Category: Guest Authors

Tech Addiction Stronger Than Storm

By Chris Freind

Thank God for Starbucks. Or, more accurately, their Wi-Fi. Because of that “gift,” many who lose power during storms don’t miss a beat being themselves, otherwise known as anti-social, bratty, and downright rude behavior caused by an acute obsession with iPads and smartphones.

Hey, I love technology as much as the next guy. Lost? Activate GPS. Need to check on the kids while stuck for hours because you’re behind all the idiots who crashed their 4-wheels thinking they could do 65 in snow and ice? Call home.

But one of the saddest commentaries on society is our ridiculous addiction to technology. Go to any coffee house, restaurant or family dinner table, and you will hear very few words spoken, and see even fewer eyes, both kids’ and adults’, looking at someone else. Instead, they gaze at their phones.

I know we’re all extremely important people, but for once, couldn’t we delay text messages and Facebook updates — you know, the ones with fantastically stupid inspirational quotes and postings fishing for “Likes” and “you look awesome” comments? (Reality check: you don’t look awesome. We’re lying. Get a nose job, and please, go see a dentist.)

God forbid that in a power outage, families actually talk, play board games, or read books — real books, with real pages.

People have become so fixated with their phones that they can no longer communicate like humans, and it shows. Person-to-person conversations are becoming archaic, writing is appalling (in schools and the business world) and public speaking is abysmal.

Before this technology, surveys showed that people feared making a speech worse than dying. Since we have devolved from that point, where are we now? Do we fear it more than watching Denver in another Super Bowl?

Call me a dinosaur, but living in the ’80s, before things became so impersonal, wasn’t such a bad thing. And living for a few days like they did in the 1880s isn’t so horrible either. It builds character. Even better, when families put down the phones and actually do things together, some kids might find out they have siblings. And that there are things called sleds and snowballs and, the biggest shocker, shovels to clear neighbors’ sidewalks for money. Which is also known as “work.”

And can we stop bashing power companies, at least for now? Many East Coasters who lost power were up in arms within the first 24 hours, clearly part of the “entitlement class” who think they have the “right” to never lose power. Heavy snow, followed by ice? So what? How dare I be in the dark without heat!

To those, a simple message: shut up and buy a generator. I know. Everybody’s going to get one now because they’re fed up. Except that they won’t. They’ll talk it about ad nauseam, but once the winter ends, they’ll forget about it. Until it snows again next winter (and the cycle of complaining continues).

It is routine procedure for power companies to be audited after every large outage to gauge how well they well prepared for, and responded to, large storms. Since millions of Americans don’t yet know how their respective providers performed, let’s give those companies the benefit of the doubt and applaud the guys working 16-hour shifts in frigid weather, braving many dangers, including generators that can backfeed the lines and kill the workers.

And let’s not forget how quickly huge work forces were mobilized, as linemen typically come from far and wide. In fact, after this latest storm, crews came from two other countries: Canada and Arkansas.

Meanwhile, the debate du jour is whether we should be placing power lines underground. Great idea, but there’s nowhere near enough money to do it, as it’s ungodly expensive (estimates are a million dollars per mile).

Could we get that cost down? Probably. And, most certainly, communities should explore a 10- or 15-year underground program for the most sensitive or loss-prone areas. Power providers’ revenue comes from its customers, so there would be a rate increase, but some of the cost could also be borne by local and state governments allocating our taxpayer money (it’s ours, not theirs) to such an important initiative.

If a local utility could place between 500 to 1000 miles of wires underground per year, outages would decrease, maintenance costs would go down, and businesses would stay open — producing more tax revenue and keeping people’s paychecks rolling. It would be a win for everyone.

Government wastes billions a year (and trillions when you throw in the federal stimulus program that produced zero return on investment). So for a change, maybe we could allocate those funds more intelligently, such as securing our highly vulnerable electrical infrastructure.

But of course, that would be a common sense solution, so expect to see it when hell freezes over.

 

Visit BillLawrenceDittos.com for Tech Addiction Stronger Than Storm
Visit BillLawrenceOnline.com for Tech Addiction Stronger Than Storm

 

Ignorance Or Arrogance?

By Jim Vanore

I follow sports for what I consider the proper reason: They are a pleasant diversion from life’s everyday annoyances—from things like car payments, health issues, bank balances, income tax, political correctness, the shrinking waistband on my trousers…

I don’t follow (listen to, watch, or read about) sports for lessons in life. And certainly not for updates on what is and is not proper social behavior. So I became annoyed (infuriated actually) when I recently heard a 28-year old sports commentator (who by the way, has been on Earth less than half the time I’ve been following sports) make the blasé declaration that, “We’re not offended by that anymore,” while referring to the use of profanity in a public forum.

