Other

by

Wake Up America! Trump is Working Towards Nulifying the Next Election!!!


My title sounds a bit bizzare but is it? We are supposed to be a country that has three equal parts of government, the President, the Congress, and the Judiciary. But what we have witnessed has been Trump combining the three into one, him. It seems that if something seems legally suspicious on Trump’s part he merely defers to the SJC and they have consitently given him the rubber stamp he desires.

Let’s back up to Trump on day 1. He gives the hundreds of men and women who purportated an insurrection against our government a pardon!!

He has openly stated the DEI must be done away with and that he is limiting the number of people who can come from other countries to study at our universities. This defies all logic. Diversity is all about having a “diverse” work or study place. Republicans do not like that but the reasoning is beyond belief. Equity, this is about giving any person an equal chance at whatever they are doing regardless of their color, religion, or ethnic background. That was the Civil Rights act of 1965!! But in Tumpland, that cannot be tolerated. And then there is inclusion. We are told we must be all inclusive in anything we doing which means giving everyone an equal chance. I think these ideals scared Trump since his MAGA followers are largely non-college grads who watch only Fox news. But they forgot what happen to Fox news when it was shown that Fox was deliberately airing items that it new were not true!

In case you were not watching, Trump is systematically, along with his Allies, ruining the lives of people with regard to their health care. First he took aim at Planned Parenthood because they perform abortions. The truth is, 90% of all women who go to Planned Parenthood are not their for an abortion but for information. Planned Parenthood does not push women into having an abortion, just the opposite actually. Why is it the Trump and his MAGA minions not see this? Because it is a truth he simply cannot deal with. Now he has taken aim at Obamacare or the Affordable Care Act. Democrats have maintained that millions upon millions of Americans, Republicans included, rely upon this act for insuranced they can afford. Part of the bill to reopen our government maintains the ACA and that does not sit well with Trump and his billionaire buddies who will get a tax reduction from monies now go to the ACA!!

Tump has the Speak of the House, Mike Johnson, toeing the line of not engaging in discussions with Democrats over getting this bill passed. Chuck Shumer, who Trump dearly hates, has requested that two Democrat, two Republicans and Trump sit down and hammer out a solution. Trump refuses. Why? Because he knows he will not get his way and it is his way or the highway.

Trump has muted the Judiciary, blunted the Congress from doing its business, and brung a high degree of power to the Excutive Branch. There is a parallel here. This is exactly what Hitler did. He consolidated power to become all powerful and one of Hitler’s first moves was to eliminate elections. Then he went after undesireables, a.k.a. Democrats in the U.S. Trump is only withholding Congressionally approved funds from highly visible universites in blue states. He has sent out the Texas National Guard to Chicago to quell all the violence there, when in face violent crimes have dropped 40% in the last 10 years, and, this also is probably an illegal act under Chapter 32 of the U.S. Code, the National Guard of a state may only be used in its own state. He also took U.S. Marines to Los Angeles which is absolutely against the law according to the law found in Chapter 10 of the U.S. code which says that active duty soldiers may not be used against American citizens. He has done it and not a single Republican has called foul. Well, I, an unaffiliated voter, am calling foul!!!

Republicans are supposed to be all about small government and pushing as much power down to the states as possible. Is Trump doing this? No!

Wake up America!! Your country is being stolen from you piece by piece by a despot!!

by

It is Time We Saved Ukraine From Putin


We have a war that actually started in 2014 when Russia annexed Crimea and declared that is was their territory anyway. The war that started then continues today. Russian is now bombing civilian areas indiscretely. At some point the United States must say, enough is enough.

What we must do is go to Ukraine’s assistance by using specialized troops on the ground. Not a single troop needs to be infantry, rather they should be artillery and air defense artillery along we a wing of U.S. Air Force fighters.

Early in this conflict, Putin sabre rattled that he would use battlefield nukes and maybe more. He has a problem there and it is call MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction). That means we have just as much as he does, and this is not including the European countries. And if a single nuke gets used on the battlefield, it will be like 1943 where the U.S. was still building up its strength while winning battles everywhere.

To put a period on this type of action, we would have to declare India, Brasil, China, North Korea, and Russia as enemy combatants. Once we have unilaterally gone into battle, it would not take much for the rest of the NATO countries to join in, and for Russia, that is very bad. At that point Russia would have nothing to gain and everything to lose and just by the troop movements, there might be an immediate end of hostilities. NATO must stand strong and demand that Russia pull all its troops at least 200km from any non-Russian border. Not a single bullet shot by any NATO country but by putting up is enough to get Russian to shup up.

