Thayer School of Engineering at Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire, has accepted an invitation to partner with Qaanaaq, an Arctic hunting and fishing community in northwestern Greenland, as the residents transition to renewable energy and an affordable, sustainable future.
Funded by a US$2.6 million grant from the National Science Foundation, the project is expected to produce sustainable technological solutions that will also benefit other communities facing the effects of the climate crisis, including areas in the mid-latitudes.
Formerly and still popularly known as Thule or New Thule, Qaanaaq is one of the northernmost towns in the world.
The people of Qaanaaq, many of whom make their living by hunting and fishing through sea ice, asked Mary Albert, a professor of engineering at Thayer, to collaborate with them in their transition to affordable, renewable energy. Albert has worked in Greenland for many years studying snow and climate. She knows the citizens from her previous work and has agreed to lead the new team.
The Thayer team expects to travel to Qaanaaq for two weeks in the spring and two weeks in the fall each year for the next four years starting in April 2020. Previous funding from the Arthur L. Irving Institute for Energy and Society at Dartmouth enabled the team to visit Qaanaaq earlier this year to help identify the area’s needs.
Professor Albert says their work will support the Qaanaaq residents’ hunting and fishing way of living, which is currently unsustainable.
Albert says the people of Qaanaaq are excited about the prospect of decreasing their dependence on diesel and other fossil fuels, which are expensive and unsustainable.
Today, 70 percent (already pretty impressive) of Greenland’s energy is renewable hydropower from melt-fed rivers, but due to the conditions in the Qaanaaq area, many sources of sustainable energy, such as hydropower, are not feasible.
“It’s not a straightforward problem – it’s multifaceted. It involves equity, policy, the economy, ecosystems, societal culture, as well as engineering principles. All those aspects come into innovative solutions for this community,” said Albert.
Albert is confident the team, which includes research scientists, practitioners, and community members in Greenland, will be able to improve living standards as well as create sustainable solutions through the combination of technology innovation, youth education, and governmental policy change.
“In order to have a healthy community, we need to address the economic issues that accompany our energy needs and help promote a more sustainable society,” said Lene Kielsen Holm, who is the Greenland lead for the project. “Economic change would produce many beneficial side effects such as enabling more independence and bringing people back to a more balanced everyday life.”
“This project demonstrates engaged science in action,” said Stephen Doig, who contributed to the grant proposal and will travel with the research team to Greenland as research director at the Irving Institute. “It’s about understanding common goals and aspirations and then helping create and act on a plan.”
The Qaanaaq area in northwestern Greenland was first settled around 2000 BC by the Paleo-Eskimo people migrating from the Canadian Arctic.
The town of Qaanaaq was established in the winter of 1953 when the United States expanded Thule Air Base and forcibly relocated the population of two villages to the north within four days.
The settlement was subsequently moved another 100 km (62 miles) north.
With 656 inhabitants as of 2013, Qaanaaq is now the largest settlement in Greenland’s far north. Its population has been stable with only minor fluctuations since the mid-1990s. With its relatively low population and tradition of hunting, the village currently has more huskies than human residents.
Qaanaaq hosts a remote Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization infrasound listening station called IS-18, which uses an array of barometric sensors to detect possible nuclear tests around the world. The station is maintained by the Danish Meteorological Institute.
Rounding out the Dartmouth-Qaanaaq team will be Christopher Polashenski, adjunct assistant professor of engineering, and Weiyang (Fiona) Li, an assistant professor of engineering, as well as three Thayer PhD students and a postdoctoral fellow.
“This is an amazing opportunity to link science and human needs directly,” said Polashenski. “Only by understanding the complex linkages between environmental change and human activities can we plan for our future.”
The National Science Foundation grant is part of the NSF’s 10 Big Ideas program, which identifies and invests in research areas at the frontiers of science and engineering.
