At last Tuesday’s session of the Bridgewater-Raritan School Board in Martinsville, there were two events associated with the recent national elections. The first was a special slide presentation by Joe Walsh, Principal of the John F. Kennedy School in Raritan Borough.
During that presentation before a full house, Mr. Walsh proudly scrolled through slides that depicted the result of all the hard work that he, his staff and students had accomplished in setting up and executing a mock convention in which JFK students were the participants. One student represented Barack Obama and another, John McCain. Obama carried the day by a margin of 121 to 82.
Great job! The kids were motivated and the project was a success.
The second event was somewhat different. Most parents had showed up Tuesday evening in support of school athletic programs. Parent after parent stood before the mike urging the Board and Administration not to cut any of those programs from the 2009/2010 budget. Just about every person who got up to speak that night received comments, clarification, and support or became engaged in Q&A with individual members of the Board or Administration.
One parent, Judith Lee, an African-American, and a 14-year resident of Bridgewater with a daughter in middle school and another at the high school also came to the mike. She addressed the Board and Administration, stating that she supported a full and complete education, including sports. However, she went on to explain that her daughters had missed an opportunity to hear and see the full swearing-in ceremony for President Barack Obama, an historic first.
Her expectation was that the ceremonies would have been made fully available on school facilities to Bridgewater-Raritan students on inauguration day.
Lee calmly and deliberately went on to explain, “I was very upset that my daughters had not seen the inauguration.” Had she known that this might have been the case, the mother continued, “I would have kept my daughters home that day.” Finished with her comments, Lee returned to her chair, followed by silence from every one of the officials sitting at the conference room table. No follow-up questions. No clarifications. No comments. Nothing.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Full House at the Wade Building
Hours before an ugly overnight storm slammed into Bridgewater, it was probably the least likely of times to expect a large turnout at a Bridgewater-Raritan School Board meeting. But that’s exactly what happened last night.
A standing-room only crowd of over 100 people packed the conference room of the Wade Administration Building in Martinsville to hear a presentation of the 2009/2010 Bridgewater-Raritan School Budget by Superintendent Dr. Michael Schilder.
In recent years, this type of occurrence is rare, very rare indeed. When it happens, you gotta know that some people have stirred up a controversy, and that rumors have been swirling around within the school community that something dire, very dire is about to happen. So you’d better show up at the Board meeting to make sure that it doesn’t.
The controversy: Athletics. At least one board member, Christine Schneider, said that she had received “panicked” phone calls from parents about cuts in that program. Schneider is also Superintendent of the Bridgewater Township Recreation Department.
I don’t know what the fuss was all about. I just checked the detailed budget for the 2009/2010 school year and noticed, for example, that the amount listed under “Athletic Activities” is $1.323 million, a mere $2,151 less than last year’s $1.325 million. The difference is almost lost in the rounding.
One of the items that the Board and Administration removed from their preliminary budget numbers is $31,900 for co-curricular and athletic awards. Not a single person from that overflow crowd came to the podium to say that the $32k should be reinserted in the budget.
When I walked into the room last night, I did not see any copies of the detailed budget proposal on the table with all of the other papers available to the public. It could have saved a lot of angst.
A standing-room only crowd of over 100 people packed the conference room of the Wade Administration Building in Martinsville to hear a presentation of the 2009/2010 Bridgewater-Raritan School Budget by Superintendent Dr. Michael Schilder.
In recent years, this type of occurrence is rare, very rare indeed. When it happens, you gotta know that some people have stirred up a controversy, and that rumors have been swirling around within the school community that something dire, very dire is about to happen. So you’d better show up at the Board meeting to make sure that it doesn’t.
The controversy: Athletics. At least one board member, Christine Schneider, said that she had received “panicked” phone calls from parents about cuts in that program. Schneider is also Superintendent of the Bridgewater Township Recreation Department.
I don’t know what the fuss was all about. I just checked the detailed budget for the 2009/2010 school year and noticed, for example, that the amount listed under “Athletic Activities” is $1.323 million, a mere $2,151 less than last year’s $1.325 million. The difference is almost lost in the rounding.
One of the items that the Board and Administration removed from their preliminary budget numbers is $31,900 for co-curricular and athletic awards. Not a single person from that overflow crowd came to the podium to say that the $32k should be reinserted in the budget.
