Author: Peter

by

North Carolina’s Vile Political Ads


I am a new resident of North Carolina having moved here just a year and a half ago. We moved here from Massachusetts in no small part to escape New England’s harsh winters. Over the last several months, we have been bombarded with political ads from both Democrats and Republican. By and large, I have found all these ads to be very disingenuous. Democrats have run ads against a woman called Sandy Smith claiming court filings show her to be a dangerous person. They showed documents that were requests for restraining orders against her. I think if the restraining orders had been put in place, they would have shown such documents. This leads me to believe that no such order was ever given.

The Republicans have been particularly egregious in their ads with claims that are on their face false. A woman named Cheri Beasly, a judge on North Carolina’s Supreme Court, is running for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated. Her opponent is a Trump acolyte named Ted Budd. One of their ads claims that Beasly in her present office has allowed sex offenders to go free without any tracking. Behind this is a North Carolina law for lifetime ankle GPS monitoring of these offenders. What they fail to mention is why she refused such restrains and what she her decision actually was. I suspect that Beasly found the NC law to be in violation of the 6th which bars “cruel and unusual punishment.” I think it likely that she did order tracking on these offenders. They ads claim that Beasly is putting children in danger because of her decisions. Such fear mongering tactics rely upon the electorate to take them at face value and not question what is being said.

I have long said to people that they should not let other people do their thinking for them. The only outlet I know of which challenges political claims is the site factcheck.org. As an organization that is not aligned with any political party, the site takes on various claims made by politicians and their campaigns.

I am registered as an independent. There are things about each political party which causes me pain. But I cannot help but wonder how much of what is happening in North Carolina is happening in other states, particularly those states that are turning “purple” as the old solidly conservative North Carolina is. Someone, somewhere needs to come forward and speak the plain truth about the various lies and half-truths being foisted upon the American public and it needs to happen now.

by

Reflections On the Presidents I Remember


I have been alive now to have lived under four different Presidents of the United States. The first I must be excused from any remembrance of Harry Truman as when he left office, January 1953, I was only 3. Pres. Eisenhower is the first president of whom I have any memory. It was probably around 1958. The media seemed to be mocking him for having back problems and his regular appearance on the golf course. I do remember when he was running for re-election in 1956, in the town of Andover MA where my father had his business, everyone seemed to be wearing “I LIKE IKE” buttons. Of course, I was still not of an age during his administration to have any political feelings about him. My father, who had served in World War 2, voted for him twice for obvious reasons. On reflection, great credit must be given to Pres. Eisenhower as he had the idea to take the German Autobahn and replicate in the United States as our Interstate Highway system.

In 1960, John F. Kennedy was running against Richard Nixon, Eisenhower’s Vice-President, for the Presidency. I remember a family a short distance from my house having “vote for Nixon” signs all over a pine tree in their yard. Even to my young 11-year-old brain, this seemed to be a bit overboard. And so, I took the opposing side and rooted for Kennedy, even though I was for too young to vote. After all, Kennedy was a Massachusetts man and a Catholic, both which I was, and am. Also, something that bothered me immensely, the Republican Party launched a campaign against Kennedy saying, to effect, that his election to the Presidency would mean the Pope would be meddling in our country’s affairs. Something inside me told me that was not true.

After Kennedy had won, by an extremely narrow margin, I stopped thinking about politics. It was not until 1963, when I was 13 years old, and a freshman in high school, that one sad day, November 23rd, someone came to the music room, where I was part of the band, and told us that Kennedy had been assassinated. Time seemed to stop. It was a little after 2 in the afternoon, and everyone started wandering in the corridors, no one saying much of anything besides “can you believe it?” There was no need to announce the end of the school day as students were already leaving the school and heading home. I think most of us watched in stunned silence, before our televisions, the next six days. In between his assassination and funeral, Jack Ruby shot Lee Harvey Oswald on live television. I did see that as it happened and once again was stunned by what was going on in our country at that time. Our first youthful President, in either our recollection or that of our parents, had been taken from us and was replaced by a much older man. In Kennedy so many of us had such high expectations which started with his promising to put a man on the moon and then his handling of the Cuban missile crisis.

I think a lot of people tuned out as Johnson was sworn into the Presidency aboard Air Force 1. He did keep the space race going which gave us all something to cheer about. But he also increased our presence in Vietnam which had started during the Kennedy Administration. Personally, I tuned that out as graduating from high school was my priority. On reflection, a little reflection back then on what was going on in Vietnam would have done me good. Still, it would not have changed my mind away from joining the military. I think Johnson was an average president. He had no crowning achievements.