Really? We are not offended? Who the hell is “we” in his absolute affirmation? Was he referring to our society in general? Was it sports fans in particular? Was he perhaps singling out 20-something-year-olds, for whom he obviously (thinks he) is the spokesman?

His remark was made in objection to a penalty levied by the National Basketball Association on a player for shouting the profanity de rigueur, politely called the ‘f-word’, not once, but multiple times (to anyone who would listen, I guess) during a well-attended game.

Neophyte adults such as this Harvard graduate (Could the banter around that campus cafeteria be any worse than that heard in a military chow-hall?) often seem to make the mistake of believing that anything happening before their birth (indeed, before their cognizance) should be relegated to pre-history. Using that reasoning, I suppose I must accept his view (elsewise I might offend him).

So I suppose I could casually babble that language in his presence, or that of his wife, mother, sister, grandmother, daughter, or anyone he values, since, “He is not offended by that anymore.”

If the f-word does not offend him, what does? The n-word?  The s-word?  The q-word?  The c-word?  The r-word?  The m-word?

How about the a-word? Oh, hell…I’m just going to say it: The kid is arrogant! He must actually believe that his sensibilities set the standard for society…for sports fans…for 20-something-year-olds…

He certainly does not speak for most of the 20-somethings I interact with. (Of course, none attended Harvard.)

This is not the first time I’ve been resolute on this topic, and it’s not the first time that I’ve qualified my opinion by citing my résumé: After four years in the military and 22 years in the Philadelphia Police Department, I doubt there’s any expletive a novice could come up with that I haven’t heard, imagined, or broadcast myself.

Read more at Good Writer’s Block

 

Common Core Questions

By Joanne Yurchak

Common Core State Standards (recently renamed PA Core Standards) is a costly, untested, educational experiment that was foisted on Pennsylvania’s schools without legislative approval. When full math and language arts implementation began in PA’s public schools in July of 2013, few educators, school administrators, school board members and legislators understood the particulars of this initiative that will fundamentally transform our educational system. Currently, even fewer parents and taxpayers understand the variety of motives for its formulation, its methodologies, its huge unfunded mandates, and its potential harmful effects on Pennsylvania’s educational system and economy.

Listed below are several questions that citizens should pose to their own district’s school board members and school administrators in order to gain a better understanding of the Common Core initiative and parental and student rights with regard to its mandates.

1. There are multiple indications that the federal government will wrest control of our educational system from local school boards and parents via the Common Core initiative.

Question: Is this likely to occur in our school district? If the answer is “No,” can you provide assurances and convincing reasons why this will not happen?

2. Beginning in 2017, the passage of three Keystones — Algebra I, Biology, and Literature – will be a requirement for high school graduation in PA.

Question: What is the estimated cost to our district for the remediation and/or project- based assessments that must be provided to students who are unable to pass these Keystones?

3. Pennsylvania’s regulations describe: (1) an opportunity for students to opt out of the PSSA’s and the Keystones on religious grounds, and (2) the right of a Chief School Administrator to waive the Keystone graduation requirements on a case-by-case basis for “good cause.”

Question: Will our district fully explain the specifics of each of these options to parents?

Question: If the number of students opting out and/or being given waivers is too large in a given school: (1) how will that affect the performance ratings of that school, and (2) how will that school’s compliance with PA’s regulations be evaluated?

4. There are major concerns that the student data collection that is tied to acceptance of federal funding for the Common Core initiative will intrude on students’ privacy rights.

Question: What specific information will be included in a student’s data file? Will data be exclusively academic or will behavioral, familial and/or biometric categories be included?

Question: Will parents be permitted to review what is in their children’s data files? If not, why not? With whom can PA schools legally share information in students’ data files?

5. Over the last several decades, educrats have devised educational experiments such as “Outcome Based Education,” the “New Math,” and the vastly unpopular “No Child Left Behind,” in which our nation’s students have been used as guinea pigs. All of these experiments have proven to be abject failures in improving educational outcomes and each has disrupted learning in a multitude of ways at great expense to the taxpayer.

Question: In light of the failures of the aforementioned experiments, why should we believe the “experts” when they say that Common Core, often described as “No Child Left Behind on Steroids,” will improve the educational performance and learning outcomes of our students?

Citizens must be persistent in obtaining answers from their school districts and must remember that an unasked question won’t be answered. A fully informed public is essential to impede governmental overreach into our educational process and also to understand the toxic consequences of Common Core. The well-being of our most precious possession – our children – is at stake!

For additional information, E-Mail nocommoncoreinpa@yahoo.com.