With the exception of Belarus, Russia has no friendly countries in the rest of Europe. When nearly the entirety of Europe lines up against you in a show of strength, you do nothing but admit defeat as the victor’s demands.

by

AMTRAK EXPANSION NOW!!


I was pretty discouraged about writing after my last post that admonished people against voting for Trump and yet they did and now where are we?

I saw an article that attempted to say AMTRAK is reasonably similar to the European rail system. I can only wonder what that guy was smoking. First of all, all major routes are electrified, something AMTRAK needs to expand. Secondly, all large cities are connect by many trains each day. Only the Northeast Corridor, Chicago to St. Louis, and the L.A. to San Diego route can claim that. There may be one or two I missed but I hope I made my point. For example, if you want to go to Chicago from New York there are two trains but they take different routes. The old “Water Level” route of the New York Central Railroad was the prime route to Chicago with many trains each day. Today there is but one train connecting New York to Cleveland, Toledo, and Chicago. This route is begging to be a high speed rail corridor for people going from New York to Buffalo or Cleveland. There are probably more the 25 million people along this route who, if there was decent frequency, would use it over the hassle at the airport. Think of someone wanting to go from Rochester NY to Cleveland. There is only one train and it leaves Rochester at 11:29PM and arrives in Cleveland at 3:53AM. They couldn’t do better than that? This train only works well for people in New York who are going all the way to Chicago. Coach is only $47 and private rooms are $265 one way and $467 the other. AMTRAK needs to go to a single price policy rather than using airline schemes of fares.

The U.S. Department of Transportation, Surface Rail had designated a number of corridors across the U.S. Several regional corridors do not even have rails meaning they are considered one thing while being another. Priorities are at odds with the states, especially more conservative states like New Hamshire.

Then there are the missing lines that cannot be made sense of. For example, there is a bus but not train from Detroit to Toledo. Trains are much more efficient and passengers will take a train before a bus. There once was a route that went from Cleveland to St. Louis connecting many intermediate sized cities. There is no such train today. Then there is the St. Louis to Los Angeles train that only runs 3 days a week. I have never heard why this is that way. And the big hole in the system is the Chicago to Miami route. AMTRAK actually had such a route at one time but it got eliminated because of Congressional foolishness.

There used to be an AMTRAK train that went from L.A. to Salt Lake City which included a stop in Las Vegas. Airlines love the LA to Las Vegas route, a real money maker but no trains. If you look at an AMTRAK map you will see blue lines that indicate AMTRAK’s Thru-Way Buses. Most of those routes are former train routes! If the U.S. truly wants to make AMTRAK at the level of European trains, it has a lot of catching up to do.

Electrification of routes in the East and on the West Coast are a must. Energy efficient and cost effective routes. Right now the only expansion of AMTRAK is happening in Maine where the progressive state is looking at its future and is actively upgrading existing track to accommodate passenger rail. This route sees 5 trains a day and is quite profitable for AMTRAK. It would seem to me that a state like Wyoming which currently has no AMTRAK trains, although they once did, would do well to promote rail travel through their state to Salt Lake City.

One last thought. Before all the rail mergers started in the 1960s, there used to be seasonal trains to ski resorts. Anyone who has been to one of these knows how horrible both driving and parking is. The old railroads used to run what they called “Ski Trains.” Such trains were very popular.

AMTRAK needs to go back to before it existed, the 1950s, and see what routes were serviced by rail and the frequency of the trains and make plans use those routes as a baseline.

by

Revitalizing AMTRAK


There was a time, prior to the Interstate Highway System, that rail travel reigned supreme. Post-World War 2 saw an end to that when the Eisenhower administration took the German idea of the Autobahn and applied it to America. To be clear, this was vital to America’s growth and has proven itself over the decades. But now with oil prices constantly increasing, and the Interstate system in desperate need of a huge influx of cash for repairs alone, we must consider alternative transportation.

In 1971 at AMTRAK’s inception, the idea was to keep intercity passenger rail service alive as private railroads were abandoning service. But AMTRAK made itself unattractive from its inception as it pared the existing intercity service to about 1/4 of what it had been immediately prior. AMTRAK’s service map of 2022 shows only a small expansion since its inception.

Service is lacking to many cities which defies logic. For example, there are no trains traveling from Los Angeles to Las Vegas, an extremely popular road and air route. Why is this? There is no service from Atlanta to Florida, also a very popular road and air route. Why? And to further that point, there is no Chicago to Florida route, one which actually existed at AMTRAK’s inception. Again, why? And there are many other examples, Dallas to Los Angeles, Atlanta to Savannah and Charleston, Detroit to Cleveland, Cleveland to St. Louis via Columbus, Dayton and Indianapolis, Memphis to Atlanta via Nashville, and there are a host of other potential routes, particularly in the densely populated Northeast. For reasons not given the public, California’s inland route extending from the San Francisco area through central California stop well shy of Los Angeles at Bakersfield. Why? Worst of all, I saved the best for last, there is no service from Dallas to Houston! The state of Texas, however, is endeavoring to remedy that situation.

