Is there such a thing as a day too hot for ice cream? If there is, then Monday and Tuesday take the cake, so to speak. With the temps pushing the 100° mark, it was no time to get in the car for a drive to an ice cream stand. Tonight, though, was quite different – a perfect time for an early-evening jaunt to the nearest ice cream parlor.
Usually, from our home in Bridgewater, we head west on Route 22, to the very popular Polar Cub, a short drive from the Bridgewater Commons. That spot has as wide a selection of ice cream treats and flavors as you could want. The service is fast, and the product is good.
Tonight, though, we took advantage of one of those promotional coupons that appear in the free-standing inserts of the Sunday newspaper. (You know: all those multi-colored glossy advertising handouts that you have to sift through before you can do any serious reading). My wife clipped a coupon for the Cold Stone Creamery in Bedminster. It’s in the Hills Shopping Center, just off 202-206 north, in Pluckemin.
For seven bucks, we ordered two mouth-watering waffle bowls filled with plenty of ice cream and a blended add-in of your choice. You’ll have to be a little patient, because the service tends to take a little longer due to the hand-blending that the servers do to fill your individual order. It’s fun to watch them. Besides, why be in a hurry for something that’s supposed to be a delight to watch and to consume?
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Sunday, June 8, 2008
“No Quick Fix”
It was a mere 26 lines of text in a two-inch-wide column, tucked inside the pages of a regional New Jersey newspaper on June 6, 2008. But it was full of meaning. In it, Henry Paulson, current U.S. Treasury Secretary, and former Chairman and CEO of Goldman Sachs, implied that oil prices will remain high, because they are a function of supply and demand. He relayed that news from Doha, Qatar, one of the oil-rich Middle East states, emphasizing that there is “no quick fix.”
It is supply and demand; but, that is not the entire question, and Mr. Paulson should know better than to put forth such a simplistic statement. The real, unstated, substantive question behind Paulson’s statement should be: Why is so much of the world’s oil supply continuing to be controlled by a cartel (the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries), of which Saudi Arabia is the linchpin?
OPEC continues to meet regularly at its headquarters in Vienna to set production quotas, effectively inflating prices and stimulating the current wave of speculation in the oil markets. This cartel sits on two-thirds of the world’s oil reserves, yet accounts for about only 36% of oil extraction, as of March 2008. Saudi Arabia, OPEC’s most influential and largest producer, continues to turn up its nose at recent U.S. requests for increased production, stating that supply and demand are in equilibrium.
In the United States, if executives of large companies were to conspire openly to control commodity output, as do the oil ministers of OPEC, they would be indicted, prosecuted, and put behind bars.
America’s role in winning the first Gulf War under George H.W. Bush and, thereby, preserving Saudi Arabia’s sovereignty and its monarchy means nothing . . . absolutely nothing . . . to these desert fat cats.
I acknowledge that there are many other factors contributing to the current level of oil prices, many of which are of our own making, but my focus here is to starkly underscore the lop-sided transfer of wealth to the oil cartel and its apparent I-don't-give-a-hoot attitude for the rest of the people on this planet.
Note: For an excellent account of the ascendancy of OPEC as an effective cartel, see Robert J. Samuelson’s story at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031102461.html
It is supply and demand; but, that is not the entire question, and Mr. Paulson should know better than to put forth such a simplistic statement. The real, unstated, substantive question behind Paulson’s statement should be: Why is so much of the world’s oil supply continuing to be controlled by a cartel (the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries), of which Saudi Arabia is the linchpin?
OPEC continues to meet regularly at its headquarters in Vienna to set production quotas, effectively inflating prices and stimulating the current wave of speculation in the oil markets. This cartel sits on two-thirds of the world’s oil reserves, yet accounts for about only 36% of oil extraction, as of March 2008. Saudi Arabia, OPEC’s most influential and largest producer, continues to turn up its nose at recent U.S. requests for increased production, stating that supply and demand are in equilibrium.
In the United States, if executives of large companies were to conspire openly to control commodity output, as do the oil ministers of OPEC, they would be indicted, prosecuted, and put behind bars.
America’s role in winning the first Gulf War under George H.W. Bush and, thereby, preserving Saudi Arabia’s sovereignty and its monarchy means nothing . . . absolutely nothing . . . to these desert fat cats.