Editor’s note: Gov. Tom Corbett is on board with Common Core.  Bob Guzzardi, who is challenging him in the May 20 Republican gubernatorial primary is against it.

Colette Moran tweeted the below image of an answer key of her daughter’s Common Core-based third grade work book back in October.

Save Charter Schools

After Barack Obama gave a thousand campaign speeches on Iraq, Guantanamo Bay, and the economy, one of his first actions upon taking office as president was to begin gutting a tiny school-choice scholarship program in Washington, D.C. And now newly inaugurated New York mayor Bill de Blasio has, as one of his first agenda items, begun the gutting of the city’s charter schools, which are public schools that operate with some limited measure of independence from the usual education bureaucracies. Like President Obama, Mayor de Blasio is here engaged in plain, naked payback, rewarding the teachers’ unions that funded and manned his campaign by taking hundreds of millions of dollars away from projects they despise. If a private city contractor had bankrolled the mayor’s campaign and been repaid by having him hobble its competition, we’d call it simple corruption. And it is simple corruption, legal though it may be.

Mayor de Blasio intends to redirect money from the city’s charter schools to help pay for expanded pre-kindergarten education, which is to say for a full-employment program for his union supporters. Expanding pre-kindergarten education is a questionable investment: The premier federal pre-kindergarten program, Head Start, has been shown time and time again to provide no lasting results  to its supposed beneficiaries. Robust support for early-childhood education sounds like the sort of thing that should work, but the empirical results are that it does not deliver on its promises.

New York City’s charter schools are consistently flooded with applications from parents desperate to rescue their children from the city’s dysfunctional standard-issue public schools. There are many metrics by which the success of an educational institution can be measured, but if we are guided in some part by the revealed preferences of New York City’s parents, then the evidence is overwhelming that charter schools are a much more attractive choice when the alternative is the product Mayor de Blasio’s union bosses are offering up. Charter-school operators, pointedly seeking to remind the administration that they are, still, operating city public schools, have asked only that their capital and operating funds be proportional to the populations they serve: “A kid is a kid is a kid,” as charter-school executive Eva Moskowitz put it. “We are public charter schools. The operating revenue should be the same. The capital revenue should be the same.”

New York’s charter schools serve a largely minority and low-income population, in a city where the traditional schools barely manage to retain half of the young black men who enter the ninth grade to graduation four years later. Educating the children of New York City entails some serious challenges, and the charter schools have not achieved what anybody would call dramatic success. They simply provide a superior alternative to traditional schools for many families. Results need not be spectacular to be meaningful.

As a report from the Brookings Institution put it:

Two recent rigorous evaluations have found that NYC charter schools are, on average, doing a substantially better job for students than the regular public schools with which they directly compete. For example, student gains in math in charter schools compared to traditional public schools are equivalent to roughly five additional months of schooling in a single school year. Likewise, students attending the small high schools of choice opened by the Bloomberg administration have high school graduation rates that are about 10 percentage points greater than students who wanted to attend these same schools but lost a lottery for admission.
Judging by the application rates, New York City parents love charter schools. The evidence suggests they do a meaningfully if not radically better job than their traditional counterparts. They are seeking only the same resources to which they would be entitled if they were not charter schools, meaning they place no special burden on taxpayers. The only faction opposed to them is the teachers’ unions, which seek to legally eliminate all competition and all alternatives.

Charter schools are a tiny crack in the Berlin Wall of the government-school monopoly, far short of the liberalized approach to education we would prefer. But they are a significant improvement that comes at very little cost, and Mayor de Blasio’s attack on them elevates the interests of his political cronies over those of the city’s children. It is low and it is shameful, and the Panel for Education Policy, which has the opportunity to stop this abuse in March, should see to it that the mayor’s proposal does not stand.

Visit National Review Online for similar stories

Save Charter Schools

Blue White Beats Black White

 

By Chris Freind

Penn State football fans have a big reason to rejoice.

Their new coach, Pennsylvania native James Franklin, brings to Happy Valley a great record. As head coach at Vanderbilt, a perennial doormat in the SEC (the nation’s toughest conference), he led the Commodores to three straight bowl games and a Top 25 ranking.

In the weeks since he was hired to take over the program, Franklin has said and done all the right things, putting together a dynamite staff and pushing for the best recruits to play for the Nittany Lions. The guy has been Mr. Blue and White.

Which is why it was somewhat disheartening to see how much attention is being paid to another color. Same goes for new Texas Longhorns coach Charlie Strong. Both are black.

That factor played prominently in the news coverage of their hirings. Headlines such as “Penn State And University Of Texas Make History With Black Coach Hires,” and “Historic Black Coach Hires At Texas, Penn State” leave little gray area for any other reason.