An aside. Pres. Johnson had kept many of Kennedy’s cabinet members. One of them was Robert Kennedy, the Attorney General. Eventually he was replaced but in 1968 he was running for President and once again our hopes arouse only to be dashed when he was assassinated by Sirhan Sirhan. I was in the U.S. Army’s flight school at the time. I called my mother and in tears asked her what was going on. I felt our country was in trouble.

In 1969, Richard Nixon took office as President. At the time, the U.S. Army had given me all all expenses paid for vacation in the far east, Asia. For some reason, still unknown to me, our former vice-president, Hubert Humphy (it could have been Nixon’s VP) showed up in-country and set up the protect him at all costs scenario. I though it to be foolishness on his part and it gave me a poor opinion of Richard Nixon, poorer, that is, than I already had. Nixon simply continued the mess which was going on before realizing its futility. I was a career soldier and I do remember something he did for which I am grateful. He gave the entire military a big pay raise. We really deserved and even though we were still grossly underpaid, we were thankful. Nixon’s presidency was first blackened by the Spiro Agnew debacle, when it was found out he was doing illegal business activities and was forced to resign. He was replaced by Gerald Ford, a soft spoken, well-respected senator from Michigan. When Nixon resigned, Ford filled the void.

President Ford was made fun of from his stumbling a couple of times. But in true, he was a breath of fresh air after the Nixon Presidency. Pres. Ford was a highly qualified, honest to a fault President. It is a bit difficult to explain Ford’s failure to win the Presidency in 1976 but he at least had restored honor to the position.

President Jimmy Carter was probably one of the least ready for the job Presidents we have ever had. People were quick to point out that he had a degree in nuclear engineering, his service in the US Navy in such a position. His folksy way made him a most likeable person and that may have been the single reason he prevailed. By anyone’s measure of his time in office, he was a failure. To his credit, Carter tried to free the hostages in Iran only to have the mission fail from an unforeseen sandstorm. In the election of 1980, Republicans used that failure to describe his entire Presidency, along with very high interest rates, something no President has much control over. He was also submarined by the Republican “October surprise” where Ronald Reagan had promised to free the hostages.

President Reagan took office on January 20, 1981, and the hostages in Iran were immediately released. That some sort of an illegal backroom deal was made was obvious. But what was it? Reagan was a good talker and could convince people of many things. Reagan, like Carter, had a folksy way about him and with economics as they were going into the election, it was easy for the American public embrace him in hopes of a change for the better. Interest rates did go down. Our economy also seemed to settle down and an era of “good feeling” set in. But behind the scenes, the Reagan administration arranged for the sale of arms to Iran, something that had been made illegal by Congress. The funds gained from the sales were used to arm the Nicaraguan rebels. At the forefront was Lt. Col. Oliver North. And although North was the most visible part of those illegal doings and who took the fall. In truth, nothing happens of that nature that the President is not aware. Then in 1987 the stock market took a fall so great that all trading had to be suspended. Until that time, there was nothing to stop the freefall. Not long afterward, Congress passed a law directing the stock markets to put in stop gap measures should the market be headed for a similar fall. It has been used in the years since. And finally, we know for fact that President Reagan suffered for Alzheimer’s Disease. It is well-established that this disease takes its time settling in and that it is likely he was suffering from it while still President. Although some Democrats have suggested that Nancy Reagan was calling the shots, I think it was most likely VP Bush. Reagan’s successes can be measured in just 2 places. First, he put in place a minimum tax rate for all corporations and person’s making over a million dollars a year. Republicans since have seen fit to remove those things. More importantly, he united what had been a divided Republican Party.

I am not going to say much of President George H. W. Bush. Mr. Bush was an extremely honest president and one who did not shy from difficult situations. His downfall, of course, was when he found it necessary to raise taxes after having run on a no new tax platform. I was in Gunter AFB in Mississippi in 1991 with a high ranking official from the U.S. Air Force’s air staff from the Pentagon. I was working for the U.S. Department of Transportation but worked entirely on military projects related to transportation and logistics. The man I was with, who I will call George, sat with me as we watched the beginning of our war against Saddam Hussein. Mr. Bush did not feign enjoining the fight but instead put exactly the right troops at exactly the right time in Saudi Arabia to take on the Iraqi Republican Guard, purportedly their finest troops. I think the Bush Presidency was an overwhelming success at all levels.