When I walked into the room last night, I did not see any copies of the detailed budget proposal on the table with all of the other papers available to the public. It could have saved a lot of angst.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Obama’s Executive Order on Abortion
Friday afternoon, President Barack Obama signed an executive order which, in combination with other family planning measures, will provide U.S. greenbacks for abortions performed on citizens of other nations as a means of birth control.
One of the controversies surrounding this action was that, as reported in the Washington Post on Saturday, “The . . . order was signed late in the day yesterday without any reporters, news photographers or television cameras present, in marked contrast to elaborate ceremonies highlighting orders Obama signed earlier in the week.”
While campaigning for the Oval Office, Obama made it clear that “We will make government open and transparent.” Apparently, this guideline does not apply when it comes to a potentially incendiary topic such as abortion. Obama’s signing of the executive order is controversial, because it reverses a prior order signed by former President W. George Bush in 2001 which eliminated that practice.
The original prohibition against U.S abortion funding in foreign lands had been initiated by Ronald Reagan in 1984. It became known as the Mexico City Policy, the location where he signed it into law. When Bill Clinton came to the White House, he saw the matter differently and, in 1993, reversed Reagan’s action by issuing his own executive order.
And so it went. Each of these presidents has, according to his own political and presumably moral compass, countermanded the other on this divisive practice which provides U.S. funds to other nations for abortion counseling and for recommending the practice to their own citizens as a means of birth control. Obama is merely the last president to append his personal signature to the controversy.
Our new president should have had the courtesy and fortitude to have signed his order and to comment on its justification in the “open and transparent” light of the public square. That is what he promised and that is what he did for the other executive orders which he executed in his first week of office. But not for this one. Journalists should have been inside the room, and the cameras should have been rolling to record the event.
One of the controversies surrounding this action was that, as reported in the Washington Post on Saturday, “The . . . order was signed late in the day yesterday without any reporters, news photographers or television cameras present, in marked contrast to elaborate ceremonies highlighting orders Obama signed earlier in the week.”
While campaigning for the Oval Office, Obama made it clear that “We will make government open and transparent.” Apparently, this guideline does not apply when it comes to a potentially incendiary topic such as abortion. Obama’s signing of the executive order is controversial, because it reverses a prior order signed by former President W. George Bush in 2001 which eliminated that practice.
The original prohibition against U.S abortion funding in foreign lands had been initiated by Ronald Reagan in 1984. It became known as the Mexico City Policy, the location where he signed it into law. When Bill Clinton came to the White House, he saw the matter differently and, in 1993, reversed Reagan’s action by issuing his own executive order.
And so it went. Each of these presidents has, according to his own political and presumably moral compass, countermanded the other on this divisive practice which provides U.S. funds to other nations for abortion counseling and for recommending the practice to their own citizens as a means of birth control. Obama is merely the last president to append his personal signature to the controversy.
Our new president should have had the courtesy and fortitude to have signed his order and to comment on its justification in the “open and transparent” light of the public square. That is what he promised and that is what he did for the other executive orders which he executed in his first week of office. But not for this one. Journalists should have been inside the room, and the cameras should have been rolling to record the event.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Presidential Perks: Retired, That is!
Journalist Jim Abrams reported for the Associated Press that former President George W. Bush will get a first-year pension payment of nearly $200,000, half of his presidential salary. Abrams goes on to conclude that, should Bush survive to his actuarial life expectancy of 83.5 years, he will have collected a total of $5,564, 800. Former VP, Richard Cheney, will initially get $132,000 on top of another Congressional pension of $132,451.
But wait a minute: Aren’t Bush and Cheney the same two bozos who tried to scuttle the Social Security program a few years ago and place the entire financial responsibility for retirement on the backs of retirees? And all that, while companies are failing and while even good ones are terminating pension plans!
I’m well aware that the Social Security program has spun out of control and is in need of reform. But I’m just as well aware that Bush and Cheney – together with all other elected officials inside the Beltway – are accepting secure, defined pensions for the rest of their lives at the expense of the rest of us.
Take a look at your 401K plan, if you are fortunate enough to have one: Then ask yourself where you’d be today if you were retiring in 2009 after your plan had lost about 40% of its value. If you are already retired, don’t bother to open that quarterly statement!
What bugs me is the sense of entitlement which Senators, Members of Congress, the President and Vice-President have about their perks. What right do people like multi-millionaires Nancy Pelosi, Bill Clinton, George Bush, Dick Cheney and plenty of other wealthy officials on Capitol Hill have to a federal pension?