Such as merit.

Make no mistake. Both men (Strong came from powerhouse Louisville) had more than enough merit to earn their new positions.

But tragically, too many in America still can’t get over the black-white issue, continuing to inject race. They don’t seem to understand that the only race that matters is the one we all belong to — the human race.

While we just celebrated the accomplishments of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., in many respects we continue to lose racial ground. Making the sin mortal is that it’s a choice of our own making. Rather than viewing America through colorblind eyes, we continue to revert to the time when people were judged for one reason: The color of a person’s skin.

Resurrecting such barriers between people, whether by well-intentioned but woefully misguided souls, or by those who have despicably hijacked Dr. King’s legacy for self-promotional and financial reasons, has no place in an America striving to right the wrongs of its past. Opening old wounds serves no purpose other than to foster resentment on all sides.

Both coaches were eminently qualified to lead these storied programs, but their accomplishments became marginalized the second that race became part of the discussion.

Sure, if they had been the first black coaches hired at major football schools, significant media attention would have been warranted as another barrier was taken down. But that milestone was achieved long ago. In fact, the number of black head coaches at the 125 major Division I schools roughly mirrors the percentage of blacks in America.

If there were only three or four minority coaches, you could make an argument that collusion was being used to exclude black coaches. But that is not the case. So when people clamor that the number still isn’t high enough, what should we do? Require a particular percentage? Determined by whom? Should it be five points more than the 13 percent black population in America? Or 10? And what about other races? What should their numbers be?

Will college football head down the racial path that the NFL has chosen with its mandating of the Rooney Rule, where teams are required to interview at least one “minority” candidate when hiring a head coach or general manager? While the intention may be noble, it doesn’t work in real life, especially in modern-day sports.

The NFL doesn’t understand that fans don’t give a damn about skin color, as they are partial only to championship gold. Teams aren’t stupid. They will hire the best and the brightest, regardless of race. So why invent a problem when there isn’t one? College football — and the media — would be smart to put that idea in their playbooks.

Trumpeting color is demeaning to the very people it is designed to “help.” Instead of uniting, it divides. Instead of equality, it promotes the notion of special privilege based on color. Instead of building upon the American spirit of competitiveness and achievement — may the best person win — it robs all candidates, white and black, of dignity and respect.

Franklin, a class act, said it best: “… the most important thing is we’re getting to a point where universities and organizations and corporations are hiring people based on merit and the most qualified guy.”

Too bad former Georgetown basketball coach John Thompson has never learned that lesson. According to an Associated Press article, he said it doesn’t make sense that so many players, but so few coaches, are black.

Thompson said, “So (when) you are not in management, you’re still perceived as the one who picks the cotton rather than owns the plantation.”

Are you kidding? What would have happened had the same statement been made by a white? He would have been pillories on the altar of political correctness. But since Thompson’s statement was met by silence from the very media playing up race on other issues, it demonstrates that the double-standard continues.

The battle for civil rights is too often being used to advance personal and political agendas. Sadly, we are coming full circle: separate and unequal; separate but equal; equal; and now separate again. That’s not why so many sacrificed their lives, and it’s certainly not what Dr. King advocated. Instead, he dreamed of a nation where people would not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.

Sure, racism still exists, and always will. But so long as we fight it — not promote it — we’re on the side of the angels.

So congratulations to Coach Franklin — and may the only colors that matter be Nittany Lion Blue and White.

Visit BillLawrenceDittos.com for Blue White Beats Black White
Visit BillLawrenceOnline.com for Blue White Beats Black White

 

Gutless GOP Fears Immigration Reform

Since the president’s State of the Union address is one week away, the annual debate on immigration reform will be in full swing. With the consistency of a broken record, ideologues on both sides will push for hard-line measures — to the absolute delight of the Washington establishment, which knows that doing so will kill any chance at a good bill.

Immigration reform hasn’t gone anywhere in decades, making one thing abundantly clear: Despite saying all the right things to appease their bases, neither party’s ruling class wants any part of it.

The Democrats benefit from illegal immigrants because many become aligned with that party, and yes, some even vote. More significant, labor unions — a de facto arm of the Democratic Party, misguided as it is — enjoy the current system because unchecked illegal immigration increases their ranks, swells their coffers, and generates more support to the party.

Republicans cower from reform for two reasons: First, they erroneously believe that pushing immigration issues hurts their standing with the Latino electorate. It doesn’t. Their lack of vision and inability to explain to Latinos how traditional Republican principles would make their lives better (lower taxes, energy independence, competitive schools, right to work) are what kills Hispanic support for the GOP. Second, too many influential big business constituencies lobby against reform since they benefit from cheap, under-the-table labor — pocketing the difference while consumers get the screws.

