December 12 2013 Omnibit Trivia by William W. Lawrence Sr.
No Christopher, neither California nor Florida has the highest number of registered boats. That honor goes to Alabama. (At least as of 1983)
Funeral For Russ Boyko
Parishioner Russell J. Boyko has died. He was a World War II Army Air Corps veteran who drew worldwide attention when his story of the year he spent as a prisoner of war in Germany was published.
A funeral Mass will be held 10 a.m., Monday, at Saints Peter and Paul Eastern Rite Catholic Church, 100 S. Penn St., Clifton Heights, Pa. 19018.
A viewing will be held starting 9:30 a.m.
Funeral For Russ Boyko
Omnibit Of The Day 12-11-13
December 11 2013 Omnibit Trivia by William W. Lawrence Sr.
About half of you drivers are operating cars that are a quart low on oil. Not good. Not good for the cars.
Global Warming Solutions
By Chris Freind
Priceless campaign ad No. 112 against Tom Corbett: His nominee to head the Department of Environmental Protection stating climate change isn’t harmful.
Unlike so many political commercials that deliberately mislead or outright lie, this one will be clear cut, right out of the donkey’s mouth (the animal fits, even though he’s a Republican). Chris Abruzzo, the guv’s pick for DEP secretary, actually told that to the Senate Environmental Resources and Energy Committee.
“I’ve not read any scientific studies that would lead me to conclude there are adverse impacts to human beings, animals or plant life at this small level of climate change,” Abruzzo said.
He would be right, except for these: Significant human health problems; melting polar ice caps; warming oceans; rising sea levels; species that have gone extinct; animals appearing in regions where they’ve never been before; and extreme weather patterns resulting in record storms, floods and droughts, all associated with climate change.
Therefore, since advocating such a viewpoint about Earth’s global warming is incomprehensible, maybe Abruzzo was talking about climate change on another planet. Uranus perhaps? The immediate implication is a no-brainer. It’s the latest nail in Corbett’s political coffin, which already has a record-setting number of career-ending spikes in it.
The more troubling aspect is that yet another Republican believes human activity plays little or no role in climate change caused by global warming, and therefore, the issue doesn’t need further addressing. It’s no wonder the GOP finds itself on the losing end of so many elections, since its position alienates the Great American Middle, who always decide general elections.
That’s not to suggest that Republicans should adopt a different position because it would help them win, but because it’s common sense.
That the Earth is warming is indisputable. The question is what’s behind that change. Is it a cyclical phenomenon occurring every 500 or 1,000 years, or more? Quite possibly, but difficult to ascertain since accurate record keeping didn’t begin until relatively recently.
Or is it because human activity has pumped hundreds of billions of tons of carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere?
The rational answer is both. So why not err on the side of caution — reasonably — to cut down on emissions while protecting American jobs and economic competitiveness?
Sounds logical enough, but it’s not easy when both sides cling to extreme positions, whether its espousing job-killing proposals or claiming adverse impacts don’t exist.
An American living in Mexico City was experiencing respiratory distress and, upon examination in the U.S., was told she needed to quit smoking three packs of cigarettes a day. There was only one problem. She had never smoked.
The unchecked pollution emanating from our southerly neighbor and most of the world’s manufacturing nations are wreaking havoc on people’s health and the environment. And since air and water currents don’t adhere to political boundaries, rampant pollution affects everybody.
It’s in our interest to solve these problems, so here’s how we can:
1. Scrap our trade policies. The Unites States has made stellar progress over the last several decades in cutting down on pollution. Lake Erie was once a dead zone, and the Cuyahoga River caught fire because of the widespread industrial waste that oozed into it, yet, now these waterways are success stories because Americans were committed to cleaning up the environment. That effort continues, but it’s not without cost.
By definition, it’s more expensive to operate a factory when adhering to strict environmental regulations, an issue compounded when competing with overseas companies who have no such laws to follow (or where they are unenforced).
We can’t physically force sovereign nations to cut back on pollution and institute environmental regulations on par with ours, but we can force their hand by leveraging our position as the world’s largest economy. But to do that, we must scrap trade policies that sell out America and leave our companies at a major disadvantage. Free and fair trade sound nice, but we have neither, and that must change.
From the threat of tariffs to the elimination of foreign aid and military support, we have the muscle. But we need the will. Money talks, and since we have more than anyone else (at least for now), we need to leverage that advantage to level the environmental playing field. In doing so, everyone wins.
2. Never sign a treaty that restricts America’s carbon emissions while giving “developing” nations a free pass. In addition to the devastating impact it would have on American jobs, such treaties (such as Kyoto) are only a finger in the dike. We aren’t the unchecked polluter, and continue to become “greener,” so why penalize Americans for doing the right thing?