Some of those problems extend from non-receptive Republican controlled states who view AMTRAK as an unnecessary luxury!

Another issue with AMTRAK is its scheduling on existing routes. If, for example, you go to the AMTRAK site and query a trip from New York to Chicago you will find a single train that does not require changing trains, the Lake Shore Limited. The Sunset Limited runs from New Orleans to Los Angeles only 3 days a week. On that route sits Houston Texas and Phoenix Arizona which are the nation’s 4th and 5th largest cities respectively. To be clear, Phoenix actually has no direct connection and residents of that city must travel south to Maricopa to catch a train between the 5th largest and 2nd largest cities.

There are only four areas of the country which receive good, not excellent AMTRAK service: The Northeast Corridor, Boston to Washington DC, California, San Francisco to San Diego. and Florida, Washington DC to several Florida destinations, most notable, Miami. Finally, Chicago with destinations of Milwaukee, Detroit, and St. Louis. I left out Indianapolis, with a metro population of over 2 million people out because AMTRAK allows it a single train that runs only three days a week!

AMTRAK does virtually no advertising. When was the last time you saw a commercial extolling to benefits of rail travel over airplanes. No lines to board, no security checkpoints, and when heavy weather closes airports the trains will still complete their trips excepting the most serious of conditions, hurricanes and blizzards. And even in blizzard conditions, trains may still be able to complete their trips.

Let’s look at a trip from Atlanta to New Orleans. Right now, airlines are publishing 1 hour 45-minute flight times point to point. Add in the 2-hour preflight arrival and the 1-hour post flight from New Orleans airport to downtown, this includes exiting the aircraft, finding ground transportation and dealing with traffic. Now your 1:45 minute flight has turned into a total of nearly 6 hours! The AMTRAK schedule shows a 12-hour trip between those points. Seems to be a negative but is it. Let’s go back to the flight. If you leave Atlanta on your flight at 9AM, considering the 7AM arrival time necessary, you will arrive in New Orleans about noontime, or time for lunch. Now we are at 1PM and only the afternoon ahead. The train leaves 9AM from Atlanta, arrives 9PM in New Orleans and the cost is $39 coach compared to the over $300 coach seat on the airline! In terms of pure economics and also stress, the train suddenly looks like the far superior choice. This is not even considering the people who must go between these two cities, cannot afford the air fare and do not want to sit on a bus. And in most of America, the people who are most drawn to rail travel are those of lesser means. This excludes the Northeast Corridor where businesspeople of all sorts regularly take the train.

The main hinderance to more people taking the train is the lack of choice in trains available and a lack of trains which make truly limited stops thereby decreasing the amount of time between any two points. Right now, AMTRAK simply does not have enough trains equipment to cover the suggestions I have made. Even more, the fleet it does have is aging and in need of replacement.

If we are ever to look like the passenger rail systems Europe enjoys, we are going to have to commit to a very large outlay of money to accomplish this. I can only guess that a 10-year $100 billion commitment might fall short. But in 10 years what are gas prices going to be, and what are air fares going to be. I am also guessing that the American public will be clamoring for exactly the extent and levels of service to which I have alluded. And finally, we can no longer afford the upkeep of America’s sprawling Interstate system which much of it needs extensive repair and replacement.

by

A Ukrainian / U.S. Involvement


At this writing, the Russian aggression along the Ukrainian border and its occupation of the Crimea poses a serious threat to world peace. What we have heard the most is about the United Nations and its responsibility to this situation. As we know, at present, the Ukraine is not a part of NATO. What does that mean? It means that the U.N. is relatively powerless to take action in the event of a Russian invasion, which, is probably imminent. But that does not mean countries cannot send troops in to help.

In the case of the United States, we need only to look at our wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria to see that. Each country involved in those efforts did so on an individual basis rather than part of a coalition such as NATO. Putin has put NATO front and center as being a “threat” to his national security. That is pure hogwash and the world knows that. Why does he do that then? Because he does not want the Ukraine to become a part of it and enjoy the benefit of a united security effort.

The U.S., contrary to anything Pres. Biden has said, can act unilaterally, as it did in Iraq, and send in ground troops. And there are two reasons we would do that. First, it is unlikely that Putin wants to war against U.S. troops. Despot that he is, he probably understands that long-term negative effects on Russia. And second, the U.S. can provide the personnel support of having troops trained in various defense systems that the Ukrainians presently lack.