President Barack Obama said that we will all have to make sacrifices. Don’t expect any of that from your elected officials inside the Beltway. They will publicly bemoan your financial plight and pontificate in your name at committee hearings, as they continue to feast at your expense in their private dining facilities.
If this were China, it would be the Year of the Pig.
But wait a minute: Aren’t Bush and Cheney the same two bozos who tried to scuttle the Social Security program a few years ago and place the entire financial responsibility for retirement on the backs of retirees? And all that, while companies are failing and while even good ones are terminating pension plans!
I’m well aware that the Social Security program has spun out of control and is in need of reform. But I’m just as well aware that Bush and Cheney – together with all other elected officials inside the Beltway – are accepting secure, defined pensions for the rest of their lives at the expense of the rest of us.
Take a look at your 401K plan, if you are fortunate enough to have one: Then ask yourself where you’d be today if you were retiring in 2009 after your plan had lost about 40% of its value. If you are already retired, don’t bother to open that quarterly statement!
What bugs me is the sense of entitlement which Senators, Members of Congress, the President and Vice-President have about their perks. What right do people like multi-millionaires Nancy Pelosi, Bill Clinton, George Bush, Dick Cheney and plenty of other wealthy officials on Capitol Hill have to a federal pension?
President Barack Obama said that we will all have to make sacrifices. Don’t expect any of that from your elected officials inside the Beltway. They will publicly bemoan your financial plight and pontificate in your name at committee hearings, as they continue to feast at your expense in their private dining facilities.
If this were China, it would be the Year of the Pig.
Monday, January 19, 2009
Soji Comes to Bridgewater
Late yesterday afternoon, in honor of Martin Luther King Day, Dr. Soji Adelaja came to Bridgewater at the invitation of the Ecumenical Council of the North Branch Reformed Church and of St. Bernard’s Roman Catholic Church. The event was held at the Route 22 location of St. Bernard’s in Bridgewater.
Dr. Adelaja is currently a distinguished professor at Michigan State University where he is director of its Land Policy Program. He previously held prestigious positions at Rutgers for 18 years. One of those was as Dean of Cook College.
Although Adelaja’s talk was under the auspices of the Ecumenical Council’s Christian Unity program, the discussion revolved largely around a very engaging presentation of the economic and social structures of the African continent and of its relationship not only with the West, but with China. Dr. Adelaja is a soft-spoken, informal and compelling speaker.
I came away from that 90-minute exposition with a very different view of Africa and of its people than I had when I entered the door of conference room B at St. Bernard’s. This man covered a wide range of topics – too extensive to cover adequately in a blog post.
But I’d like to leave you with a few of Dr. Adelaja’s insights. One is that China is eating our lunch in Africa, because it is much more flexible in dealing with African governments than is the West. Consequently, China is gaining traction in exploiting Africa’s oil resources and is establishing a long-term footprint on that continent.
One of the monetary realities in Africa is that the continent remains starved for capital. Another is that cash invested in the U.S. is gradually being repatriated due to the current instability of our financial system. He underscored that doing business in Africa is still risky, but that the return on capital is also higher than in the West.
Adelaja is an African native and descendant of a royal family. His dad turned down an opportunity to become king, despite being encouraged to do so. Adelaja described a growing middle class, particularly in those countries where entrepreneurship is beginning to take hold and where, according to him, there are many opportunities in the fields of banking, telecommunications, insurance, and engineering.
Thanks for reading. Stay safe and warm in this time of cold.
Dr. Adelaja is currently a distinguished professor at Michigan State University where he is director of its Land Policy Program. He previously held prestigious positions at Rutgers for 18 years. One of those was as Dean of Cook College.
Although Adelaja’s talk was under the auspices of the Ecumenical Council’s Christian Unity program, the discussion revolved largely around a very engaging presentation of the economic and social structures of the African continent and of its relationship not only with the West, but with China. Dr. Adelaja is a soft-spoken, informal and compelling speaker.
I came away from that 90-minute exposition with a very different view of Africa and of its people than I had when I entered the door of conference room B at St. Bernard’s. This man covered a wide range of topics – too extensive to cover adequately in a blog post.
But I’d like to leave you with a few of Dr. Adelaja’s insights. One is that China is eating our lunch in Africa, because it is much more flexible in dealing with African governments than is the West. Consequently, China is gaining traction in exploiting Africa’s oil resources and is establishing a long-term footprint on that continent.