3. No unfunded government mandates. Sure, reducing a factory’s emissions is important, but having the government mandate a billion-dollar scrubber be installed in a finite period of time results in job loss, lack of growth (and hiring), and for some companies, a one-way ticket out of America. Tax credits and market-based incentives for such pollution control initiatives are an infinitely better solution.
The government will never gain converts by taxing them into submission; instead, it needs to incentivize them to play ball. Many companies want to go green and reduce their carbon footprint, but can do so only if the measures they undertake are cost-effective. To help ensure that, Congress must reduce the world’s highest corporate income tax. Failure to do so is a tragic disincentive for corporations to become more environmentally responsible.
4. Don’t listen to anything Al Gore says. No disrespect to the inventor of the Internet, but why should we follow someone who proselytizes the virtues of greenness and the evils of the gas combustion engine, yet whose carbon footprint is larger than Montana?
5. Use more natural gas — a lot more — while mandating safe fracking techniques. America sits atop a virtually limitless supply of gas, which produces a mere fraction of oil’s emissions. From power plants to vehicles, the use of natural gas would not only substantially reduce greenhouse gases, but bolster America’s national security, reducing dependence on Middle Eastern oil barons. This extremely cheap, abundant energy would resurrect our manufacturing base while keeping American dollars where they belong. Here.
6. Stop ceding the environmental issue to extremists hell-bent on returning America to the Stone Age. Preserving the environment for our children and grandchildren isn’t radical. It’s the right thing to do. The GOP should take a lesson from Teddy Roosevelt’s playbook, as he successfully epitomized what a true Republican should be: A capitalist not afraid to take on big business that, left unchecked, would run rampant over the environment; a leader who prioritized preservation and responsible stewardship of the land; and a politician who, above all, carried a big stick.
A stick that could be used to whip into shape those who don’t think climate change is a major issue.
Visit BillLawrenceDittos.com for Global Warming Solutions
Visit BillLawrenceOnline.com for Global Warming Solutions
Visit BillLawrenceTrivia.com for Omnibits
Corbett Primaried By Bob Guzzardi
Main Line businessman Bob Guzzardi has announced that he will be taking on Gov. Tom Corbett in the Republican primary, May 20.
Guzzardi notes that Corbett is expected to be the first incumbent to lose Pennsylvania’s gubernatorial race since 1854, and that Pennsylvania Republicans need a chance to choose an alternative.
Guzzardi is the first to announce a primary challenge to Corbett.
He cites Corbett’s $2.4 billion annual tax increase and his looming general election defeat as his reasons for running along with the governor’s many failures such as the inability to privatize liquor sales or pass meaningful prevailing wage reform.
“The contest is between the Forgotten Taxpayer who works, saves and invests to raise the standard of living for all and the establishment insiders who use government for their own financial benefit or who want power,” Guzzardi said.
Guzzardi said that his platform will include true state pension reform; expanding Marcellus Shale natural gas production to lower energy costs, create productive jobs and raise the standard of living for all; and vouchers for all students — not just those living in Philadelphia or low economic areas.
Corbett Primaried By Bob Guzzardi
Pennsylvania Hunting Safety Tips
With the hunting season underway, the Pennsylvania Game Commission has safety tips to offer to first-time hunters, and those who have not been hunting in the past several years, says State Rep. Jim Cox (R-129).
• Hunters should always identify the target, do not shoot at sounds or movement. Young observers should dress appropriately as well, following the rules.
• Wear the mandated amount of florescent orange clothing and stay in the zone, do not shoot at game moving between hunters.
• Scouting hunting areas is always best, plan where to hunt, and hunt where you plan.
• Use a map and compass or a GPS unit. This way you can be found in case of an accident.
• Carry a basic survival kit and know how to use it.
PLCB Advertising Fix Sought
State Rep. Stephen Bloom (R-199) circulated a petition on Dec. 2 seeking co-sponsors for a bill requiring all advertising by the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board to prominently state “This Ad Paid For By You, The Taxpayers of PA”.
The PLCB spent $5.8 million last year to encourage shopping at the state-owned liquor stores which has a practical monopoly on the sale of bottles of liquor and wine in the Keystone State.
Bloom also notes that the PLCB also awards grants aimed to reduce drinking.
“You’re literally seeing taxpayer dollars being used to buy billboards and TV commercials promoting drinking liquor while at the same time, the same state agency is advertising to discourage people from consuming liquor,” Bloom said.
PLCB Advertising Fix Sought
Our Physical God
By Fr. Frank Pavone
It’s Christmas time again, and the Church focuses on the Incarnation, a word coming from the Latin “in carne,” which means, “in the flesh.” Christmas is God in the flesh: no longer only an eternal Spirit who fills the universe, but our brother, whom we can hear, see, and touch.