Then in 1993 the reins of power were turned over to Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton may well have been the most intelligent President we have ever had, to include going forward to the present day. Republicans hated Clinton in some part because he stole some of their agenda, eliminating the national debt, and also by repeated, and mostly without merit, the claims of sexual misconduct by the President, the one which was both true and caused his impeachment, was his dalliance with Monica Lewinsky. But he was far from the first, or even the second, to have had such dalliances. Presidents Kennedy, Eisenhower, Roosevelt and Harding all have well-documented such affairs. Why was Clinton different? Republican truly hated him and had been spurned on by New Gingrich, a Republican representative from Georgia. How would I characterize the Clinton Presidency? A little above average, in light of his financial successes, but nothing to cheer about.

The last presidency I will comment on is that of George W. Bush. Mr. Bush probably made the Presidency via US Supreme Court meddling. It overturned a Florida Supreme Court decision, something the USSJC is wont to do at all times. In office on 8 months, Mr. Bush was put into an impossible situation. On 9/11 he was blindsided by a terrorist attack on our country. Many people, particularly Democrats, were quick to point to his inaction immediately following the attack. That was simple political fodder, expediancy, when in fact, there was nothing to do in the moment except to support those at the twin towers in their efforts. That he did do with immediacy. From there, a planned attack on Iraq was formed. The reasoning used, extremely faulty, was that Iraq held weapons of mass destruction and hid terrorists. There were no weapons of mass destruction but there certainly were terrorists. And when it was discovered that Osama Bin Laden was behind the 9/11 attacks and that he was hiding in Afghanistan, the war was expanded to there. I think those were the right moves at the time. Saddam Hussein was still in power in Iraq and had no problem not only terrorizing his own people but harbored those who terrorized other countries. By-and-large, the Bush Presidency was above average. His one big failure was his inability to reign in financial markets, and in particular, the sub-prime mortgage thieves. Even though I did not vote for Mr. Bush either time, I found myself defending him when Democrats were calling him a draft dodger, someone who used his father’s office to gain a position in the Texas Air National Guard. The very fact that he served was enough. As anyone who ever served in Vietnam knows, members of the National Guard of the various states were not immune from serving there, and many did. He was, and is, an honorable man who served his country to the best of his ability.

by

A Problem With Public Education Today


I am part of the largest group of people in the U.S. population today, Baby Boomers. We are fast retiring from the workforce. But are we done with working? To that question, many of us would say “no.” Many of us have advanced degrees which are comparable to subjects taught in high schools today. So what is the problem particularly with a national shortage of teachers today? The idea of teacher testing.

I have a master’s degree in U.S. history, a departure from my degree in engineering, a field in which I worked 40 years. In today’s job market, which until this fall, I worked as a substitute teacher. In most districts, substitute teachers are paid the same rate whether you have a high school diploma or a master’s degree. It is difficult to understand the reasoning behind that. Some districts do make a financial difference, but it is minor. Personally, I feel very underpaid and for that reason I have decided to not participate in substitute teaching this year.

Around the year 2010, after I had retired from the Federal Government and over 30 years of service, I took the Massachusetts tests for a teaching certificate. I passed 4 of the required tests, failing only one that was full of “teacher speak.” Those are terms that are peculiar to teaching and not found elsewhere. I did not retake that test as there is no handbook on such jargon. Such tests, and how courses are taught in teachers’ schools, need to be changed to align with common English phraseology.

All states have a requirement that a regular classroom teacher have taken a teaching course of study in college and have passed a certain set of exams to qualify. In the case of primary school teachers, that they have taken college courses in their desired field of instruction is entirely reasonable. But after that, such a requirement becomes less necessary upon succeeding grades, 4 through 8. In particular, where middle school education is concerned, most school districts have taken an approach to education that is similar to that of secondary education. That is, students see two or more different teachers during the day. Additionally, to their curriculum, the STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) has been added as a single course. This is a response to today’s world.

Now, back to the “Baby Boomers” and their possibilities. Between STEM, mathematics, social studies, physics, chemistry, and other fields, there are many retirees who are either as knowledgeable or more than present classroom teachers. Now, especially considering the teacher shortage, states would do well to drop the impediments facing such people to joining the ranks of teachers. They instead should only be required to participate in and successfully pass an online course that teaches teaching techniques, classroom behavior, and student expectations.

I fear, however, that teachers’ unions would opposite such a move, much to their detriment. But to ignore this, as yet, untapped source of knowledgeable persons, is to shoot yourself in your own foot. Many such retirees could easily serve as much as 20 years in a school system, and, as they already have a pension, would have no need of a state supported retirement making them much more cost effective than life-long teachers.