One of the monetary realities in Africa is that the continent remains starved for capital. Another is that cash invested in the U.S. is gradually being repatriated due to the current instability of our financial system. He underscored that doing business in Africa is still risky, but that the return on capital is also higher than in the West.
Adelaja is an African native and descendant of a royal family. His dad turned down an opportunity to become king, despite being encouraged to do so. Adelaja described a growing middle class, particularly in those countries where entrepreneurship is beginning to take hold and where, according to him, there are many opportunities in the fields of banking, telecommunications, insurance, and engineering.
Thanks for reading. Stay safe and warm in this time of cold.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Food Court Oasis
Regular readers of this blog know that Priscille and I like to get our winter exercise by frequently walking at the Bridgewater Commons Mall. This week, the JCC pool, which is part of my cross-training routine, is closed for about 7 days for refurbishing, so the Mall is it.
We try to avoid the crowds by arriving early to mid-morning. We then head back to control central and get on with the rest of our daily tasks, appointments, meetings, etc. Rarely do we have lunch at the mall – it doesn’t help the calorie intake. But yesterday was different. The pull of the newly renovated food court was too much to resist.
Besides, you’d be surprised at all of the other activities that take place there during lunch. We settled upon Charley’s Grilled Subs. Pris found a natural, light-bathed booth near the outside windows across from Sbarro’s. I stood my turn in line and ordered a foot-long chicken teriyaki sub which we split and washed down with large bottles of Poland Spring (remember when water was free?). This selection set us back a mere $11.92 and was a good, tasty choice.
While sitting in our booth – it comprises one of several rows that form two sides of a triangle pushing against the outside windows – I spied a couple of older guys (who am I to say!) playing a serious, but engaging game of chess. Seated on the outside of the booth was a third man, intently observing their game. Later, a fourth observer joined the trio.
The new food court at the Bridgewater Commons Mall is becoming more than just a place to eat. It seems to be emerging as a public gathering place where people can get together not only to share a meal, but to participate in some of life’s other convivial, yet simple endeavors. Even harried business people can get a welcome change of pace there.
In this fragile, bungled, and overly complex economy, an oasis like this provides a welcome break.
We try to avoid the crowds by arriving early to mid-morning. We then head back to control central and get on with the rest of our daily tasks, appointments, meetings, etc. Rarely do we have lunch at the mall – it doesn’t help the calorie intake. But yesterday was different. The pull of the newly renovated food court was too much to resist.
Besides, you’d be surprised at all of the other activities that take place there during lunch. We settled upon Charley’s Grilled Subs. Pris found a natural, light-bathed booth near the outside windows across from Sbarro’s. I stood my turn in line and ordered a foot-long chicken teriyaki sub which we split and washed down with large bottles of Poland Spring (remember when water was free?). This selection set us back a mere $11.92 and was a good, tasty choice.
While sitting in our booth – it comprises one of several rows that form two sides of a triangle pushing against the outside windows – I spied a couple of older guys (who am I to say!) playing a serious, but engaging game of chess. Seated on the outside of the booth was a third man, intently observing their game. Later, a fourth observer joined the trio.
The new food court at the Bridgewater Commons Mall is becoming more than just a place to eat. It seems to be emerging as a public gathering place where people can get together not only to share a meal, but to participate in some of life’s other convivial, yet simple endeavors. Even harried business people can get a welcome change of pace there.
In this fragile, bungled, and overly complex economy, an oasis like this provides a welcome break.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Madoff Convinces Judge
In a recent AP article, Rachel Beck, an admired columnist of mine, wrote a justification that Bernie Madoff, the investment advisor who is alleged to have bilked thousands of people from billions of dollars, should not be put in jail while awaiting trail. She claims that putting Madoff in the slammer would inhibit him from cooperating with officials who need to obtain information from him.
Today, it seems that Roland J. Ellis, magistrate judge for the Southern U.S. District of New York agrees with Beck, though perhaps not for the same reasons. In a 22-page report, the judge rebuffed federal prosecutors who claim that Madoff poses a flight risk and that the current conditions of his release do not protect the safety of the community. The prosecution wants Madoff in jail now, not in his apartment.
Both Beck and Ellis are wrong and curiously naïve. Their logic does not take into account the vast scope of the crime which Madoff is alleged to have committed. He doesn’t deserve the privilege of hiding in the luxury of his multi-million dollar Manhattan digs, while people accused of much lesser offenses sweat it out in jail.