However, should the unthinkable occur — a chance at comprehensive reform — here are some ideas that should be on the table:

1. Leave the rhetoric behind and do not demonize illegal immigrants. It’s not their fault that the United States deliberately fails to enact strong measures to deter illegal immigration. Most are simply trying to make a better life for themselves and their families, often enduring unspeakable hardships, from terrifying border crossings to not seeing their loved ones for years. That said, we must not get caught up in emotional sob stories. There is a legal way to enter America; doing so illegally, and staying here, are crimes that must be dealt with fairly, but strictly. As President Reagan aptly stated, “A nation without borders is not a nation.”

2. America is, by far, the most generous nation on Earth regarding legal immigration, annually allowing entry to over one million. But since legal immigrants are being slapped in the face every time someone enters illegally, perhaps we should halt admitting the former until we enforce laws controlling the latter.

3. Build the border wall — period. It is disgraceful that the wall is not yet completed, despite authorizations to do so. Costs could be controlled by employing non-violent prisoners and yes — illegal immigrants — to finish construction, with funding derived from drug seizures. Unquestionably, secure (and fully constructed) border walls substantially cut down the “supply” side of equation. Just ask Israel.

And it’s not just illegal immigrants crossing, but drug traffickers and terrorists. If nothing else, protecting our children and eliminating al-Qaida’s free pass with a suitcase nuclear weapon should be everyone’s top priorities. Or we could wait until Phoenix and New York get vaporized before stopping illegal border crossings, though that might be a tad late.

4. Institute self-deportation policies. Employing stringent law enforcement measures on businesses, levying taxes and eliminating lavish public benefits all level the playing field for legal workers, and would end much of the free ride enjoyed by illegal immigrants. Many will find it so onerous that they will return home on their own accord.

Those pushing mass deportation are simply insane. It would literally take an army to find and deport the 12 to 20 million illegal immigrants, and the price tag would be astronomical. Worst of all, it would turn the U.S. into a bigger police state than it already is.

5. Federally mandate that every business utilize the free E-Verify system, which quickly determines the legal status of a potential hire (currently, its use is at the discretion of each state). This front line tool ensures a legal workforce. Companies in noncompliance should face stiff penalties — from hefty fines to the loss of business licenses, and criminal prosecution should be employed where warranted. Hitting businesses where it hurts the most — the pocketbook — always proves effective.

6. Until the illegal immigration issue is settled, there should be no government (a.k.a. “taxpayer”) assistance of any kind — local, state and federal. No drivers’ licenses, no community college, no benefits. No matter how compelling the arguments may be to lend assistance, illegal immigration is against the law. Government assistance to illegals is unequivocally aiding and abetting criminals. Change the law, but don’t ignore it whenever convenient. To do so leads to a total societal breakdown.

7. Illegal immigrants who have been convicted of crimes should serve their time and be deported immediately, yet they are routinely released back into our society — where they commit more crimes (statistics show that their recidivism rate is very high). Why aren’t they deported? Because their home countries don’t want them. Guess what? Tough. Pass the bill that was introduced five years ago that eliminates American aid to any country refusing its citizens. We’ll see how quickly they change their tune.

8. Most controversial of all, we need to address the illegals already here. We cannot deport them all; neither should we give them amnesty. A reasonable approach would be to document them and issue a long-term or lifetime work visa; permanently deny them American citizenship and the right to vote; require them to pass a criminal background check; have them begin paying taxes immediately; and levy a significant fine (deducted in installments directly from paychecks).

Some will call that amnesty, but it’s actually something else: Realistic. It penalizes lawbreakers, documents millions by bringing them out of the shadowy underworld, and makes them, and American citizens, considerably safer. It would increase tax revenue and, for the first time, make formerly illegal workers pay into the benefits programs. This system would also have the effect of making some return home, since they would quickly find that having to compete fair-and-square in the workforce is not easy, especially when there is a significant labor surplus and real unemployment near 15 percent.

There are no easy answers to illegal immigration, and neither side will ever be fully satisfied. But one thing is certain: if Congress fails to act soon, the situation will get exponentially worse for everyone.

In that case, Congress should receive no amnesty — and face immediate deportation from voters.

 Gutless GOP Fears Immigration Reform

 

Paycheck Protection Benefits Teachers

 By Matthew J. Brouillette Pope Says Redistribute Wealth

Pennsylvania’s AFL-CIO union boss Rick Bloomingdale is absolutely right that there is a “war on workers” here in Pennsylvania—he should know, because he is waging it. His recent opinion piece on PennLive tries, and fails, to defend the indefensible, getting the facts wrong in the process.