The solution to your national teacher shortage is obvious. What is not obvious is why states refuse to consider these people and make changes to accommodate them. Personally, I feel fully qualified to step in as a teacher of U.S. History were that offered, particularly with my 15 years of experience in substitute teaching.

by

Political Tomfoolery


In this election year, the Republican Party has taken our economic condition as its cudgel. Similarly, the Democratic Party has taken abortion as its cudgel. Neither position helps the American public to any great degree.

The Republicans a very disingenuous in using the economy. In my undergraduate studies, oh so many moons ago, I minored in business administration. But even in those days, it was made very clear to us that we live in a world of a global economy. Simply put, every nation in the world is affected by the actions of either a handful of large economies of any single nation or that of a handful of small nations tied together.

Over the last 10 years, one of the world’s largest economies, China, has affected the rest of the world. China supplied, and still supplies, the world with electronic components and toys among to many other items. In return, China imported many food stuffs, particularly from the United States. When the corona virus hit the world, supply lines everywhere were negatively affected. Christmastime last year those supply line issues were shown to us via the major news outlets. Everything seemed to be in short supply, which was true. And who was to blame? Absolutely no one! The simple fact that many workers were too ill to work caused shortages which were entirely because of the pandemic. Recently, China has taken the stance of cancelling many of its food imports.

During those two years, many of those workers dropped out of the work force entirely, some never returned. Additionally, sectors such as transportation laid off huge numbers of their employees entirely because of the lack of demand. But in all cases, many of those workers who were of an age to retire, did so. Others got themselves trained for jobs which were still available and did not return to their previous job. Were there no pandemic, it is not unreasonable to assume they would have stayed on well beyond today. This was not because of the action or inaction of either political party. It was a simple and predictable part of economics. One such example is the oil industry. When demand goes down so do prices, a simple principle of economics. But the response of oil producing countries was to lower supply, an entirely reasonable response. This has the effect of raising prices even in a down economy. But this particular industry is somewhat unique. As the demand for oil started to rise, there is no reason for oil producing countries to increase production even though the United States was able to get OPEC to briefly raise production. Recently, OPEC decided to reduce production again.

Americans, thinking locally have taken this personally, and have disregarded this as a global issue, which, of course, it is. Right now, it is President Biden who is taking the heat for something over which he has no control, a global issue. The entire world is suffering the effects of higher oil prices with no country immune.

Our economy, like every economy in the world, is affected by the whims of stock markets, and in particular, that of the “futures” guessing game within stock markets. Easily spooked and too often wrong, these markets affect the prices we pay in the supermarket. Does the President of the United States or the entire 535 members of Congress has any sway over these things? It is foolish to think they do.

Politically speaking, neither party has the power to change our present economic situation. The best tact for each party is to explain to the public the truth, as I have just laid out, how our challengers with China, the war in Ukraine, the problems with the European Union economies, political unrest in Africa, food shortages world-wide, and so many other ills, all play into the economy in which we now find ourselves. One of the best moves, which Pres. Trump started, and which Pres. Biden has continued in earnest, is to make America lest dependent on supplies from other countries. No place is this more evident than in the automobile industry where new car availability is difficult at best. Pres. Biden has called upon industry to manufacture more electronic components here rather than relying upon other countries to supply them. But that is not an isolated example. Our export deficit has been plaguing us for decades with U.S. businesses sending more jobs overseas in search of lower manufacturing costs. There is one place that politics can take action, if unpopular to business, the resulting effect would be positive to Americans, in supply availability but in job availability.

It would be far more responsible were politicians to honestly educate Americans on the realities of economics than playing the us-against-them ideology being practiced today. All 535 members of Congress plus the President and his political appointees are responsible for seeing that through.

by

Why Do Republicans Fear “Critical Race Theory”?


Over the last 6-plus years, the Republican Party has attacked this idea. Their political ads make out the idea of teaching this idea in our public schools as something which should horrify the average American.

What is “Critical Race Theory”? It is the idea that there exists structural racism in society, first when it was introduced by 3 Colombia University law professors in the early 1980s, and today. What is “structural racism”? It is the fact of racist tendencies that have been passed down for many generations and is too widely accepted in today’s society. (https://news.columbia.edu/news/what-critical-race-theory-and-why-everyone-talking-about-it-0)

I was getting my master’s degree in U.S. History from Harvard University when this idea was presented, although I did not hear of it at the time. In one course that I took, one of our required readings was a book named A Thick Interpretation of Culture by Clifford Geertz. Geertz explained why using a simple cause/effect idea of telling history to be undesirable. That is, in one of his examples, he used the Battle of Waterloo where Lord Wellington defeated the far superior force of Napolean. He stated that by simply assigning the victory to Wellington’s having gained the literal high ground is far from enough to explain the battle. He showed that Napoleon’s tired troops, who had marched many hundreds of miles, his lack of good logistics, the weather, the temperament of troops, and other things must be brought to light to give a full view of the battle.