The 8500 troops Biden has already alerted fall far short of the number needs for a strong show of force. Of the continental U.S. Army divisions are at least 6 which could supply men and arms to the Ukraine. The 8500 coming from the 82nd Air Borne can be bolsters by the 1st, 4th, 5th, 101st among others. Each division has a size of about 15,000 personnel. And additional support troops for many places in the U.S. could also be deployed, such as Army Engineers, ordinance specialists, air attack helicopter groups, etc.

But an even more importantly, the U.S. could then use airpower against the Russian invasion without ever sending a single Air Force unit into the Ukraine. We likely enjoy air superiority to Russia in this area as well. But the most important part of that superiority is the ability of our Air Force units to make strategic decisions at a much lower level than Russia. Russian military beaurocracy has always pushed decision making upwards where the U.S. has pushed in downward.

I do hope that the joint chiefs and their advisors have advised the President of their various scenarios, not doubt long formulated, for entering the Ukraine. And these would doubtless be many and varied responses to Russian aggression. We cannot at this juncture show any weakness when dealing with them and a strong show of force to Russia may well pre-empt an invasion idea they have, hopefully.

by

July 4, 1776, a Very Scary Day


Today is Independence Day in the United States. We declared that to be true for the first time on July 4, 1776. But it really was not true in fact back then, it was simply a piece of paper, read in Philadelphia, and then secreted away just as quickly for to hold such a document was a treasonable act under English law. In truth, we were in the midst of a civil war no different from our own internal civil war of 1861 to 1865.
To be a truly independent country we needed to be recognized as such by another sovereign nation. The Confederacy tried, and failed, to get England to recognized them. The leaders of the revolutionary war also failed initially to gain recognition. Our best hope was France who despised the English and with whom, through Benjamin Franklin, we had warm relations with their government. But the French were reticent to acknowledge our sovereign existence. The French feared that England would turn on them and they would be, yet again, at war, a war they simply could not afford.
The first country to recognize us was Holland in 1776 and then Morocco in 1777. As great a statesman as Franklin was, he simply was unable to get the French to do more than to supply us with some money and an invaluable man whom Gen. George Washington used to help lead he ragtag group of revolutionaries, Lafayette. Finally, John Adams join Franklin in Paris and on a trip to Versailles, seat of the government, the French were convinced that we would likely win the war. Then, finally, on February 8, 1778, the French signed an agreement of “Amity and Commerce.” This gave America a trading partner in Europe of great importance.
But back in 1776, on that day of July 4, thirteen copies of the Declaration of Independence, all signed, we sent to the capitols of each of the new states. But the danger in holding this document was great and each was secreted away for the remainder of hostilities.
We had been at war for over a year when the Declaration of Independence was signed and distributed but had a poll of the world’s leaders been taken at that date asking the chances of our succeeding, it is likely we would have garnered only a few favorable votes. The fact was, we were losing the war and no one knew how many Tories, those still loyal to the English crown, still existed. Boston and the state of Massachusetts are virtually eradicated all its Tories on March 17, 1776 when the loyalists were given safe passage out of Boston Harbor and up to Nova Scotia.
But at that same time, New Jersey had for its governor Benjamin Franklin’s son who had declared himself loyal to the crown. Throughout the other 12 colonies similar conditions existed and people were extremely caution in whom they trusted.
European Wars, and now this war, were always fought in the warmer months of the year. Troops retired to their various sides during the winter months as had Washington and his troops in 1777. But Washington was not a traditionalist and his mind was ruminating over the many loses he had suffered thus far at the hands to the British. The worst being his having to watch he troops slaughtered on one side of the Hudson River while he sat on the other.

Washington moved southward and encamped at Valley Forge. From the beginning Washington had pressed the Continental Congress for the necessary implements of war to fight and win, mostly unsuccessfully. In 1777, Frederic von Steuben, a Prussian Lieutenant General, joined Washington and immediately set about training Washington’s troops at Valley Forge.

That winter, on Christmas Day, while the Hessian troops feasted, Washington rallied his troops to attack Trenton and in doing so gained his first major win of the Revolution. From there they continue their march up the middle of New Jersey winning battle after battle. But von Steuben’s effect was immediately obvious. The attack was far from perfect but even so, American officers were able to lead their men and accomplish their mission. And for the first time, America turned from a defensive military posture to an offensive one, a posture they never relinquished until the British government finally acquiesced after the Battle of Yorktown in 1783.
That eight-year period, from 1775 to 1783, was never easy for American patriots. By declaring war on Britain, they have lost their most important trading partner and certain types of goods were always in short supply. Fear of retribution among the general populace soon subsided after the siege of Boston succeeded and the first of the British departed. But until the tide of the war turned, no one could feel both safe and a patriot. But Americans asserted their grit and determination to be respected as a sovereign nation and this required 13 colonies to become united which they did.

by

The Earth’s Coming Death?