Navigating the New Arctic, one of the 10 Big Ideas, recognizes that biological, physical, chemical, and social changes in the Arctic will fundamentally alter climate, weather, and ecosystems globally with profound impacts on the world’s economy and security.
© Environment News Service (ENS) 2020. All rights reserved.
If you have an adult family member who is incapable of caring for themselves due to a physical or mental condition, it may be necessary to establish a legal guardianship for that person. A guardian is basically someone appointed by a judge to make decisions on behalf of an incapacitated person, who is known as the “ward.”
Because the ward loses significant legal rights under a guardianship, Florida requires family members and judges to take certain steps before a guardian can be named. One of these steps is for the court to appoint an examining committee of three people. This committee must conduct a “comprehensive examination” of the person under consideration for guardianship. Depending on the circumstances, this must include a physical examination, a mental health examination, and a “functional assessment” of the individual.
Court: Examining Committee Failed to Properly Examine Ward
In a recent decision, Cook v. Cook, the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeals dug a little deeper into this law, looking at what meets the “comprehensive examination” requirement. In this case, a group of siblings asked a judge in Palm Beach County to appoint a guardian for their brother, who they said had been “living like a recluse” in his condo for several years and was “unable to plan for his affairs or make practical decisions.”
The judge appointed the three-member examining committee as required by law. The committee included a primary care doctor, a licensed psychologist, and a layperson. The doctor interviewed the ward, reviewed his file, and determined the ward suffered from “psychosis.” The psychiatrist conducted a similar review and concluded the ward suffered from clinical depression. The layperson said the ward “was in denial” about his mental health.
Based on this and other evidence, the judge decided to place the ward in a guardianship. The ward appealed this decision. And by a 2-1 vote, the Fourth District reversed the trial court's ruling after determining the examining committee failed in its duty to conduct a “comprehensive examination.”
The two-judge majority pointed to the following problems with how the committee completed its task:
● None of the committee members actually “performed a physical examination” of the ward, nor did they explain why they neglected to conduct such an exam.
● The psychologist only conducted a basic mental health exam of the ward. The psychologist also told the court the ward needed “further evaluation.” But the psychologist never performed such an evaluation.
The dissenting judge argued the examining committee did its job properly, and that additional evidence–such as the testimony of the ward's family–was sufficient to justify appointing a guardian.
As you can see from this case, the decision to place an incapacitated adult under a guardianship is not a simple one. Even if you are 100 percent convinced a sibling, parent, or other relative can no longer care for themselves, the law still affords that person certain protections that must be respected. So if you are looking to establish a guardianship, you should speak with an experienced Fort Myers estate planning lawyer who can advise and assist you with the process. Contact the Kuhn Law Firm, P.A., at 239-333-4529 to schedule a free consultation with a member of our team today.
Fifteen years after the U.S. invaded Iraq to turn Saddam Hussein's dictatorship into a beacon of democracy, Iraq's Parliament, amid shouts of "Death to America!" voted to expel all U.S. troops from the country.
Though nonbinding, the expulsion vote came after mobs trashed the U.S. embassy in an assault that recalled Tehran 1979.
What provoked Iraq's Parliament into demanding the ouster of all U.S. troops?
First, the five December U.S. strikes on Iraq's Popular Mobilization Forces in retaliation for a dozen Kataib Hezbollah rocket attacks on U.S. bases, which killed a contractor and wounded four U.S. soldiers.
Then came President Donald Trump's decision to launch a drone-strike and kill Iranian General Qassem Soleimani at Baghdad International Airport. Killed in the same strike was the
Shiite Iraqi leader of Kataib Hezbollah.
During his return flight to Washington Sunday, Trump warned Iraq: Follow through on your demand that all U.S. troops get out, and we will insist that Baghdad repay the money we just spent on a major air base.
Moreover, said Trump, if Iraqis expel U.S. troops, then we will impose upon them "sanctions like they've never seen before, ever. It'll make Iranian sanctions look somewhat tame."