In “critical race theory,” we are charged with looking at a broad view of racism, not only as it exists in America today, but its history going all the back to 1865 when the Civil War ended. For nearly a century, Jim Crow laws of the south used the idea of “separate but equal” as being an acceptable response to race. Today we know, or should know, that such laws were used to manage white supremacy as the norm. Northern states were guilty as well but in different ways. In the north, as in the south, people of color were routinely pushed aside in favor of white people, even when the person of color was the better choice. In the area in which I grew up, the Merrimack Valley of Massachusetts, the newest immigrants, who were also people of color, were of Hispanic heritage, particularly of Puerto Rico at first and then from the Dominican Republic. These people were looked upon as being lazy and inherently violent. Of course, these things were not true, then or now. But when that is how you are “educated,” that is what you come to believe.

Critical Race Theory is an attempt to look at the whole person of color, not just his race, but his entire heritage which includes the forces which worked against these people over the decades. It asks the question, “Why is the crime rate higher in neighborhoods of color than in white neighborhoods?” But it would force the question of how such neighborhoods, if the statement is in fact true, came to be that way.

Sadly, the Republican party, these days, is embracing white nationalist ideas and ideals. These are things which can not only be identified as coming part-and-parcel from the Trump administration, but from Republican governors of states bordering Mexico. When Trump decried the refugees from Central America as being “rapists, drug dealers and murderers,” is his simply saying out loud what many of the more conservative Republicans have thought for many decades.

Were the greatest part of the Republican Party to embrace “Critical Race Theory” would mean alienating an unfortunately large portion of voting Americans. They fear losing power more than doing the right thing. They would rather embrace the institutional racism which exits today in America rather than decrying it and working towards a more unified, accepting America.

One last thing, on the current state of immigration. Today, both legal and illegal immigration is about 1 million per year from all countries. Those coming over the border, both legally and illegally, to the states that border Mexico, are about 200,000 per year. In 1910 there were about 1.12 million immigrants to the U.S., most of whom came through the ports of Boston, New York and Baltimore, a large portion of whom settled within 50 miles of those ports. Today this a large part of our present Italian, Polish and Russian Jewish population. Sadly, our national resentment towards new immigrants still exists today towards immigrants, not only from Hispanic regions, but also those coming from India and Asia. In the 1900 to 1920 era, our largely Republican northeastern states acted towards immigrants as our southern Republicans do today. And that, sadly, defines too many Republicans and is why Critical Race Theory is so important.

Teaching critical race theory in our public schools is a necessity if we are ever to ever embrace our entire society with equity and understanding. We are a nation which was founded on the idea of “all men are created equal” and we are now challenged to ensure that. It is only through an honest education, starting in our elementary schools and continuing forward, that we will become closer to a nation of our ideals rather than a nation of shortcomings.

by

New England Passenger Rail Transportation


I recent saw and article exhorting the idea of running an overnight passenger train from Boston to Montreal via Portland Maine and then up through Berlin NH. Nice idea but it will not go anywhere, I believe for two reasons. First, I do not think there is enough enroute population to support such a train and the train itself would rely almost entirely on people from greater Boston and Portland Maine for its passengers to Montreal. Not likely. Next, an overnight train means that it will be traveling between Portland and Montreal between midnight and 6AM, not a good time to gain passengers en-route.

But this idea did prompt me to think about how to go about providing a might higher intercity rail transportation route than now exists. That all starts with Boston, the largest city in New England. At present it sports a large number of trains southbound through Rhode Island and Connecticut to New York City. The route is very popular and, of course, has lots of passengers.

The first problem is with Boston itself. It has two stub-end terminals. That means North and South stations are a terminus with no possibility of through trains. In 1991, prior to the beginning of the “Big Dig,” there was a lot of support for running a tunnel next to the sunken highway to provide a connection between the two stations. For reason, that are purely political and lacking any reasonable thinking, the plan was scuttled with a myriad of illogical explanations. As someone who was working in transportation and had been at a transportation seminar given by the late Paul Tsongas at the University of New Hampshire, civil engineers who were fully involved with the “Big Dig” explained how easy and inexpensive the plan was. And so here we are, 30 years later, and no closer to a solution.