What has Bloomingdale so upset?

It’s a proposal that would simply stop using public resources to collect union campaign contributions and political money for government unions.

Far from an attack on workers, this reform would actually give union members a stronger voice in how their dues and campaign dollars are spent. It is not anti-union. It is pro-worker.

If Rick Bloomingdale were interested in protecting the middle class, he’d be standing alongside teachers like Rob Brough rather than against them.

Just ask Rob Brough, a teacher in Pennsylvania who must pay fees to a government union, the Pennsylvania State Education Association, in order to keep his job.

“Their agenda and political ideals are counter to what I believe, and it is a kick in the teeth every time my dues are withdrawn from my hard-earned paycheck and handed off to some organization that I would never contribute to of my own free will,” Brough said.

Shouldn’t the PSEA have to look Rob in the face, ask him for his $680 in dues, and then explain how the union plans to spend it? Since Rob is forced to pay this money to keep his teaching job, isn’t it fair that he should be empowered to have a stronger voice in how his money is spent on politics?

Right now, the leaders of the PSEA and other government unions don’t have to do that. They can use taxpayer resources to collect campaign contributions and political money directly out of employees’ paychecks.

Not only is this unfair to taxpayers; it hurts the very workers government unions claim to represent. Union members are harmed because union bosses don’t have to explain the unions’ political expenditures to members.

That’s what the legislation Bloomingdale references would fix. And he’s wrong that it would affect “all unions”—it only affects government unions, the ones that represent people whose salaries we taxpayers pay.

Bloomingdale argues that ending this special legal privilege for government unions and requiring them to play by the same rules as everyone else “singles out unions only for unnecessary and burdensome rules and restrictions.”

In reality, it is teachers like Rob who are singled out for onerous and unfair restrictions on their hard-earned money—not union bosses.

Imagine if the National Rifle Association or Planned Parenthood demanded taxpayers pay for the collection of their lobbying funds and campaign contributions. They would be ridiculed and rejected – and rightfully so.

Government unions enjoy this same benefit of using your township, borough, city, and state tax dollars to collect their political money and deny union members the ability to hold their union bosses more accountable. No other private or political organization enjoys this financial and political privilege.

Unions can – and should – play by the same rules as everyone else. One questions how viable and relevant government unions are today if, as Bloomingdale implies, they are so dependent on taxpayer subsidies that they would have to close up shop should they lose this exclusive legal privilege.

Paycheck protection would do one thing: Stop the use of taxpayer resources for politics. That, in turn, would set teachers free, allowing them to make their own choices with their own money. It won’t end collective bargaining or keep unions from collecting dues. They would simply have to do it themselves.

Protecting the paychecks of union members and taxpayers is supported statewide. No less than three separate polls of Pennsylvanians reveal overwhelming support for ending Bloomingdale’s exclusive legal privilege.

One survey of likely voters revealed that 79 percent of voters (and 75 percent of union members) agree that unions should not be permitted to use taxpayer-funded resources to collect government union dues.

The public gets it because no other political group enjoys such privileges on the taxpayers’ dime. There is no greater pro-worker and pro-taxpayer proposal than ending the taxpayer-funded collection of dues and campaign contributions for government unions.

If Bloomingdale were truly interested in protecting the middle class, he’d be standing alongside teachers like Rob Brough rather than against them.

Matthew Brouillette is president and CEO of Commonwealth Foundation

Paycheck Protection Benefits Teachers

 

We Won’t Kill Anybody: Overcoming Civil Rights Disconnect

We Won’t Kill Anybody: Overcoming Civil Rights Disconnect
By Father Frank Pavone

Our nation again approaches the Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday, and I will again be with Dr. King’s family on that day.

Many people understand the connection between the civil rights movement and the pro-life movement thanks to the work of Dr. Alveda King, the niece of Martin Luther King, Jr. Her father, Rev. A.D. Williams King, was Martin’s brother. She began working with me full time at Priests for Life as our Director of African-American Outreach in 2004.

She and I have been together with her family at many events both happy and sad, including the annual observances of the national Martin Luther King Jr. holiday at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, and the 50th anniversary celebration of the “I Have a Dream” speech at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, DC. On these occasions, we have been privileged to enjoy some of the most soaring oratory of our day, and some of the most articulate speeches about civil rights, justice, equality and freedom that one can ever hear. Time and time again, I have been energized and inspired by these speeches, and moved to recommit myself to the pursuit of justice and equality for every human being.