I acknowledge that there are many other factors contributing to the current level of oil prices, many of which are of our own making, but my focus here is to starkly underscore the lop-sided transfer of wealth to the oil cartel and its apparent I-don't-give-a-hoot attitude for the rest of the people on this planet.
Note: For an excellent account of the ascendancy of OPEC as an effective cartel, see Robert J. Samuelson’s story at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/11/AR2008031102461.html
Thursday, June 5, 2008
Something Serious to Worry About
This will be quick: I’ve just returned from a book discussion group. One of the participants had been absent for months – she had undergone cancer diagnosis and treatment. The good news is that the cancer was removed and she has been deemed cancer-free – no follow-up chemotherapy or radiation needed.
The not-so-good news is that the Marine Corps unit of her son-in-law was ordered to a second term in Iraq. He was part of the initial deployment in the second Gulf War, survived it, came back to the U.S. and stayed on as a reservist. He is now on active duty and planning the logistics for his team which will be re-deployed to Iraq in September for a seven-month tour.
As you read this over the weekend, think about that woman and her son-in-law . . . and of that other woman – the wife being left behind. Perhaps that long commute to work; the long wait in the check-out line; and that exasperating manager at work aren’t so unbearable after all. Maybe all those other inconsequential episodes of life that can bother us so much are nothing compared to the ravages of a cancer gone wild, or of a man getting his ticket punched for a second tour in Iraq.
Possibly your life is pretty good.
The not-so-good news is that the Marine Corps unit of her son-in-law was ordered to a second term in Iraq. He was part of the initial deployment in the second Gulf War, survived it, came back to the U.S. and stayed on as a reservist. He is now on active duty and planning the logistics for his team which will be re-deployed to Iraq in September for a seven-month tour.
As you read this over the weekend, think about that woman and her son-in-law . . . and of that other woman – the wife being left behind. Perhaps that long commute to work; the long wait in the check-out line; and that exasperating manager at work aren’t so unbearable after all. Maybe all those other inconsequential episodes of life that can bother us so much are nothing compared to the ravages of a cancer gone wild, or of a man getting his ticket punched for a second tour in Iraq.
Possibly your life is pretty good.
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
It’s Been a Long Time
Yesterday morning, after doing laps at the JCC Pool in Bridgewater, I pointed the car to our polling place to choose among Congressional candidates, local party officials, and national convention delegates in the New Jersey primary election. (What, again! – I thought those were over on Super Tuesday.) This is the first year in decades that my wife and I vote in the primaries, because we are unaffiliated voters.
Did you know that, if you are an independent voter, you can vote for either a Democratic or Republican slate in New Jersey’s primary elections without declaring your party affiliation in advance? If you do, though, you’ll stay registered in the party of your choice for all following primary elections, unless you contact Somerset County Offices in Somerville, and request a change back to unaffiliated (independent) voter. It’s easy to do, but you have to take the initiative.
I’d like for New Jersey to have the same system of primary voting as does New Hampshire. In that state, a Democrat or Republican can vote in the primaries for any party. In subsequent primary elections, NH voters can reverse allegiance at the polls at will, if they so choose, without having to go through any red tape.
. . . . On a related matter . . . Did you catch Senator Carl Levin of Michigan testifying before the Democratic Party’s Rules Committee the other day? He was rightfully upset and fuming about the long-unresolved issue of seating Michigan delegates at the upcoming Democratic National Convention? I thought he would bust a gut.
Senator Levin does not – emphasize, ‘does not like’ – the notion that the states of New Hampshire and Iowa keep trumping all the other states in the Union by insisting on staying ahead of the pack in the primaries and caucuses. It’s tradition, Senator, tradition.
Did you know that, if you are an independent voter, you can vote for either a Democratic or Republican slate in New Jersey’s primary elections without declaring your party affiliation in advance? If you do, though, you’ll stay registered in the party of your choice for all following primary elections, unless you contact Somerset County Offices in Somerville, and request a change back to unaffiliated (independent) voter. It’s easy to do, but you have to take the initiative.
I’d like for New Jersey to have the same system of primary voting as does New Hampshire. In that state, a Democrat or Republican can vote in the primaries for any party. In subsequent primary elections, NH voters can reverse allegiance at the polls at will, if they so choose, without having to go through any red tape.
. . . . On a related matter . . . Did you catch Senator Carl Levin of Michigan testifying before the Democratic Party’s Rules Committee the other day? He was rightfully upset and fuming about the long-unresolved issue of seating Michigan delegates at the upcoming Democratic National Convention? I thought he would bust a gut.