Since man first stood upright on this planet he has been a creature like none other. In his earliest days, he was a hunter-gatherer. That meant he used very rudimentary tools to kill animals and he harvested fruits, berries, roots, and other edible plants to stay alive. To be sure, for man’s first million years, his was a constant struggle just to stay alive.

But during this period he also started to move outward from East Africa where he first rose to prominence. He discovered that even though he was not match for many of the larger animals he co-existed with, he could use his brain to elude those animals should they decide they had a taste for human flesh.

But also during this period man discovered war. Man grew from family groups into small protective groups and then into small communities. These communities fought one another when food became scarce and possibly when one group felt another was impinging on their territory. This probably did not happen very much but we need only look at today’s society to discover man’s ancient proclivities.

And so it went until the 20th Century arrived. The 20th Century, and now the 21st Century, have burdened our planet early like never before. Even though the industrialization of the Earth started in the 19th Century, those toxic fumes emitted by mills were not so great that they posed an immediate threat to Earth’s biosphere.

The 20th Century, however, was one of great scientific and industrial invention. It has also been the period of the most rapid growth of Earth’s human population. Between these two things, planet Earth has been put at risk of dying, literally.

Industrialists, and those who support them, contend that what is happening to planet earth is little more than a natural progression. That the earth is warming is nothing new and those who complain about it are just alarmists. The contend that there is more than enough proof that the Earth has gone through similar events and survived. The question here is: Is their logic sound?

During the 1940s through and into the 1970, aerosol cans used a gas named florochlorohydrocarbons. This gas was used in items such as hair spray and other consumer items that needed a gas to propel their active ingredients. When it was discovered that the use of this gas compound was causing a big hole over the Earth’s poles where ozone had previously existed, the federal government stepped in and banned the use of those compounds. Most other countries on the earth did the same, following our lead. The result was the holes closed up and there was proof positive that man had caused an unnatural imbalance in the earth’s biosphere.

Plastic was first made in the 1920 but did not come into any sort of widespread use until the 1950s. As a child I remember our milk was delivered either in glass containers or paper containers that were lined with was. Neither of these containers posed any threat to our biosphere. Additionally, most other liquid items were delivered either in glass or metal containers. Again, no serious threat to the biosphere. But starting in the 1970s industrial economies dictated that the delivery of fluids in plastic containers was much more economical. Glass containers, such as the soft drink industry used, required that the bottles be returned, then cleaned for reuse. This process proved relatively expensive. Today, such a process is considered “green.”

Grocery stores changed over from the paper bag to the plastic bag. Plastic bags were less expensive and required smaller spaces for containment. But plastic bags, once recycling took hold, were not acceptable items for many communities recycling. The problem? They tended to get bound up in the gears of the machinery processing them with the other forms of plastic and therefor became prohibited items.

Curiously, one of the nation’s larger food market chains which uses only paper bags and promotes its reusable repurposed plastic bags has no system to capture used plastic bags. To be fair, the reusable plastic bags that I am referring to, feel like fabric to the touch and last a long time making the need to use a food stores plastic bags unnecessary. This is an industry at least attempting to take positive measures in the responsible use of plastics.

To further illustrate the threat these plastic containers pose to the planet, there is an island of plastic sitting in the middle of the oceans larger than 3 countries. More, who has not been to a beach where plastic bottles and bags could be found along the beach front?

The other great threat to our biosphere is atmospheric pollution, green house gases. Most prominent, but not alone, are carbon monoxide (CO) and carbon dioxide (CO2). I put the chemical formula for these compounds to show how closely related they are. Carbon monoxide is unstable and will capture an oxygen molecule quickly thereby robbing our atmosphere of its precious oxygen content and leaving behind carbon dioxide, the compound which most seriously impacts the green house warming our planet is presently experiencing. Green house gases trap sunlight in the earth’s atmosphere, sunlight that would otherwise be reflected back out into space.

One method scientists use for tracking the effect of our planet’s warming is the regression of glaciers. In the 1930, many was the author who wrote about the snows of Mount Kilimanjaro in Africa. They were legendary but they no longer exist because of global warming. Of particular interest to them has been the glacier which covers most of Greenland. This glacier has always melted during the summer months but the rate of melting has increased over the past decades. Also, where small puddles of water that existed atop this glacier during the summer months, they have been replaced by large lakes, further proof of the extent of global warming.