But therein also comes the pain and a glaring disconnect. The deepest human emotion and commitment to justice is evoked as speaker after speaker decries violence in the streets, senseless shootings, vast numbers of young people in prison, social inequities and economic injustices, and the horrors of war — to mention a few. But what is never mentioned is the violence of abortion, and the need to secure justice and equality for the child in the womb. Alveda and I have both felt the disconnect so intensely at these gatherings that, amidst the loud applause, we sometimes say out loud, “And the children too! Don’t forget the children in the womb!” We were indeed gratified when, on a single occasion (the MLK Holiday observance at Ebenezer in January of 2013), the Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, in his keynote address, mentioned the need to protect all life, including the womb.

That is the kind of consistency that then gives credibility to the cry for justice and equality in all the other contexts that are mentioned.

At that recent 50th Anniversary celebration, we heard the assertions,  “There are still too many lives taken by violence… I dream of a world that does not hold anyone back…We can’t move ahead while some people are falling behind…We must protect the most fundamental rights we have…” No reference was made to the right to life of the youngest children.

And hence the pro-life movement declares today, “There are indeed too many lives taken by the violence of abortion… We dream of the world that does not hold the unborn back…We can’t move ahead while children in the womb are falling behind…We must protect the most fundamental right we have, the right to life.”

On Christmas of 1967, Martin Luther King Jr. preached the following words: “The next thing we must be concerned about if we are to have peace on earth and good will toward men is the nonviolent affirmation of the sacredness of all human life. Every man is somebody because he is a child of God…Man is more than …whirling electrons or a wisp of smoke …. Man is a child of God, made in His image, and therefore must be respected as such….And when we truly believe in the sacredness of human personality, we won’t exploit people, we won’t trample over people with the iron feet of oppression, we won’t kill anybody.”

Indeed, we won’t kill anybody, including the children in the womb.

Father Pavone’s website can be found here.

A Novena in Reparation for Roe vs. Wade is being held through Jan. 22.  The prayer is:

God and Father of Life,
You have created every human person,
And have opened the way for each to have eternal
life.

We live in the shadow of death.
Tens of millions of your children have been
killed
because of the Roe vs. Wade decision legalizing
abortion.

Father, have mercy on us.
Heal our land
And accept our offering of prayer and penance.
In your love for us,
Turn back the scourge of abortion.

May each of us exult in hearts full of hope
And hands full of mercy
And work together to build a culture of life.

We pray through Christ our Lord. Amen.

Chris Christie Fight Now

 By Chris Freind

An letter to Gov. Chris Christie

Dear Gov. Christie:

By now we’ve heard, ad nauseam, all the “what if’s” regarding your embattled governorship. What if you knew that lanes on the George Washington Bridge were closed for political retribution? What if you covered it up? Most damning, what if you ordered it?

The pundits on both sides, of course, are having a field day predicting your political future as governor and possible presidential candidate. But most of them are agenda-driven and don’t know their heads from their derrieres, so their input is largely irrelevant.

Since much of what will unfold in Bridgegate is out of your hands, the real question isn’t what might happen to you, but what you will do to retake control in order to win back your credibility and rebuild your national image. If you play your cards right, governor, the current slide can be reversed and your second term can meet the same level of success as the first — as you remain a viable national candidate.

Here’s how:

It is imperative that you get back to your roots — immediately. Use your ace-in-the-hole that no other politician in America has, but all envy: being a “regular guy,” aka, just being Chris Christie. Your unique ability to speak directly to the people — articulately, brusquely, and, when needed, right in their faces, be they voters, press or opponents — has met with unparalleled success.

From eschewing the teleprompter and talking off-the-cuff on a wide range of issues in a way that even the most non-political person can understand, to your self-deprecating humor, the “Christie model” is exactly what Americans are seeking. As your last election showed, while many may disagree with you, they support you anyway because they know where you stand. People will choose conviction and passion in their leader any day over spineless, vacillating hacks.

Why mention this? Because too often we see individuals, businesses and sports teams deviate from the game plans that earned them success. Rather than stay the course, many completely change who they are in a misguided attempt to meet a new challenge or survive a crisis. Chris Christie cannot achieve success — and can’t beat this scandal — if he tones down his press conferences, appears more stoic, and keeps quiet until the storm passes. You must be stronger than the storm — or your career will soon be a bridge under troubled waters.

So with all due respect, Guv, go after your critics, hard, right now. Take the fight to them by addressing the accusations head-on.

Who better a spokesman than you to tout the strength and fortitude of New Jerseyans who faced literal hell getting their state back on track? Who is more identifiable with Jersey than the man who spearheaded the reconstruction efforts? And who demonstrates to a nation in desperate want of bipartisanship the true meaning of “working together,” shoving political considerations aside and reaching across the aisle to get things done, helping people and businesses get on their feet again?