Senator Levin does not – emphasize, ‘does not like’ – the notion that the states of New Hampshire and Iowa keep trumping all the other states in the Union by insisting on staying ahead of the pack in the primaries and caucuses. It’s tradition, Senator, tradition.
Sunday, June 1, 2008
The Abuses of the Abbott School Districts
The news media are full of stories about the waste and extravagant spending coming from the state-supplied money spigots of the Abbott Districts. In one case, Governor Corzine has ordered the state Attorney General’s Office to intervene in order to block elements of the outrageous employment contract awarded to Keansburg’s outgoing Superintendent of Schools, Barbara Trzeszkowski.
In another instance, Education Commissioner, Lucille Davey, claims that she couldn’t get the Elizabeth school district to fork over records required to investigate allegations of financial abuse. On Friday, she issued a subpoena to force the release of those records.
. . . and so the saga continues.
Ever since 1981, when the Newark-based Education Law Center, under the direction of Marilyn Morheuser, filed its now famous Abbott v. Burke lawsuit, there has been a seemingly endless string of litigation. A former nun-turned-attorney, Morheuser wanted to improve the education of children “attending poor and urban schools in New Jersey.”
Since then, the ELC’s actions have resulted in a serious funding bifurcation pitting the 31 Abbott Districts which ELC litigation serves, against the remaining school districts in the State of New Jersey. The money flowing from Trenton to non-Abbott School Districts is now acutely unequal.
Fiscal abuses within the Abbott Districts continue to be reported. Yet I don’t recall reading of any stern and persistent efforts by the ELC to require accountability from the Abbott Districts. The billions of dollars poured into the Abbotts by New Jersey taxpayers have resulted in enormous good; they also have resulted in apparently vast waste and loss of goodwill.
The acceptance of massive funding by the Abbotts from the entirety of the New Jersey community comes with undeniable ethical responsibilities for fiscal accountability. The Education Law Center needs to refocus its efforts away from the amount of money that the Abbotts receive and to redirect its energies towards the regulation and monitoring of educational standards, desired scholastic outcomes, and the enforcement of requirements to ensure the responsible stewardship of those funds.
How long should we hold our breath?
Note: For a list of the 31 Abbott Districts, see http://www.state.nj.us/cgi-bin/education/abbotts/abbotturls.pl?string=code&maxhits=100. For a brief history of the Education Law Center see http://www.edlawcenter.org/ELCPublic/AboutELC/History.htm
In another instance, Education Commissioner, Lucille Davey, claims that she couldn’t get the Elizabeth school district to fork over records required to investigate allegations of financial abuse. On Friday, she issued a subpoena to force the release of those records.
. . . and so the saga continues.
Ever since 1981, when the Newark-based Education Law Center, under the direction of Marilyn Morheuser, filed its now famous Abbott v. Burke lawsuit, there has been a seemingly endless string of litigation. A former nun-turned-attorney, Morheuser wanted to improve the education of children “attending poor and urban schools in New Jersey.”
Since then, the ELC’s actions have resulted in a serious funding bifurcation pitting the 31 Abbott Districts which ELC litigation serves, against the remaining school districts in the State of New Jersey. The money flowing from Trenton to non-Abbott School Districts is now acutely unequal.
Fiscal abuses within the Abbott Districts continue to be reported. Yet I don’t recall reading of any stern and persistent efforts by the ELC to require accountability from the Abbott Districts. The billions of dollars poured into the Abbotts by New Jersey taxpayers have resulted in enormous good; they also have resulted in apparently vast waste and loss of goodwill.
The acceptance of massive funding by the Abbotts from the entirety of the New Jersey community comes with undeniable ethical responsibilities for fiscal accountability. The Education Law Center needs to refocus its efforts away from the amount of money that the Abbotts receive and to redirect its energies towards the regulation and monitoring of educational standards, desired scholastic outcomes, and the enforcement of requirements to ensure the responsible stewardship of those funds.
How long should we hold our breath?
Note: For a list of the 31 Abbott Districts, see http://www.state.nj.us/cgi-bin/education/abbotts/abbotturls.pl?string=code&maxhits=100. For a brief history of the Education Law Center see http://www.edlawcenter.org/ELCPublic/AboutELC/History.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)