Where do we stand now in Iraq?
Though Sunnis and Kurds abstained, the Iraqi parliament has voted to expel all our troops. The State Department has urged U.S. civilians to flee Iraq. 82nd Airborne units have moved into the region to protect the U.S. embassy. U.S. troops fighting ISIS alongside Iraqi troops have separated themselves and stood down. In Iraq, the war on terrorism is on hold.
Across the Middle East, U.S. diplomats, soldiers and civilians are on alert. The acting prime minister of Iraq, in an echo of Tehran and radical Shiites, is demanding that all 5,200 U.S. soldiers in Iraq depart.
How can our troops, detested by the PMF militias and their thousands of fighters, unwanted by the Iraqi Parliament majority, the acting prime minister, and much of the Shiite majority, remain safely inside the capital city of Baghdad or the country?
What a difference a presidential decision can make.
Two months ago, crowds were in the streets of Iraq protesting Iran's dominance of their politics. Crowds were in the streets of Iran cursing that regime for squandering the nation's resources on imperial adventures in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen. Things were going America's way.
Now it is the Americans who are the targets of protests.
Over three days, crowds numbering in the hundreds of thousands and even millions have packed Iraqi and Iranian streets and squares to pay tribute to Soleimani and to curse the Americans who killed him.
As emotions are running high and America's friends in the region are mute, the twin goals of Iran and its militia allies appear clear:
Tehran wants to avoid a war with the United States, but to direct the passions of the moment toward forcing an expulsion of the Americans from the Middle East, beginning with their ouster from Iraq.
Thus, Tehran has signaled that its retaliation, its revenge for the death of Soleimani, a military man, will be proportionate. Tehran is telegraphing an attack on the U.S. military. Hassan Nasrallah, the head of Hezbollah in Lebanon, has called on his followers not to attack innocent Americans in the region but to zero in on U.S. military targets.
Oddly, what the America-haters of the Middle East seek is what Soleimani wanted, and what Trump promised in his campaign of 2016 -- an end to U.S. involvement in the forever wars of the Middle East.
Perhaps, rather than sending troops into Iraq and Kuwait to defend U.S. troops already there, we should accede to the local nationalist demands, start bringing our troops home, and let Iranians, Iraqis, Libyans, Syrians, Yemenis and Afghans settle their quarrels.
Despite the rage in Iran over the killing of Soleimani, the political imperatives that existed before last Friday's drone strike remain.
Iran does not want war with the United States. And Trump wants no war with Iran.
But Iran made a mistake in its extrapolation from that truth.
Assuming that because Trump did not want war, he would recoil from a fight, Soleimani believed he could kill Americans with impunity, as long as his
fingerprints were not on the murder weapon.
Killing Soleimani was just. But what is just is not always wise.
Yet, his killing restores Trump's credibility as a Jacksonian who avoids wars but who, wounded, will stab the enemy who cut him.
Trump has a red line. It is not shooting at American drones but shooting at American soldiers, the drawing of American blood.
The message the rulers of Iran should have received?
If they retaliate for Soleimani by killing American soldiers, diplomats or civilians, using either Iranian troops or proxy militias, Trump will retaliate against Iran itself.
Otherwise, "Come Home, America," George McGovern's slogan from the 1972 presidential campaign, has rarely seemed more relevant.
Patrick J. Buchanan
Hollywood loves taking apart conservatives. So when presented with the idea of men in the highest reaches of the conservative media sexually harassing women at the office, it was manna from heaven.
You'll not find a TV dramatization of Harvey Weinstein's predations ripped from the headlines. There's no movie on the alleged sexual misconduct by Matt Lauer at his hellish NBC offices, or Charlie Rose's at CBS. There is only "Bombshell," a fictionalized account of the hostile, sexist atmosphere at Fox News.