Back in the 1940s, the solution between the Maine Central, the Boston and Maine, and the New Haven railroad was to run trains from Portland and points northward south through Worcester and then to Norwich and onward to New York and Washington.

Today, the state of Massachusetts and the MBTA, are trying to go it alone and increase east-west rail service with no eye towards any north-south service. While that is laudable, it falls far short of what is truly needed.

First, the six New England states needs to come together in a passenger rail consortium. In this manner, plans for passenger rail in all directions and involving all the states could be addressed. For instance, one of the easiest ways to get some much-needed inter-city rail, AMTRAK must be involved. The states themselves are going to have to pick up a large portion of the cost for upgrading the existing rail, and in some cases, relaying rail on long abandoned right-of-way.

First, the MBTA needs to stay out of the intercity rail service save that within Massachusetts and the long-established route to Providence. Most people in southern New Hampshire are looking to the MBTA to provide rail service to Nashua and Manchester with the possibility of Concord being included. The state would be better served by AMTRAK much in the way eastern New Hampshire and the cities of Exeter, Durham and Dover are now. This has become a very popular route. The same should work in going to Manchester. But in the longer term, this could also open up the possibility of rehabilitating the rail route north of Concord all the way to White River Jct. and then provide service to Montreal, a long tried and true route in our now distant past.

At this point, it is proper to suggest that the MBTA be dropped as a provider of much increased service to Springfield and Pittsfield and that AMTRAK be the entity of choice, of course with state assistance. This might also open up the possibility of extending such service to Albany and beyond. Amtrak does provide a number of trains out to Buffalo, in addition the Lake Shore Limited which starts in Boston, there are three other trains passing through Albany on their way to Buffalo.

In the end, the only way any of this happens, or happens to any degree, is if all the New England States take part.

by

Greenville North Carolina


This is a bit of a departure from most of my online rants. If you do not live in North Carolina, the chances of your ever hear of Greenville diminish quickly with distance. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Greenville’s population stands at 88,728. Also, according to thecentersquare.com, Greenville’s poverty level stands at 24.3%, highest in the state. And yet, were you to drive the streets to the south and east of the city’s center, you would be impressed by how new everything is and how vibrant this city is. And so, what is going on?

I live in Ayden NC which sits about 10 miles to the south of Greenville and has a population of about 5200, a farming community to be sure. Other towns surrounding Greenville are Winterville, Farmville and Bethel. With the exception of Winterville, to drive to any of those other communities, you will be driving past corn fields, cotton fields and tobacco fields.

For Greenville itself, the largest employer is Vidant heath which owns the city’s only hospital and many clinics. Next is the Pitt County school system. In other words, there is no industry in this city. At one time, Greenville was a center of the textile industry in North Carolina. Not the largest by any means but easily the area’s largest employer. But in the 1950s and 60s, like most of America, those jobs dried up and the mills closed down as the textile industry shifted to Asia.

But once you leave Greenville you are going to drive at least 1/2 hour before you reach another city of any appreciable size. This part of North Carolina is most definitely rural.

Then why would my wife and I relocate from the Boston environs to this area? Well first, we wanted to get away from New England winters. I am getting up there in years and shoveling snow was becoming too difficult. And I also found that to have my driveway plowed would cost me about $200 per storm! I was not willing to pay that. Also, in the Boston area we were paying $2300 per month for an apartment rental whereas here we own a home with a monthly mortgage payment of $1200. That was a no-brainer! Last winter Greenville received about 4 inches of snow early one Saturday morning and the city quite literally shut down for the next 2 days! We had to laugh.

While we are still trying to find a really good Italian restaurant, we have added a fantastic North Carolina Barbeque restaurant, the Starlight Inn here in Ayden. We like this place not only because it came in 2nd place in an all–North Carolina competition but because we just really like it. We also found a Jamaican restaurant, a hole-in-the-wall place near the town of Snow Hill, about 1/2 hour from us.

Getting the beach from here is about 1-3/4-to-2-hour trip. But once you get there, it is glorious! Not the outer banks, but still a southern continuation of the outer banks which suits us just fine.

One thing you notice in the Greenville area is all the new houses being built. These homes are being bought almost as quickly as they are built. I have known of houses in the process of being built that were already sold! To me, this says that Greenville and its environs, is an area on the rise. The cost of living relative to the northeast is much lower with certain exceptions but those are things like gasoline and other commodities where pricing is on a national level rather than a regional or local one.

