Cryptowit

By William W. Lawrence Sr

Yl mnrgkgqr kyw qcc y jgefr ufcpc rfcpc gq lmlc, zsr ufw ksqr rfc ncqqgkgqr yjuywq psl rm zjmu gr msr?
Pclc Bcqayprcq

Answer to yesterday’s puzzle: If you make any money, the government shoves you in the creek once a year with it in your pockets, and all that don’t get wet you can keep.  ~
Will Rogers

Iron Lady Thatcher: Last From A Great Era

Iron Lady Thatcher: Last From A Great Era

There is a fascinating book by Irving Stone entitled, They Also Ran, the story of men defeated for the presidency. Stone, an historian, also analyzes the races to determine if the people chose wisely.

It’s a fascinating concept, as readers are left pondering how history may have been altered had there been a different outcome.

The opposite also holds true — how history would have changed had the winner not been victorious.

Reflecting on the the passing of England’s Iron Lady, Margaret Thatcher, it seems obvious — for so many reasons — that the Brits did indeed choose their leader wisely. And for the most part, the world owes them a debt of gratitude for doing so, for it is far safer because of Maggie.

With both Ronald Reagan and Thatcher now gone, the pangs of sadness resonate with the ending of a golden era. For those who lived through superpower showdowns and nuclear war games, it is impossible not to give Thatcher a special place in your heart. As America’s greatest ally in the Cold War, she never wavered in looking the mightiest Evil Empire of all time right in the eye, saying, “Give me your best shot — I can take it.”

*****

Every generation has a tendency to view the past through rose-colored glasses, remembering the good times while letting the bad melt away.  It’s a human trait that allows us to move past traumatic events so that life can continue.

However, one can make a strong case that, rainbows and lollypop reminiscing aside, the 1980’s truly were a remarkable decade, an enviable time when the country was unified, evidenced by substantial electoral victories by Reagan (and Thatcher). It was an era marked by monumental events thought unthinkable just a decade prior. The malaise of the 70’s had significantly eroded people’s faith, not just in their leaders, but in themselves.  Optimism for a better tomorrow hit a brick wall in America and Britain, and for good reason: runaway inflation; interest rates of 20 percent; rationed gas; an aggressive Soviet Union; and the Iranian hostage crisis (444 days long). The pinnacle of failure came during the calamitous rescue attempt, which, in addition to the gut-wrenching loss of life, was an embarrassment of epic proportions.

It was this widespread self-doubt and loss of hope that led to the election of Reagan and Thatcher. They took the helm of a West in search of its identity, and carried the dreams of billions on their shoulders. In charting a new course, they once again lit the beacons of hope, resurrecting the West to become that famous shining City Upon A Hill.

And they succeeded. Big time.

Hostages were freed, militaries were beefed up, and economies roared back to life.  With work came prosperity — hopes and dreams were not just restored, but realized. Peace through strength became the mantra, and though that policy was wildly effective (it eventually bankrupted and destroyed the Soviet Union, freeing hundreds of millions), it was not without its tests.

Who could forget Thatcher’s decisiveness in immediately dispatching the British fleet to reclaim the Falklands after they were invaded? That act of war by the Argentinians, by the way, was calculated on the belief that Britain had neither the resources nor the stomach to wage a conflict half a world away.

Were they ever wrong.

A throwback to another era — and likely the last time we’ll ever see it— Ships of the British Line steaming 8,000 miles in the mold of Nelson and Hornblower, freeing the people and routing the Argentinians. Perhaps most significant, Thatcher’s bold action put an exclamation point on the undeniable fact that British Pride was back.

Years later, Thatcher took considerable heat — but never faltered — when she allowed American bombers based in Britain to attack Libya after Gaddafi’s acts of terror. And of course, her chiding of George H.W. Bush as he wavered about helping Kuwait after Iraq’s invasion will forever define her testicular fortitude: “Remember George, this is no time to go wobbly!”  Classic Margaret Thatcher.

Back home, she embarked on the Herculean task of reviving the sluggish, bureaucrat-laden economy, succeeding by instituting labor reforms, free-market principles and privatization initiatives. Just like Reagan, she endured some very tough days before things turned around, but she held fast, declaring to doubters in her own Party, “You turn if you want to…this Lady’s not for turning.”

Turn she did not. And she was reelected twice.

*****

As effective as Thatcher was, she had her drawbacks, none more significant than her handling of Northern Ireland. Declaring “crime is crime is crime; it is not political,” she let Bobby Sands and nine other Irish prisoners die from their hunger strike as they protested their deplorable conditions and political status.