Today, it seems that Roland J. Ellis, magistrate judge for the Southern U.S. District of New York agrees with Beck, though perhaps not for the same reasons. In a 22-page report, the judge rebuffed federal prosecutors who claim that Madoff poses a flight risk and that the current conditions of his release do not protect the safety of the community. The prosecution wants Madoff in jail now, not in his apartment.
Both Beck and Ellis are wrong and curiously naïve. Their logic does not take into account the vast scope of the crime which Madoff is alleged to have committed. He doesn’t deserve the privilege of hiding in the luxury of his multi-million dollar Manhattan digs, while people accused of much lesser offenses sweat it out in jail.
Thursday, January 8, 2009
Somerville Icon Shuts Down
On Thursday, December 31, MacArthur’s Appliances shuttered its doors and went out of business. It was a very quiet ending for an area institution begun in 1955 by “Mac,” father of Hayes and Craig MacArthur, brothers who grew up in the enterprise and who eventually succeeded their dad. Hayes explained how, starting at 11 years old, he showed up at the store to help out after school. Together with Craig, they gradually worked their way up the ladder.
Situated on Main Street in the heart of downtown Somerville, MacArthur’s served area residents uncompromisingly; selling, delivering and servicing major home appliances and TV’s. In its heyday, MacArthur’s maintained its own large warehouse, buying in bulk ahead of customer purchases, stocking name brands like Maytag and Zenith in the days of USA-manufactured products.
But, about 15 years ago, the appliance and television markets began to change in a way that would signal the beginning of the end for stalwart businesses like MacArthur’s. National chains like Lowe’s and Home Depot would begin their encroachment into appliance retailing, while others like Best Buy and Circuit City would begin their takeover of the television market.
The advantage of national chain purchasing power, combined with large-scale advertising of American products manufactured offshore, would erode the ability of a small community business like MacArthur’s to compete.
In the 30-plus years that we have lived in Bridgewater, none of our major appliances – all of which have been replaced over time – have come from any store other than “Mac’s” place. Priscille could never see the advantage of saving a couple of bucks (peanuts when written off over the years of an appliance’s life) by jumping around from one store to another, dealing with people who would not be there the next time she entered the establishment.
When the need arose, we always showed up on Main Street in Somerville, greeted Hayes and Craig, asked one another how things were going, and got down to the business of talking appliances.
We still have an aged 36-inch Zenith console TV, the oldest of our MacArthur purchases. It needed to be repaired once, but the darn thing just won’t quit. Eventually, when we need to get that new LCD HD TV, we’ll be thinking of those two guys on Main Street, Somerville, who provided some of the best service in Somerset County.
Situated on Main Street in the heart of downtown Somerville, MacArthur’s served area residents uncompromisingly; selling, delivering and servicing major home appliances and TV’s. In its heyday, MacArthur’s maintained its own large warehouse, buying in bulk ahead of customer purchases, stocking name brands like Maytag and Zenith in the days of USA-manufactured products.
But, about 15 years ago, the appliance and television markets began to change in a way that would signal the beginning of the end for stalwart businesses like MacArthur’s. National chains like Lowe’s and Home Depot would begin their encroachment into appliance retailing, while others like Best Buy and Circuit City would begin their takeover of the television market.
The advantage of national chain purchasing power, combined with large-scale advertising of American products manufactured offshore, would erode the ability of a small community business like MacArthur’s to compete.
In the 30-plus years that we have lived in Bridgewater, none of our major appliances – all of which have been replaced over time – have come from any store other than “Mac’s” place. Priscille could never see the advantage of saving a couple of bucks (peanuts when written off over the years of an appliance’s life) by jumping around from one store to another, dealing with people who would not be there the next time she entered the establishment.
When the need arose, we always showed up on Main Street in Somerville, greeted Hayes and Craig, asked one another how things were going, and got down to the business of talking appliances.
We still have an aged 36-inch Zenith console TV, the oldest of our MacArthur purchases. It needed to be repaired once, but the darn thing just won’t quit. Eventually, when we need to get that new LCD HD TV, we’ll be thinking of those two guys on Main Street, Somerville, who provided some of the best service in Somerset County.
Monday, January 5, 2009
New Jersey, Tax Champ
Because of the recent national financial meltdown, all levels of government in New Jersey are strapped for cash, but not more so than the individual Garden State taxpayers who are picking up the tab for the last two decades of reckless spending increases.