Whatever Greenville lacks in urban attraction is made up for by a trip to the Raleigh and Durham area which are about 90 minutes away. Greenville is a very attractive place for young people from an affordability view and the same is true for retirees. The city is also prime for the location of new large industry, something I expect will happen in the near future. Say what you like but Greenville is truly a good place to live.

by

Rise of Fascism in the United States?


At first blush the title would seem to greatly overreach the present political status in the United States. It may be a bit but when you look at the definition of fascism certain parts are an undeniable part America’s political makeup today. (Fascism: A philosophy or governmental system marked by stringent socioeconomic control, a strong central government usu. headed by a dictator, and often a belligerently nationalistic policy; Webster’s II New Riverside University Dictionary, 1988, Houghton Mifflin Co., p. 466). With slight modifications of that definition, we can arrive at the far right, and controlling, portion of the Republican Party today. From 2017 to 2020, in Donald Trump, we had a man who acted like a dictator, and, who like true fascists of the 20th Century, tried to invalidate a national election when it did not go his way. Fortunately, men and women of good conscience did not sign on to his rhetoric.

Right now, with a decidedly very conservative U.S. Supreme Court, activist judges are attempting to push their religious views upon the entire population of America. This thinly veiled chicanery has the conservative majority in the USSJC taking the almost unprecedented view of reversing precedent after precedent held in that very court with regard to Roe v. Wade. I, as someone who actually opposes abortion, find that overturning Roe is contrary to the interests of the American population at large. And what is the legal precedent for not overturning Roe? The second part of the First Amendment which states that the government shall make no law with regard to religion. This is a moral issue founded in our religious beliefs and not one based in historical law.

Fascism, at its core, tries to limit and/or restrict individual rights to self-expression and access to good medical care. Roe, quite simply, ordered that the right of a woman to medical care according to her conscience could not be infringed upon. This is the part that the SJC seems to be ignoring in favor of its own religious beliefs which, in the case of the two of the most recent appointees to the SJC are rooted in Roman Catholicism. It might also find its roots in the basic beliefs of Justice Samuel Alito as well, the writer of the likely SJC decision.

From a purely public view, only 35% of Americans are in favor of overturning Roe! And yet, because of this minority’s activism, almost half of all states will make abortion illegal with some making laws to criminalize a citizen of its state from getting an abortion in another state!

Next in line, most certainly, will be birth control, contraception. The line between the legalization of birth control and Roe is a mere 5 years! When I was attending Boston University in 1967, Bill Baird, a birth control activist, started to give a talk at Boston University about birth control. City of Boston police arrested him for just talking about it! That was where we were! Are we now heading back to that? Again, fascism, at its root, restricts free speech. Worse, it also dictates morality, and this is at the heart of what is going on right now in America.

I am someone who is against abortion, even though what I have just written might belie that. But, as a male, it is not a decision I have to make. What I view as morally wrong is not enough for me to visit my views upon those who see it differently. That is why I have always supported a woman’s right to choose. I have never been in favor of legislating morality, and this is most certainly what is happening in America today. It is a sad day for America if this minority opinion is forced upon the majority. It is what makes fascism work!

by

NATO and Ukraine


When last I wrote of this war, I was of the opinion that NATO would be forced to support Ukraine or watch it fall to Russia. I was wrong. And for the small bit, I am grateful. But I am not in the least satisfied with NATO’s response, and, as its leading member, the response of the United States.

What I have seen of Russia’s army is that it is not well trained and lacking in good command and control on the battlefield. Some have suggested that Ukraine could win this war. It cannot. At least not on its own. Russia has been through this before in Chechnya and Afghanistan. They won the former while losing the latter. But in both cases, Russian was willing to take on the battle for years. This we must remember.

I have found President Biden’s response has been slow and lacking. I voted for Biden and considering the state of the world today, it was a good choice. Still, he lacks decisiveness. He has bungled the request of Ukraine to get MIG-29 jets from Poland. Everyone in power was in fear of Putin, and it showed! The simple answer to transferring those jets was to allow Ukrainian pilots to fly them home. There are only a handful and flying below radar should be easy for experienced pilots which Ukraine does have!

In the past, the United States has had no problem with getting military advisors secreted into combat areas. The claim that Ukrainian military lack training in anti-ship weapons is true but getting them trained would have been easily accomplished in the opening days of the war.