Debating the England-Ireland issue is for another column. It is clear, however,  that while Thatcher made some progress for peace in Northern Ireland, it wasn’t nearly enough.  True, the conflict didn’t originate on her watch, but as a strong-willed leader, she could have and should have done more to rectify that situation.  Too many —on both sides — died, too many families were needlessly ripped apart, and too many lives were ruined in Ireland during Maggie’s reign.

With few exceptions, the British Empire left the places they occupied considerably better off than when they found it.  Not so with Northern Ireland, and the troubles occurring there in the 1980’s remain a black mark on what is otherwise a legacy for the record books.

*****

Reflecting on the 1980’s, it is clear that both Americans and Brits were far more unified in their respective countries. Sure, there were political rivalries and disagreements, but not nearly as mean-spirited and downright uncivil as today. Thatcher and Reagan could have a knock-down, drag-out fight with an opponent during the day and share a beer — and a laugh —that evening.

Maybe that was because we weren’t the only superpower back then. We knew the sobering capabilities of our enemy — and the consequences of failure in meeting its challenges. Maybe it was because, despite our political differences, that Cold War kept us sharply focused, binding us together as a people facing the ultimate threat.

But even more, it was because we had great leaders, true visionaries who believed in a hell of a lot more than themselves and their next election. Great communicators, Reagan and Thatcher were principled, God-fearing stalwarts who made us once again believe in something that had been lost before they came along: ourselves.

Gipper, your best friend is with you again. Iron Lady, thank you. Rest in Peace.

Chris Freind is an independent commentator who operates FreindlyFireZone.com.

Emptiness Of The 4th Estate

As many Americans remain unaware of the horrors created by the “pro choice” movement as unveiled by the Kermit Gosnell trial, and are unlikely to know that the man for whom they voted for president is a staunch supporter of making legal the deeds  committed by Gosnell, many are unaware that 700 special forces veterans have signed a letter demanding a new investigation into the  Sept. 11, 2012 Benghazi attack that killed three of their comrades along with diplomat Chris Stevens.

Apparently, they don’t believe  the explanations offered by the Obama administration and reported by the old media a.k.a the “mainstream media” the MSM, the lamestream media.

Emptiness Of The 4th Estate

Prisoner Unemployment Benefits Would End With Bill

Prisoner Unemployment Benefits Would End With Bill — The Pennsylvania House voted unanimously last week in support of legislation to increase penalties on individuals who commit willful fraud to obtain unemployment compensation benefits, including cases of fraud by incarcerated individuals, reports State Rep. Jim Cox (R-129).

House Bill 403 would impose an additional 52-week penalty for claimants who illegally apply for benefits while in prison. This penalty would apply to these same individuals in the future should they become eligible and attempt to apply for unemployment benefits again.

In addition to fraud by prisoners, House Bill 403 also addresses other types of fraud. It would increase the monetary penalty from its current range of $100 to $1,000 to $500 to $1,500 for claimants who knowingly make false statements to obtain unemployment benefits.

It also would increase the minimum number of penalty weeks from two to 10 and remove the current four-year statute of limitations. The bill also would allow for penalties to be collected through liens, civil action or any other means available by law for up to 12 years after the end of the benefit year.

House Bill 403 now heads to the Senate for consideration.

 

Prisoner Unemployment Benefits Would End With Bill

Prisoner Unemployment Benefits Would End With Bill

Cryptowit

By William W. Lawrence Sr

Li brx pdnh dqb prqhb, wkh jryhuqphqw vkryhv brx lq wkh fuhhn rqfh d bhdu zlwk lw lq brxu srfnhwv, dqg doo wkdw grq’w jhw zhw brx fdq nhhs.  ~
Zloo Urjhuv

Answer to yesterday’s puzzle:  If thou have much give abundantly: if thou have a little, take care even so to bestow willingly a little.
Tobit

Pennsylvania Liquor Control Conundrum

Pennsylvania Liquor Control Conundrum

In 2010, Gov. Tom Corbett was elected by a wide margin, in part because of his insistence that the state-controlled liquor system be privatized — an issue on which he was absolutely correct.

Despite that being a cornerstone of his campaign, nothing was accomplished during his first two years, even though he enjoyed historic Republican majorities in both legislative chambers.