The filmmaker on this one is Jay Roach, who has made a series of comically leftist movies for HBO, such as one on Al Gore being denied the presidency ("Recount") and one on Sarah Palin's losing turn as vice presidential nominee ("Game Change"). Roach's idea of a hero movie was "Trumbo," based on screenwriter Dalton Trumbo, who, in the '40s, slavishly plopped Stalinist talking points into movies and belonged to the Communist Party USA, for which he was blacklisted.
Woe is anyone who goes to these movies expecting a faithful recounting of history. What you get instead is rampant editorializing and fiction. Characters are made up out of whole cloth and placed into real events. In "Bombshell," Fake Megyn Kelly and Fake Gretchen Carlson are digitized into actual Fox News footage. Two other central characters in this anti-Fox hit job -- an evangelical Christian beauty and a snarky, Hillary Clinton-loving lesbian Fox staffer -- are pure inventions.
The lesbian staffer describes the Fox ethos in this way: "You have to adopt the mentality of an Irish street cop. The world is a bad place. People are lazy morons. Minorities are criminals. Sex is sick but interesting. ... Ask yourself, 'What would scare my grandmother or piss off my grandfather?' And that's a Fox story."
Virtually everyone, and this includes Fox employees, has no idea what here is actually true and what is entirely made up. The media suggest the details aren't that important. What's important is "starting a conversation."
So long as that conversation isn't about liberal predators.
To his credit, CNN's Brian Stelter asked Roach: "I'm thinking myself, where's the -- where's the Matt Lauer movie? Where's the Les Moonves? Are those coming? I'm serious." Roach insisted there's a Harvey Weinstein documentary coming, and that someone will make a film about Ronan Farrow's struggles with NBC News in reporting on Weinstein's abuses.
"I would happily make that movie," he claimed. Don't bet a nickel on it.
Oh, how they objected to the concept of composite characters in movies based on real events when the subject was Clint Eastwood's "Richard Jewell," where it's implied that an actual Atlanta Journal-Constitution reporter (now deceased) offered sex for information from a fictional FBI agent. But these voices are silent when it comes to the Fox News-bashing movie.
The same thing is happening with "The Two Popes," a Netflix film spinning a tale about the relationship between crusty, traditionalist Pope Benedict XVI and his forward-looking successor, Pope Francis. Entire conversations are manufactured to dramatize the differences between conservative and liberal takes on the Catholic Church.
Catholic journalist Raymond Arroyo was poignant in saying: "It's a nicely acted fantasia, unmoored from fact, that misses the true character of both men. It is slanderous toward 1 Pope and overly fawning toward the other, serving neither the audience nor history."
If you're looking for historical truth in Hollywood movies, you're looking in the wrong spot.
L. Brent Bozell III
and Tim Graham
I’m starting this column with what I believe is a very telling question:
What FBI Director has been involved in more controversy in criminal investigations, with lots of allegations of corruption against him and within the ranks of the FBI – since J. Edgar Hoover’s death? (I don’t remember ANY during Hoover’s tenure.)
Is the answer James Comey? You bet it is and that, by itself, should make a reasonable man ask WHY?
Why would Comey violate the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and make prosecutorial comments, his opinions, regarding ongoing criminal investigations against Hillary Clinton?
There must be very close ties with the Clintons. Well, a little research is very revealing. Check for yourself, starting with the Marc Rich investigation by newly appointed (2001) SDNY US Attorney, James Comey!
Comey “cleared” Clinton and Comey’s career blossomed.
Follow it. It’s very telling.
I don’t want to waste my time on Comey’s close ties to the Clintons. You won’t believe me, so check for yourselves!
I don’t recall Hoover ever being accused of anything close to what Comey is accused of doing.
Comey’s First Deputy Director, Andrew McCabe, and Second, Peter Strzok, both testified under oath, that “Comey told me to leak”.
When did you ever hear that during any other FBI Director’s tenure – including Hoover?