Absolutely no one. So don’t run from those things; embrace them.

And, using campaign money, launch a series of ads that not only tout your accomplishments but blast the hacks who, believing you are weakened, are criticizing you and your family for appearing in public service ads that promoted a rebuilt New Jersey after Sandy’s devastating blow. (Just as the entire Gulf region did after the BP oil spill).

Political opportunists are already requesting federal investigations into the public service ads, but, more disconcerting, they are doing so without so much of a whimper from you, governor. Say it ain’t so! Don’t let them get away with it — or we all lose.

The hacks are already trying to derail your second-term agenda by using Bridgegate to marginalize you, despite the overwhelming number of Garden staters who just sent you back to Trenton. It’s time to off take the gloves, as only Chris Christie can, and beat them to a pulp.

Tell them that their tactics will not be tolerated, that you will unequivocally not allow New Jersey to stagnate for the next four years, and that the successes already achieved, but need to be expanded upon, will not rot away because of partisan politics.

Your opponents, Republican and Democrat, are smelling blood, hurling everything they can at you — legitimacy and truth be damned — in the hopes of a knockout. And the pundits say you have to “play nice” to get through this challenge.

So do the opposite. Unleash holy hell and tell them to reap the whirlwind, as Chris Christie isn’t going away. Be the bull in a china shop that we have not just come to expect, but love. By addressing the criticisms, and outright slander, in the way that only you can, you will rekindle support overnight with the only ones who really matter: the people.

I have championed many of your causes (pension reform, fiscal responsibility, strong leadership in the face of seemingly impossible odds) and, as a fair commentator, have also been critical (the helicopter flap, the weight issue, taxpayer money for Seaside Heights businesses, and your handling of the DRPA).

But above all, I, along with millions, respect your aggressiveness and no-nonsense, tell-the-truth approach. Therefore, I implore you, governor, to remain true to who you are and go with what brought you. It’s your only way to avoid being on a bridge to nowhere.

The 2016 election is fast approaching. It would be a great disservice to all Americans if Chris Christie were not among the candidates. Godspeed, governor.

Chris Christie Fight Now

 

Obamacare Liberation Manifesto

The chat below represents a spontaneous chat this morning (Jan. 17) on Facebook. I called it a manifesto, because it seems only right wingers have them (sarcasm noted). The names have been altered for the sake of their privacy;

Pat Carfagno: Its not something I like to make the focus of my life, but I have MS. I had wonderful health insurance and pharm coverage. I have all but lost my pharm coverage with the advent of Obamacare and its affect on private insurance. It is so restrictive as to be useless for someone with chronic illness. A broad look at the changes shows the deliberate isolation of specialty drugs from folks like me. Where the insurance that I worked for, was once a successful attempt at personal responsibility, I am now to be responsible for 50 Grand a year out of pocket. It might as well be a million.

I assure you all that I am not alone in this. As the year progresses, more and more people will discover that they have been targeted for costs savings by insurance companies with the permission and blessing of Obamacare. The chronically ill will find out first. It is only as boomers are diagnosed with illness will they find out that they have been similarly targeted.

There is a “free drug” program for me to apply for. Then, at the end of your life, (or before) the government comes to liquidate your assets for your “privilege” of getting “free” drug. I will not bankrupt my family for the ‘common good’.

Note that this confiscation is what politicians mean when they use the phrase “means testing”.

Yippee.

Still waiting for paperwork (application). But its already been months. It seems as if you can have free drug on the taxpayers dime. The drug company will “give” you drug, but the taxpayer fully reimburses the drug company for the full 50 grand. I will not be part of such an evil thing by participating even though this decision may have a profound effect on my quality of life.

(responses)

Sam: Government at it best! Just like Social security, medicare etc.\

Anna: A woman that has a hysterectomy had to carry it…just in case. A women over the age of 65 has to carry it…CHILDREN may have to carry it as well…just in case. Idiocy. Real. True. Idiocy.

Beth: The libs have turned America into a communal village, next we’ll be sharing bathrooms. I just abhor what the socialist/Marxist are doing to this Nation.

Pat Carfagno; I thank God that he is in charge of the plan of my life and not any man.

I am posting this chat because I think the posts linked together make an especially coherent explanation of the situation Americans will find themselves in sooner, rather than later, which I have thus far been unable to express. Note that the taxpayer will now pay the drug company for their products rather than the private drug insurance program in which I have been enrolled.

Note further that elite leftist pattern of having our children pay
for their elders freebies remains in overdrive in this and all
government ponzi schemes.

God Save Us.

Pat Carfagno’s Freedom Radio Rocks can be found here.

Obamacare Liberation Manifesto