One of the side effects of global warming, and probably the most deadly to the continued existence of the human race, is that deserts are becoming larger and small tracts of arid land are fast converting into deserts due to the lack of rainfall. The reason for the lack of rainfall is how air circulates around our planet. The rainy seasons that sub-Saharan residents used to rely upon have all but disappeared. The Sahara desert in turn moves southward pushing out the people who used to populate this land. Many other parts of our planet are experience elongated droughts. Such droughts have never been recorded in these areas for as long as man has inhabited them.

A case in point is California. California had traditionally relied upon the snows of the Sierra Mountains to provide them with needed water. But for years on end the snows came in such reduced amounts that the reservoirs they typically filled fell far short of the water necessary. Certain of these reservoirs dried up completely. The city of Los Angeles was in crisis. The drought ended just in time to avert the crisis at hand. But it is only a question time, and not an if, when the next elongated drought strikes the southwestern United States and it lasts far longer than the available water can support.

California is one of the chief vegetable and other food producing areas of the United States. A plant killing drought will be disastrous for both the people of the United States and its economy. That a single state can be the root of a catastrophe illustrates how dependent we are on any one region being economically healthy.

The bottom line is: the Earth is reliant up a series of interrelated eco-systems, each reliant upon the other. When any one of these systems changes, even slightly, the effect of that change is felt in all the rest of the systems. The question is how much is each system affected? That we can quantify the rise in the temperature of sea water to be several degrees is hugely significant. Were it just a tenth or two, there would be no reason for concern. But that is simply not what is happening. The larger question at hand here is: how much more will the temperature of the oceans rise? The is extremely important because the ocean’s temperature directly affects weather patterns. In the Atlantic ocean we have seen a marked increase in both the number and the intensity of hurricanes. In other parts of the earth the change in weather patterns have caused stronger winter storms, greater flooding, hotter summers and even colder winters.

That the United States has withdrawn from the Paris Climate Accords is a travesty. It says that the United States cares more about corporate profits than the continued life of our planet. The United States, which for over 100 years, has lead the world in most areas, has abdicated its leadership responsibility. This is a debt which must be paid whether the United State’s present political leadership acknowledges or not. The debt grows daily and will be paid by our children, our grandchildren, and our great grandchildren.

by

Our World in 50 Years


There are three generations whose ability to impact positive change in the United States has either gone to zero or is on that track. I’m a baby boomer, born in 1949, which means the majority of my generation is either retired of contemplating it. The generation ahead of us has, for the most part, embraced their retirement and only gives thought about our country during national elections. Then there is the generation right behind me. Their age range is about 30 to 55. The youngest end still has a chance to make strong positive changes while the older end, if they are not actively engage in public policy, are not likely to join in.

 
The future of our country lies in the hand of those who are now in high school and country. We need them to be as well-educated and actively involved in government as possible. History teaches us that a large portion of discoveries, inventions, and activism happens to this age group as soon as they finish their education. But my generation, and those generations around mine, are leaving a legacy which is in desperate need of a large influx of new ideas. The ideas of those presently in power are simply not working to a large degree.

 
What will our work look like 50 years from now? First of all, recent history has shown our planets oceans have risen enough that ocean-front cities are experiencing flooding at ever increasing levels. My own city, Boston, Massachusetts, has just this last winter seen flooding of city streets with water from the ocean that has entirely overwhelmed the ability of the city’s storm drains to remove these waters. That the level of our oceans in continuing to rise in indisputable. What will our children have to do?

 
First of all, they are going to need to occupy and become a majority of every country’s leadership and embrace the fact of global warming an man’s contribution to it. Their’s will be the challenge to improve and expand upon renewable energy sources which do not contribute to global warming: wind farms, solar panels, geo-thermal, and water both from the planets rivers but also from the ocean, a well-know but entirely undeveloped source of energy.

efully, the internal combustion engine will be mostly, if not entirely, obsolete worldwide. It will have been supplanted by electric automobile. But to do that effectively three things have to happen: first, batteries capable of operating automobiles at highway speeds must be good for 450 miles. At present 200-250 it about the best. Secondly, the price of these automobiles must be brought into line with what the average consumer can afford. With an average price tag of around $40,000 at the low end, such cars are simply out of the range of the average consumer. But with such cars available, cities, towns, and villages are going to have to accommodate charging stations in their public parking lots, at a reasonable fee of course. And lastly, as the price of oil rises at first, such demand should fall with the advent of the wide-spread electric automobile. This in turn should mean lower diesel fuel prices which will keep our trucking and railroad industries viable. But even their, the Hybrid diesel engine must come into wide use and still have the ability to haul heavy loads.

