample size of polls that are used to measure public opinion on critical issues facing our nation are grossly inadequate and much too small.

In the book "The Opinion Makers, An Insider Exposes the Truth Behind the Polls" by David W. Moore, former Senior Editor of the Gallup Poll, the author points out many of the problems with polling, and how polls can be manipulated. In fact Mark Crispin Miller, Professor of Media Studies at New York University, was quoted in reference to the book as saying "A powerful argument that polls do not merely misinform us but pose a genuine, if subtle, threat to our democracy". If this is the case, and it is believed that it is, there should be questions asked on why we seemingly blindly report and believe polls, and why they are not more questions raised by objective media reporters.

Many polls that are issued are used to influence public opinion, not measure it. In the 2004 presidential election between George W. Bush and John Kerry a number of exit polls issued had Kerry significantly (and falsely) in the lead. These exit polls were issued by media sources that definitely favored Kerry. The exit poll results were issued prior to all polls in the United States being closed. This was clearly an attempt to influence the election. (All this was swept under the rug after the election.) A number of years back the Boston Globe issued a poll on same sex marriage. The Globe interviewed only 500 people and had a definite bias in favor of same sex marriage. Yet not only did no one question the poll (with all the issues given above) but the results spread like wild fire across the country with headlines reporting that the American people favored same sex marriage.

There is LITTLE question that as we approach 2012 that many polls will be used, not to measure public opinion, but to influence it. Beware.

Thursday, November 3, 2011

Bigger? A Direct Threat to the United States

Bigger is NOT better. In fact in 1890 there was public outcry against monopolistic activities, those that led to becoming too big, too dominating, and too powerful. As a result Congress passed the Sherman Antitrust Act. The Clayton Antitrust Act and the Federal Trade Commission Act were both passed in 1914 in follow up. These laws placed things in check for a period of time. During the 1980's, however, the antitrust laws were not rigorously enforced. Since that time there appears to be only hand slaps as not only corporations grow dominate in certain areas , but vital industries such as banking /finance, energy / oil, transportation, pharmaceutical, Internet & social networking, healthcare, communications, and others have fallen into the hands of the giant few.

We now frequently hear the phrase “too big to fail”. Why is it that no one questions how and why these entities, in direct opposition to anti-trust and anti-monopoly laws, were allowed to get so big? In fact “too big to fail” is the exact antithesis of the antitrust laws that were felt to be critically important at the time.

Yet the very fact that these entities have been allowed to become “too big to fail” is a direct threat to the democracy and the sovereignty of the United States, and our personal freedoms. It also absolves all responsibility and in most cases the taxpayers of America end up paying to prop up the failing industry.

It gets much, much worse, since it propels itself to not only vital industries, but to government itself. The Founders of our country knew that the best way to preserve our democracy was to keep the power at the local and state levels, closest to the people. Yet today we have the pulling of all power to the federal level, with a great deal of new governing activity at the international level. The further distance the government is from the people, the worse the plight of the people. In this process not only do people have less and less to say in the governing and decisions that affect them, but they begin to incrementally lose personal freedoms.

In the rational and responsible world if you have several entities competing in a particular industry and one through mismanagement, corruption, or whatever the cause, fails…you let it fail. That is reality! You take whatever lumps that occur, learn from it, and go on. Not only is this being responsible and rational…it is actually vital to allow this to happen. Yet what we see is the tying together of entire industries into bigger and bigger super structures. The great danger of the “too big to fail” philosophy is that you allow things to be positioned such that if one fails, it brings down the entire industry…or, the entire country. How have we ever allowed this to happen?

For America, we are allowing ourselves to get dragged into dependency on the international level, as well. You notice recently how the economic failure of Greece is being ALLOWED to bring down the global economy, including that of the United States. We give billions of dollars to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) without the approval of the American people, they then turn around and require us to pay into the IMF and dictate certain directions concerning our economy. This should never, never be. This same scenario is happening with the G-20, the World Bank, the International Court, the United Nations, the World Health Organization, and more. They make it appear that we need to think “global”, and tell us that everything is global today, and this lulls us into giving up everything that our nation was founded upon. A big mistake. The American people have little or nothing to say, even our Congress is circumvented, yet these global organizations are being allowed to incrementally control vital aspects of our country, and in turn, the people of America. Through this process our Constitution is being violated, and along with that our democracy, our personal freedoms, and even the sovereignty of the United States is threatened.. Bigger is not better!