Since privatizing liquor is one of the few issues that enjoys a large consensus, it’s baffling why it took so long for the Republicans to put forth a plan. Now they have finally done so, yet it’s so ill-conceived that state-store union employees are punch-drunk with elation.

For now, though, it’s important to realize why privatization is so long overdue.

Sometimes the grass really is greener elsewhere. For Pennsylvanians, that “green” is all the money saved by consumers in other states because they aren’t gouged when buying alcohol.

For the uninitiated, here is a primer for how Pennsylvania’s alcohol monopoly works:

Pennsylvania is the largest purchaser of booze in the country. The state government, through the Liquor Control Board (LC, controls the purchase, distribution and sale of all wine and liquor. You might think that with such immense clout, we would have outstanding selection and competitive pricing. But as we all know, that’s clearly not the case.

Interestingly, the LCB is charged with two distinct, and inherently contradictory, roles. While it is responsible for raising revenue through the sale of wine and liquor, it is also charged with controlling the sale of booze throughout Pennsylvania. By definition, if the LCB is succeeding at one, it must be failing at the other.

The major reason why alcohol is so expensive is courtesy of an 18 percent “temporary” tax. So a $10 bottle jumps to $11.80 — and that’s before the 6 percent sales tax is calculated, making Pennsylvania inherently uncompetitive. But since it’s a government monopoly, the bureaucrats don’t care. Oh, and why the 18 percent levy? To rebuild Johnstown after its second flood.

Which occurred in 1936. So much for “temporary.”

Anyone traveling outside Pennsylvania knows how refreshing it is to enter a grocery store and, remembering you need a bottle of wine, browse the plethora of vino at your fingertips. Since others accomplish this feat with little difficulty, it’s incomprehensible that the nation’s sixth-largest state can’t — or, more accurately, won’t — do the same.

It is infinitely more efficient when a private company, responsive to the needs of the free market (instead of bureaucrats), stocks its shelves with items that consumers actually want, at a fair market price. It is the core principle on which America was founded.

But Pennsylvania remains stuck in the Dark Ages, choosing to remain there. It hasn’t dawned on the politicos that they are losing untold revenue because of their Draconian system, as millions cross state lines to fill their liquor cabinets.

And despite protections from the Interstate Commerce Clause, if you are caught bringing alcohol into Pennsylvania, it’s a criminal offense. In fact, such “criminals” used to have their cars confiscated for doing so.

To be fair, today’s LCB has made substantial progress. Not too long ago, customers had to place their orders at the counter, since browsing was not permitted. The clerk would disappear into the bowels of the store, only to return 10 minutes later, more often than not stating that they were “out of stock” and asking for another choice. Now imagine that scene at Christmas, with 30 people in line.

But that’s not all.

Nothing was chilled. No ancillary items such as tonic water were sold. No employees were permitted to offer advice. And credit cards were not accepted.

And all this because former Gov. Gifford Pinchot, who as a young man became violently sick while imbibing overseas, became determined to make alcohol as difficult as possible to obtain.

But the LCB’s improvements amount to being valedictorian of summer school. The whole system has to be scrapped. The ultimate irony is that the Keystone State, birthplace of American democracy and cradle of liberty, continues down the path of state control and government regulation, to the detriment of its 12 million citizens.

Pennsylvania Liquor Control Conundrum

Pennsylvania Potholes Can Be Reported

Pennsylvania Potholes Can Be Reported — Pennsylvania drivers can contact the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) to report potholes and other problems on state roads, reports State Rep. Jim Cox (R-129)

Based on the caller’s phone number, calls are directed to local PennDOT maintenance facilities where problems can receive the appropriate attention. Callers are encouraged to:

–Report the county and municipality where the problem is located.

–Report the state route number, which can be found on the small white-and-black signs posted along state roads, where the problem is located.

–Describe familiar landmarks nearby in order to help PennDOT crews locate the problem.

The toll-free maintenance hotline can be reached at 1-800-FIX-ROAD (1-800-349-7623). In addition to reporting potholes, motorists may also report missing highway signs, shoulder drop-offs, roadway washouts and other potential hazards.

 

Pennsylvania Potholes Can Be Reported

Pennsylvania Potholes Can Be Reported

Cryptowit

By William W. Lawrence Sr

By qbi qcff hin ywihigcty qcff bupy ni uaihcty.
Wihzowcom

Answer to yesterday’s puzzle: I’m not a headline guy. I know that as long as I was following Ruth to the plate I could have stood on my head and no one would have known the difference.
Lou Gehrig