 
I believe that in 50 years the most notable global crises will be a food shortage. But at the root of this will be two things: expanding deserts and extreme water shortages worldwide, even in the United States. One solute to the water problem is the desalinization process of turning ocean water into fresh water. Right now such costs are prohibitive but that does not mean with our young people and their new idea, the cost of such a process cannot be reduced to where the economics of desalinated ocean allows the flow of huge quantities of water to feed the world’s farmland. Man can develop friendly ecosystems but he has to be willing to pay for the initial costs. My generation is not so inclined but hopefully the next two generations will see this differently.
These three things, energy, food and water, are guaranteed to be at the root of future wars if we do not start acting in a positive manner now and in the immediate future.

 
If you happen to read this and are between the ages of 15 and 30, I do not envy the challenge ahead of you but I believe that when you see the enormity of our failures you will take on the challenge and succeed like we never have.

by

Thanksgiving


The first Thanksgiving was held in 1621 in Plimouth. That is how they spelled it back then so don’t correct me. Anyway, there were only about 50 white people at the meal and no one knows how many native Americans but probably at least an equal number. Those 50 settlers were giving thanks for having survived that first winter which took 50 of their brethren. But they were also thankful that the local natives were instrumental in assisting them in farming and fishing techniques. Most of those settlers had professions other than farming or fishing and knew little of either.

But can you imagine living in America those first few decades? Between the Plimouth Colony and the Massachusetts Bay Colony there were only a handful of towns, Boston, Salem, Ipswich, and Newbury being a few. A quick look at any map shows these towns all sit on the ocean. And each had its own port. Two things were certain in the minds of the early settlers: they would need to harvest the ocean and they would need a supply line from England.

Landing in those few towns was easy. But as soon as they traveled inland things became extremely difficult very quickly. The natives were not unhappy with their new neighbors but neither spoke the other’s language so to ask a question of the natives, like, where is there a large body of water inland that we might settle near, simply was not happening. That meant exploration. And remember, there were no roads, no maps, no knowledge. There may have been trails the natives used but where did they go?

The Pilgrims who settled Plymouth did not grow in size at the same rate as their brothers to the north did. For one thing, they were still persona non grata in England and for those still not in America, arranging travel was a challenge.

The Puritans, on the other hand, were mostly middle class Englishmen in somewhat good standing and could come and go in England as they pleased. The King, Chares I, was just as happy to see them go as they had proven to be a thorn in their side. They openly challenged the beliefs of the Church of England which, at the time, was quite the sin. But these Puritans were more than capable of bringing more than the shirts on their backs to the New World unlike the Pilgrims.

By 1636, however, a schism in the Boston Puritans arose when several of the men asked to see the charter which John Winthrop had held close to his chest. Once they read it, and discovered they could not be compelled to believe as Winthrop believed, something he had done, they quickly moved across the Charles River and founded Cambridge and a quaint little school was started to guarantee their form of religion was properly taught. They were the first Congregationalists, no central leadership, no hierarchy. And that little theological college took on the name of its founder, John Harvard.

Now when the Puritans first arrived in the New World, they first settled in what is today Charlestown. But all the water was brackish, not fit to drink or cook with. By chance they ran across a fellow who was living on the peninsula across the Charles River, William Braxton, who claimed he had a fresh water well. And so the move was on. But this amplifies the very basic needs of the settlers and the difficulty surrounding such needs. The Pilgrims had had a similar experience ten years prior when the first stopped at the tip of Cape Cod, Provincetown today, and were unable to locate drinking water. While most of the Pilgrims left the Mayflower’s tight confines for the shores of Cape Cod, a small group of others went in search of drinking water and hence came to Plymouth.

Traditionally the first thing settlers did was to build their church and then continue on to small dwelling surrounding the church. But where did they get the lumber, the nails, and the other materials needed to construct any building? New England abounds with trees which meant they needed a brook, for power, and a saw mill built next to it.

One thing is certain about both groups, they were happy to be in this new world, a world where they decided what their religion would be, a world where they made all the laws, all the rules and through a democratic process in the earliest days, they decided upon their leadership. The Virginia Colony, the Plimouth Colony, and the Massachusetts Bay Colony all had one thing in common, a charter. And it was from those charters that each colony first developed its laws and later each wrote a constitution for the colony which defined their form of government.