Hoover had problems with Bobby Kennedy as AG. He told Nixon to “F”-off when Nixon said he would accept an executive position with the FBI. He did quid pro quo with adversaries when he went before appropriation committees – and usually won – for the FBI!
Hoover was never accused of leaking. Nor was he ever accused of undermining an investigation. He was accused of being too tough on communists and Martin Luther King.
After Hoover’s death, Clyde Tolson, deep throat, leaked everything he could because he wanted the director’s job, and believed he deserved it. I believe he would have killed to get it but never did get appointed.
Instead, L Patrick Gray got the job, temporarily.
By a set of circumstances, I met and spent time with Mr. Gray and his wife. Mr. Gray was very concerned with the morale of the FBI because of the way Hoover treated the employees — all employees.
Mr. and Mrs. Gray wanted to know what to do to turn that around. Mrs. Gray could not believe how poorly FBI Agents were paid and how poorly FBI executives, including her husband, were paid!
She said they could not make a living on his salary. Mr. Gray was a Federal Judge before becoming FBI Director.
My impression of Mr. Gray and of the other former judge I spent some time with, Judge William Sessions, was that neither one of them knew anything about law enforcement. They were very good people with high standards, legal scholars, but knew nothing about law enforcement.
I kept asking, “Why would they appoint only former lawmen to chief of police jobs? Appoint only former/current military men to chiefs of various military branches but appoint a judge as FBI Director?”
It’s insane, in my humble opinion and doesn’t freaking work! I have never receieved an answer that made any sense!
I can tell you why none of the other FBI Directors were in criminal, legal trouble, however. Because they did not break the law! They followed the laws, they sent people to jail for breaking. But not Comey.
He is one person who believes he is above the law!
Comey, without any doubt in my mind, wants to be president of the United States and save you and me from ourselves. He knows what’s best for us!
The difference between Comey and Obama or Lynch or Clinton is Comey doesn’t care who knows he broke the law.
He admits he leaked. He admits he knew the Steele Dossier is a phony and still signed it. He knew Hillary broke hundreds of laws, he told us, but it was “best” for us that he did those things to save us from ourselves and of course, from Trump!
If I were the FBI Director, I would charge Comey with treason right now and only cut a deal if he gave me Obama!
Comey led a coup to overthrow the president and our government and lost!
The only problem I would have winning that case is credibility — the lack of it by Comey.
So I would need Lynch at least and Hillary to lock up a conviction. And you know what, I would get both Lynch and Clinton to roll — “wanna bet”?
They would all face conspiracy to commit treason. Treason carries the death penalty and there is no statute of limitations!
Stocks reached new records and oil prices dropped Wednesday after President Donald Trump’s announcement on curtailing the conflict with Iran.
The boost came after U.S. stocks closed in the red on Tuesday, expressing investors’ concerns about conflict in the Middle East and after Iran launched more than a dozen missile against two military bases in Iraq.
On Monday, Chevron Corporation CVX announced it was evacuating all of its American oil workers from Iraq as a "precautionary measure" "for the time being."
Chevron and Exxon Mobil both reported losses on Tuesday, with Dow Jones shares declining 1.3 percent and 0.8 percent, respectively.
In response to Trump’s decision to issue sanctions, stocks rallied on Wednesday, breaking two records.
The S&P 500 reached another new intraday all-time high Wednesday by nearly one point, a seven-tenths percentage point increase, and the Nasdaq Composite reached an all-time high of 0.7 percent.
While the Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 0.8 percent, its increase didn’t match the all-time high record it set on Jan. 2.
Oil prices also dropped Wednesday by more than 4 percentage points after the president’s remarks, reassuring traders that tensions with Iran de-escalated.
The president announced sanctions on Iran, and said the door was open to negotiation, “toward making a deal with Iran that makes the world a safer and more peaceful place. We must also make a deal that allows Iran to thrive and prosper, and take advantage of its enormous untapped potential. Iran can be a great country.”