One of the reasons he did this was to empower us to love him, and to love our neighbor.
The first Christians learned how to love, because the source of love, the Christ who sacrificed himself, was personally known to them. They saw and touched him.
“That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched – this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it…” (1 John:1:1-2).
And when commanded not to speak about Jesus, they replied, “We cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard.’” (Acts 4:20).
This contact with the humanity of Christ speaks to us of what we are to do now for the unborn. It is the contact with the human reality of their lives, and the human tragedy of their deaths, that is to impel us in our self-sacrificing love for them.
It is not the “nuance” of the super-sophisticated that impels self-sacrificing, life-giving action. It is contact with the humanity we serve. It is facing the injustice that oppresses human lives, and then making a human response to it that springs from the depths of our own humanity, grounded in the God who gave that humanity to us.
That is why we need to look at the pictures of the victims of abortion — Not simply at the pictures of the living baby in the womb, but the pictures of what abortion does to that baby (see both at Unborn.info).
The last thing supporters of abortion want to talk about is abortion. You will not hear them describe the procedure, much less show people what it looks like.
In his homily on July 3, Pope Francis said,
“We find Jesus’ wounds in carrying out works of mercy, giving to our body – the body – the soul too, but – I stress – the body of your wounded brother, because he is hungry, because he is thirsty, because he is naked, because he is humiliated, because he is a slave, because he’s in jail because he is in the hospital…Those are the wounds of Jesus today. …We need to touch the wounds of Jesus, we must caress the wounds of Jesus, we need to bind the wounds of Jesus with tenderness, we have to kiss the wounds of Jesus, and this literally. Just think of what happened to St. Francis, when he embraced the leper? The same thing that happened to Thomas: his life changed. ”
Let us touch the sufferings of the baby who is in danger of abortion, and be changed into fearless warriors for them.
Read and listen to this column online at Priestsforlife.org/columns/4824-our-physical-god
Comments on this column? Go to Askfrfrank.com
Fr. Frank’s columns are podcast. See Priestsforlife.org/podcast
Remember to support our work at Priestsforlife.org/donate
State Seems Deaf To Common Core Concerns
Here is a copy of a letter sent by education activist Joanne Yurchak to David Summer, executive director of Pennsylvania’s Independent Regulatory Review Commission (IRRC).
“Maybe it will wake some people up,” she said. “Unfortunately it didn’t seem to have an effect on the IRRC.”
Mr. David Sumner
Executive Director, IRRC
333 Market Street, 14th Floor
Harrisburg, PA 17101
Reference: IRRC #2976
Dear Mr. Sumner:
In a previous testimony, I specified the numerous concerns that I have with regard to the implementation of Common Core Standards (CCS) in Pennsylvania’s schools. This supplemental testimony elaborates on one of my prime concerns — the nationalization of our educational process and the consequential loss of influence of parents and local school boards that will unquestionably result from Pennsylvania’s accepting money from the Feds to sign on to the CCS. (Although the initiative’s name has been changed to Pennsylvania Core Standards, this was essentially a marketing technique. A pickle by any other name would taste as sour!)
I recently wrote to Representative Clymer (the Majority Chair of the PA House Education Committee) voicing my concerns regarding the federal government’s wresting control of our students’ education from parents and local school boards. He responded: “After weeks of my own private investigation, I do not have a perception that the federal government is in control of the educational process here in Pennsylvania.”
I provided the following examples in my response to Rep. Clymer’s comment.
“I can understand why you don’t have a perception that the federal government is in control of the educational process here in Pennsylvania. That is because the control by the Feds is not currently obvious. Those who favor nationalization are far too cagey to make their intentions evident at the outset; they know that this would only alert citizens who would undoubtedly rise to stop it. National control will not happen immediately, but will occur gradually over time until we are so entwined in the mandates and controls from the Feds that we won’t be able to extricate ourselves from them. There are definite clues that a nationalization of our children’s education is in progress and will ultimately occur:
1. A clearcut and indisputable indication that the Feds are in control can be found on page 53 of Pennsylvania’s Chapter 4 Final form (October 18, 2013) which states: ‘The Department will seek to have the Keystone Exams approved as the high school level single accountability system under the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Upon approval by the United States Department of Education, the Algebra I and Literature exams will be used to determine adequate yearly progress at the high school level.
The words ‘Upon approval by the United States Department of Education’ clearly indicate that Pennsylvania does not have the autonomy to determine what assessment we can use as an accountability system. The Feds have to approve our assessment tool, which means it is they, and not Pennsylvania, who are in control. This directly contradicts what the PA BOE has been insisting is the case.