That the United States, and President Biden, continues the refrain of not wanting to escalate the war by making Putin angry is beyond the pale. Putin has been increasingly escalating this war without incurring similar response from Ukraine. That he has Sabre rattled about nuclear weapons is something our military is ready with a response, and Putin knows this! He has called our bluff and we have succumbed.

NATO and the United States needs to act boldly. They need to come to terms with adding Ukraine to NATO. Putin knows this is on the agenda but has called the West’s bluff by stating he would consider such an action as an escalation! Really? And most recently he has said that if Ukraine agrees to never join NATO, he might be willing to end the war. Of course, he has also said that Ukraine must cede more territory to Russia.

It is now established that China is unwilling to come to the rescue of Russia with military aid. It does, however, supply humanitarian aid. While in Ukraine, Russia has not allowed for humanitarian aid anywhere in Ukraine.

With things as they are now, President Biden and NATO have allowed things to progress to a point where giving Ukraine proper aid is greatly reduced. But there is a way around this that was employed a long time ago, the United Nations. During the Korean War, the troops fighting North Korea were declared UN troops, though the uniforms were those of the nations involved. Why have we not tried, at least, to use this to combat Putin and put an end to the hostilities?

by

War In Europe?


I am calling upon my over 25 years of either being in the military and as a Federal Employee who worked closely with the U.S. Air Force. My active military service was entirely with the U.S. Army. When I first saw Russia invading Ukraine, I, like so many others, Putin included, felt this would be a short war with an ultimate Russian victory. It seems we underestimated the resolve of the Ukrainian people. It would also seem the Putin either has no sense of history or is ignorant of it. In 1940, the Soviet Union tried to invade Finland as it felt that country should naturally fall under Soviet control. They were wrong! In what is called “The Winter War,” the Finnish people initially defeated the Russian army which no one had expected. Finland only had what we today call a National Guard, no regular army troops. But as with Ukraine, the Soviet Union entirely underestimated the resolve of the Finns. Later, however, Russia did take over Finland.

I still think it unlikely that Ukraine will ultimately enjoy victory. The Russian army and its resources are just too vast. But one thing I have found surprising is the lack of command and control of the Russian forces. Command and control simply means how an army tactically attacks an enemy, First of all, Russia very poorly set up its logistics. That means how supplies are brought from its rear areas to its forward areas. This is an extremely important part of command and control. But it also shows how Russia has not allowed the ideas of modern warfare to exist within its military. That is, when I was in the military during the Soviet era, we knew that the Russian military was what is called “stove piped,” or that its military is ruled entirely from the very top straight down to its most elemental parts, the foot soldier. Soviet leadership did not allow for much in the way of command decision at the battalion level which in the American army is highly prized. This explains the sort of helter-skelter operation of the Russian military in Ukraine, the air forces do not talk to the army and the infantry does not talk to the artillery, etc.

This leads us to the situation presently in Ukraine. The city of Lviv has just endured its first attack by Russian missiles. Lviv is extremely close to the Polish border which we have all become acquainted with through news reports. But this also brings back the idea of command and control. Will the top Russian militarists know to stop at the Polish border lacking other information? Or will it simply continue onward until told to stop? Or is Putin already scheming to attack Poland and tell his people it was NATO’s aggression that forced his hand? No one knows the mind of Putin which is a scary thought. But our military, since the Korean Conflict, has made it a priority to “war game” with the idea of having a nearly fully formulated idea of how to proceed in the event of any military engagement. Although I have no first-hand knowledge of this, I suspect that NATO has been doing this as well.

That said, we are left with three basic possibilities of the Russian aggression. First, Russia defeats Ukraine and ceases its attacks. Second, Russia either invades Poland, which it dearly desires, or it invades the Baltic Countries, and a conventional war is started. The third, and scariest, is that Russia uses battlefield nuclear arms to succeed. That of course can easily lead to a nuclear war, something no one, including Russia wants. But this is where the sanity of Putin comes into play. Make no doubt about it, Putin’s office which is called a “Presidency,” is a convenient cover for the dictatorship he has evolved. Putin has for a long time acted unilaterally and has never had a fear of cutting off the heads, figuratively, of anyone who opposes him.

It is my belief that Putin is using Ukraine as a testing ground for what he truly wants, a return to the Soviet iron curtain countries of pre-1990. That would include Hungary, Romania, Poland, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia and other countries. Our best hope is that he realizes that his military is hardly prepared to take on such a heady task and will stop with Ukraine. But if he does engage NATO, I have every confidence that NATO will reign supreme in the end and that Putin will be arrested and brought to task, with his sycophants, to answer for the war crimes he has committed. But once again, the face of the world will greatly change.