Over the years, we have always had one of the highest real estate taxes in the nation. But did you know that, according to The Tax Foundation, New Jersey – at 7.1% – now has the highest real estate tax burden in the country when measured as a share of income. Nebraska, only tenth down the list, is half that number, at 3.6%. That gives you an idea of how confiscatory property taxes on owner-occupied homes have become in New Jersey.
No matter how the numbers are sliced and diced, we are a taxing and spending champion: NJ property taxes are the highest per capita in the nation. The sales tax is the country’s second highest, and the cigarette tax is the highest. Furthermore, New Jersey’s total state and local tax burden is also the highest in the nation at 11.8% of income, way over the national average of 9.7%.
Even businesses are getting whacked: For 2008, The Tax Foundation ranks NJ at the bottom of the pack, number 49, in its measurement of attractiveness as a state in which to do business.
Over the years, we have always had one of the highest real estate taxes in the nation. But did you know that, according to The Tax Foundation, New Jersey – at 7.1% – now has the highest real estate tax burden in the country when measured as a share of income. Nebraska, only tenth down the list, is half that number, at 3.6%. That gives you an idea of how confiscatory property taxes on owner-occupied homes have become in New Jersey.
No matter how the numbers are sliced and diced, we are a taxing and spending champion: NJ property taxes are the highest per capita in the nation. The sales tax is the country’s second highest, and the cigarette tax is the highest. Furthermore, New Jersey’s total state and local tax burden is also the highest in the nation at 11.8% of income, way over the national average of 9.7%.
Even businesses are getting whacked: For 2008, The Tax Foundation ranks NJ at the bottom of the pack, number 49, in its measurement of attractiveness as a state in which to do business.
Friday, January 2, 2009
Always Faithful
Imagine what life would be like if every American were “Always Faithful.” The term can be applied to every single facet of American life, both public and private. Few Americans understood the meaning of that phrase better than Marine Cpl. Jonathan Yale, 21, and Lance Cpl. Jordan Haerter, 19, both killed in action in Iraq.
The two Marines were guarding the main entrance to a joint American-Iraqi security compound in Ramadi, one of the hell holes in Iraq’s Anbar province, when they spotted a truck approaching from a distance. As it weaved in and out of the barriers, heading directly towards the gate loaded with a ton of explosives, two other guards – Iraqis – ran for cover as did other nearby Iraqi police.
Only the two U.S. Marines, Yale and Haerter, stood firm, firing their weapons at the Jihadist suicide driver bearing down with his hand on a dead-man switch. The truck exploded away from the gate, saving the lives of dozens of soldiers inside the compound.
Semper Fidelis – Always Faithful – even unto death. That’s the lived motto of the U.S. Marine Corps, and it was loyally carried out that day as two young American warriors protected not only their own, but other Iraqis inside the gate.
The two Iraqi police officers whose duty it also was to defend that gate obviously had not internalized the meaning of “Always Faithful.” It reminds me – and perhaps a few of you reading this: Why is it that the Iraqis themselves are so unwilling or incapable of straightening out their own affairs? And if they won’t, then why does America continue to shed its blood for this intolerant theocracy pretending to govern as a democracy?
The two Marines were guarding the main entrance to a joint American-Iraqi security compound in Ramadi, one of the hell holes in Iraq’s Anbar province, when they spotted a truck approaching from a distance. As it weaved in and out of the barriers, heading directly towards the gate loaded with a ton of explosives, two other guards – Iraqis – ran for cover as did other nearby Iraqi police.
Only the two U.S. Marines, Yale and Haerter, stood firm, firing their weapons at the Jihadist suicide driver bearing down with his hand on a dead-man switch. The truck exploded away from the gate, saving the lives of dozens of soldiers inside the compound.
Semper Fidelis – Always Faithful – even unto death. That’s the lived motto of the U.S. Marine Corps, and it was loyally carried out that day as two young American warriors protected not only their own, but other Iraqis inside the gate.
The two Iraqi police officers whose duty it also was to defend that gate obviously had not internalized the meaning of “Always Faithful.” It reminds me – and perhaps a few of you reading this: Why is it that the Iraqis themselves are so unwilling or incapable of straightening out their own affairs? And if they won’t, then why does America continue to shed its blood for this intolerant theocracy pretending to govern as a democracy?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)