2. Money received from the Feds always has stipulations attached. Pennsylvania received over $40 Million from Phase III Race to the Top funds from the federal government. I know that you, Representative Clymer, are an experienced, knowledgeable and savvy legislator, and therefore must realize that when states accept money from the Feds there are stipulations attached. A major stipulation was that we have to align our standards to national standards which are tied to assessments and ultimately to curriculum. (I realize that PA has renamed the standards “Pennsylvania Core Standards,” but this was unquestionably done as a marketing technique. We took money from the Feds that committed us to align our standards to theirs. That means they have a hold on us in this regard. Why would anyone be fooled into believing that a name change and minimal tweaking would really make a difference?)
3. PA also received a partial waiver from the No Child Left Behind as a result of our signing on to the standards. This is another “permission slip” from the Feds. Doesn’t that indicate federal control?
4. Governor Corbett’s request for more money from the Feds for early childhood education will undoubtedly make us even more beholden to federal control. The Feds don’t give PA money out of the kindness of their hearts; they expect something in return!
5. A major fiscal concern is that Title I monies could be withheld from low income schools if the Feds are not satisfied with a state’s compliance with the standards. A subtle suggestion that this could be an issue was noted at an August, 2013 meeting in Delaware County with then Acting Secretary of Education Harner. When I asked him why we didn’t just return the $40+M that we’d received from the Feds so that we could assure autonomy from their mandates, Dr. Harner skirted the question and indicated that there were other monetary considerations. I asked him whether TItle I monies could be involved but never received a definitive answer.”
The IRRC should know that there are strong indications that national control of education has been in the planning stages for some time. Opportunity knocked for proponents of national control when our country elected a president known to favor a strong federal government over the rights of states and of individuals during the same time period that huge amounts of stimulus money became available to “encourage” (AKA “bribe”) states (including PA) to sign on to the Common Core. Significantly, Mr. Louis Gerstner, an avid proponent of a transformational educational initiative that involves national standards and removal of local control and a co-chairman of Achieve (an organization that was a primary developer of the Common Core Standards), wrote a chilling editorial that was published in the Wall Street Journal on December 1, 2008. The article was entitled: ““Lessons from 40 Years of Education ‘Reform’…Let’s abolish local school districts and finally adopt national standards.” (The article can be accessed on-line at: online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB122809533452168067#articleTabs%3Darticle.)
In the article, Gerstner suggests that the United States “Abolish all local school districts, save 70 (50 states; 20 largest cities). Some states may choose to leave some of the rest as community service organizations, but they would have no direct involvement in the critical task of establishing standards, selecting teachers, and developing curricula.” He also suggests that the U.S. “Establish a set of national standards for a core curriculum. I would suggest we start with four subjects: reading, math, science and social studies.”
Although the PA DOE continues to mislead Pennsylvanians into believing that it is Pennsylvania and not the Feds that is in control of our students’ education, the examples noted above indicate otherwise. Warnings that implementation of the CCS will ultimately lessen and possibly totally eliminate the influence of local school boards and parents on the education of our children cannot be ignored. The current Common Core implementation is certainly not as radical as the vision of Gerstner, but considering the stealthy manner in which this initiative was foisted upon the states, including Pennsylvania, it is not unreasonable to assume that his vision could be a predictor of what will happen in the future. Two quotes regarding nationalization from known educational experts are particularly appropriate to this discussion. Maggie Gallagher, a Fellow at the American Principles Project, noted: “Common Core advocates continue to insist that Common Core does not usurp local control of curriculum, but in practice high-stakes tests keyed to the Common Core standards ensure that curriculum will follow.” She also opines: “Once a state adopts Common Core, its curriculum goals and assessments are effectively nationalized.” Joseph A. Califano, Jr., former Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, indicated the portentous aspects of nationalization in his statement: “In its most extreme form, national control of curriculum is a form of national control of ideas.”
Forewarned is forearmed! The Feds have a proven track record of ineptitude when they take control. A prime example is the Affordable Care Act, during which the auto-bureaucrats in DC ignored consequences and vastly underestimated costs in their rush to take over our health care system. Americans are now experiencing the chaos resulting from their incompetence. It is unfathomable that states such as Pennsylvania would be so short-sighted and fiscally irresponsible as to allow them to attempt to nationalize our educational system. I strongly urge the IRRC to consider the implications of this potential nationalization and put an immediate halt to the implementation of the Common Core initiative in Pennsylvania. Thank you.
Respectfully,
Joanne Yurchak
West Chester, PA
yurchak@science.widener.edu
Visit BillLawrenceDittos.com for State Seems Deaf To Common Core Concerns
Visit BillLawrenceOnline.com for State Seems Deaf To Common Core Concerns
Omnibit Of The Day 12-7-13
December 7 2013 Omnibit Trivia by William W. Lawrence Sr.