The Thanksgiving tradition died out pretty quickly in those early years. It was not celebrated as a national holiday until 1863 when Lincoln declared it such. The first president to broach the question, however, was Thomas Jefferson who said that it was a religious feast and that there must remain an absolute separation of church and state. I think it wise to remember that it was the travails of those early settlers, their mettle and hard work, that kept us together and gave us a land to be proud of and to be thankful for.

by

Despotic Donald: The Ultimate Narcissist


Let me start by telling you that I have over 30 years of service in the federal government, am now retired.  I spent the first almost 11 years of that service as a member of the U.S. Army on active duty: 1968 – 1979.  Then from 1987 – 2007 I was a systems analyst/computer specialist for the U.S. Department of transportation.  I mention this to validate what I know from experience within the government.

I have listened very carefully to Donald Trump and two things occur to me, both scary.  He is an absolute narcissist.  A narcissist cannot image that anything he says or does is wrong.  He believes that he is always misunderstood when people try to correct him.  But worst of all, a powerful narcissist, as Trump is, feels he can do just about anything with impunity; he believes he is above the law, that he has certain privileges that set him apart from most everyone else.  And as a despot, he wields his power without an sense of responsibility when things go wrong.  In his case, he does not feel stiffing people their wages when his companies went belly up is wrong.  And just last night (September 26), he thought the fact that he did not have to pay any income tax on over $600 million income meant he was smart.  Those were his words actually.  Had he paid only the 14% tax rate most of the middle class pays, he would have paid $84 million.  Don’t you think some school systems, some public health agencies, some poor municipality could have used that money?  It makes me wonder just how much income over the years he has paid nothing on.  And in that same sense, how many others do the same?  But that’s another subject.

Trump stated last night that he had been endorse but the Federal Agency ICE.  That is a very interesting statement since no agency, by law, can endorse or engage in any political activity.  And to do so would require action from that agency’s inspector general with possible criminal charges.  Every year I worked for the federal government I was required to attend ethics training and that is one subject, particularly during election years, that was emphasized.  It is a prohibited action.  I think more likely he got some official to say he is support Trump in his run.  But that official cannot say those words publicly as a member of ICE for to do so would “give the appearance of a conflict of interest,” very damning situation in the government.

Trump was born June 14, 1946 which means he was required in 1964 to register for the draft.  Curiously when he registered he was a student at the New York Military Academy, a military prep school.  I too went to a military prep school and I can tell you with certainty that a very large portion of my classmates went into the military.  We had 10 out of a class of 69 who went to one of the service academies, several others went to Virginia Military Institute and The Citadel.  We had a feeling of duty to our country.

Trump, like so many, got a college deferment while he attended Fordham University and after 2 years transferred to Penn.  That means he graduated in 1968, the height of the Vietnam war.  He did not continue on to grad school and probably would not have gotten a deferment had he, the exceptions were medical school and theological studies.  We know he is neither Dr. Donald nor Rev. Donald, so how did he avoid military service.  He was not married until 1977 so that was not it either.  He was quite the patriot!  What he was doing during the early 70s was using his family money to buy real estate, housing mainly.  It was also the first time, of many, that he was charged with “anti-black bias” in a suit brought by the Dept. of Justice.  In turn he filed suit against the federal gov’t for $100 million because he said the gov’t was trying to force him to rent to welfare recipients.  Contrary to what Trump said last night, the affair ended 2 years later when he settled with the DOJ.  The narcissist looks back upon such incidents and claims no wrong doing, no fault, no responsibility, and states he was innocent of anything said against him even when the facts show the opposite.  He cannot see such facts because they do not suit the narcissistic mind.

One of the strong-holds of the Republican Party has traditionally been the military.  Trump claims to have been endorsed by over 2o0 admirals and generals.  Why have we not seen this list?  You would certain want such a list front and center to prove your validity as Commander-in-Chief.  I suspect he had 2 or 3.  I noticed time after time during the debate Trump’s penchant for speaking in hyperbole.  And since he refuses to show proof, then hyperbole of the worst kind it is then.  Our military is literally tired from all the wars it has been forced to fight.  They are war weary.  But if you listen to Trump, it takes no imagination at all to see he is hell-bent on starting a war somewhere.  He thinks that is the was to kill of ISIS, and other undesirable elements.  Trump will probably still get a large portion of the military vote but it is unlikely he will get the 90% most Republican candidates have enjoyed over the years.  It is very difficult to have confidence in a commander-in-chief who has absolutely no military or government service experience.  And as an aside, if elected, he would be the first president to have neither.

There is one thing all president over the past 50 plus years have understood implicitly.  They knew you dealt with friends and enemies both via diplomacy.  The military necessarily is the last resort, when all forms of diplomacy have failed, AND, you are under attack.  Trump definitely does not understand this.

The man is dangerous and I am at a loss for what people see in him as a realistic leader, as someone who will keep our country safe and do what is best for the country, not what suits him.