Recently we had a power outage in the Northeast where over a million people were without electricity. Local municipalities are now tied into bigger regional and national grids. When the grid goes down millions of people are affected. Is this a good thing? Is bigger better? Or is it better to have local control over power generation and when a storm or an outage happens a larger population is not affected….hundreds, or thousands, vs. millions? Is there also a better, clearer, and faster opportunity to fix the problem at the local level? Bigger may not be better since the responsibility lies close to the people who are affected…just as in the government examples.

We are on a very dangerous path with our country. Vital industries and control are being allowed to fall into the hands of a few. On the international level we are allowing our Constitution, our democracy, our freedoms, and our sovereignty as a nation to slip away into the hands of international organizations where the American people have no say.

Bigger IS NOT better. Our Founders were genius in forming our great country so that control would be at the local level, not the federal, and certainly not the international level. Yet the current trend is just the opposite, and dangerously so. This trend is a direct threat to our country. It is time for all good Americans to speak up and act.

Tuesday, November 1, 2011

3 Days of Darkness, A Warning

The Northeast power outage should be a warning to us all. If an enemy of the United States, or if elements of our own government wanted to take over our country, they could easily cripple us by attacking our regional and national power grids. What this does is immediately isolate people, communications, and worse, placing us into a very vulnerable position. For much of the country when it happens in winter it is even worse.

People are obviously left without all their electrical devices. No television, no radios, and no phones, and in the winter, no heat. People take for granted how much communication means in their daily lives. Most people will be without sufficient batteries. Battery operated devices will be short lived as the batteries wear out and without the ability to recharge the rechargeable ones. Gasoline and other fuels will be scarce, many relying upon non existent electrical dispensing. Those who have generators will run out of gasoline or fuel to run them. In a short time the ability to generate power will disappear.

Perishable foods will spoil. There will be a rush for non perishable food and this food will soon become scarce. People will make fires for heat, cooking, boiling, or use other toxic or dangerous devices and many accidents, even deaths will occur. Water will become scarce since water treatment plants will depend upon non existent power sources. Water will become contaminated and will present problems for not only drinking but for bathing and cleanliness. Health problems will begin to occur with the potential of widespread disease. Medical and emergency services will be greatly curtailed...eventually people will not even be able to call 911.

The network of vital communication will be cut short to family members within a home and the immediate neighborhood. It will be very difficult, if not impossible, to communicate with family, relatives, and friends for information and support outside the immediate area. Vital information from responsible government, news, and support services will be very limited. Communication will, to a large extent, be by word of mouth. The difficulty with this is that it will be very hard to distinguish truth and facts from opinions, rumors and incorrect information. This will cause a lot of confusion with many isolated pockets of people.

With a prolonged power outage, the above scenario is exactly what will happen (and has happened to some extent recently). In addition to the great peril that the people of our country will be placed into through this process, if an enemy of the United States wishes to attack us; or an element of our own government wants to do away with democracy and turn us into a totalitarian state we will be very helpless to defend ourselves. (If this sounds far fetched, how many of you completely trust those in Washington? Surveys have shown very few.)

What we need to understand and do is the following:

1) We need to understand how we all are tied into regional and national power grids. Bigger is not always better vs. local area power sources that can act and provide power locally in an emergency. A large scale "grid" implies by its nature that when it goes down...everybody is without power! This is not a good thing. We need to not only FULLY understand this, but have a clear and publicly explained plan on how to prevent large scale power outages to a massive number of people. Currently this is all much too mysterious and it should NOT be.

2) There needs to be a national plan, well known and communicated, in the event of an emergency where very massive numbers of people are without power over an extended period of time. We should not be, as appears to be the current case, in a reactionary mode. It is clear that in the last several large scale power outages we definitely appear to be in a reactionary mode. This is unacceptable to the people of this country and unacceptable in regard to our national defense. All of us should have pasted up on our refrigerators what our national plan is, clear and simple, so we know what to expect and can plan for it. And how about the people in this country having a say about the whole thing?

3) At the local level there needs to be clear plans in the event of extended power outages. What can the people expect, what communications, emergency, and support mechanisms are in place? This is critical. There also needs to be a clear must list for families and individuals on what they need to do in order to prepare for extended power outages. They seem to be occurring at an increased rate due to weather and other causes. People need to know and prepare. The scenario above on what to expect with prolonged power outages is real!

We desperately need, on both the national and local levels, an emergency preparedness plan for long term power outages. NO matter what they say, we currently are reactionary and that is unacceptable.