Trump urged U.S. allies, China, and Russia, to “work together to make a deal with Iran that makes the world a safer and more peaceful place.”
He concluded by saying, “to the people and leaders of Iran: We want you to have a future and a great future – one that you deserve, one of prosperity at home, and harmony with the nations of the world. The United States is ready to embrace peace with all who seek it.”
The Center Square
Make It Legal Florida (MILF), the well-funded political action committee sponsoring a prospective November 2020 constitutional amendment seeking to legalize recreational marijuana, will spearhead a legal challenge to a new law it claims has unconstitutionally hampered the state’s citizen initiative process.
Restrictions imposed on petition-gatherers by the Republican-led Legislature during the 2019 session that went into effect July 1 “have the intent and effect of impermissibly burdening and impinging the petition rights of plaintiff and Florida voters,” MILF’s lawsuit states. “As a result, the amended law is facially invalid, as an unconstitutional alteration of the initiative petition process.”
MILF’s 57-page class-action filed lawsuit Tuesday in Leon County Circuit Court names Florida Secretary of State Laurel Lee and all 67 county elections supervisors as defendants, alleging the new restrictions “lack even a rational, reasonable, or coherent justification or relation to any purported state interest” other than to prevent issues unpopular with GOP lawmakers from being presented directly to voters.
MILF seeks more time to submit petition signatures to qualify for the November 2020 ballot. State law requires petitioners present the state’s Division of Elections (DOE) with 766,320 validated signatures by Feb. 1 to qualify.
As of mid-day Thursday, 223,897 valid petition signatures had been filed with the DOE by MILF, which did not emerge until last summer and begin its petition signing campaign until the fall.
Petitioners now say, under new state rules, they’ll need at least 1.1 million signatures to ensure 766,320 are verified before Feb. 1.
MILF’s proposed constitutional amendment would allow people 21 or older to “possess, use, purchase, display, and transport up to 2.5 ounces of marijuana and marijuana accessories for personal use for any reason.”
Tampa-based MILF has received $3.8 million in campaign contributions largely from two national marijuana corporations – five-year-old Atlanta-based Surterra, which operates more than 30 medical marijuana dispensaries in Florida with similar operations in Texas, Nevada and Massachusetts totaling $50 million in 2018 revenues, and MedMen, founded in 2010 in Culver City, Calif., which operates nearly 100 retail sites in 12 states, including in Florida, with $39.8 million in revenues last year.
MadMen Southeastern Director of Government Affairs Nick Hansen chairs MILF.
MILF’s lawsuit maintains its initiative campaign also has been hamstrung by repeated administrative issues and technical problems in implementing the additional complexities imposed on the ballot process by House Bill 5, the controversial 2019 bill that essentially extended the state’s voter registration system for absentee ballots to petition-gathering.
Introduced as a raft of 11th hour amendments onto an unrelated bill and adopted in partisan votes by the House and Senate in the waning moments of the session, HB 5 requires every citizen initiative to have its own numbered, serialized petition, bars out-of-state entities from organizing ballot campaigns and prohibits signature gatherers from being paid.
MILF’s lawsuit claims that complying with HB 5 has “presented an enormous (if not insurmountable) barrier to the ability of sponsors, such as plaintiff MILF, to collect the requisite number of signatures for petitions and have them reviewed, validated and verified by the supervisors, and then reviewed and deemed sufficient by the secretary – all by the Feb, 1, 2020 deadline.
“It is thus substantially likely, if not certain, that initiative petitions will fail (i.e., they will not make the ballot for vote by electors in the 2020 general election),” MILF’s complaint continues, “despite the fact such initiatives would or could have succeeded if not doomed by the impairments caused to petition circulators’ ability to register and timely begin circulating and collecting signatures in support of petitions.”
MILF’s measure is one of two petition initiatives seeking to legalize adult marijuana use, and one of 26 overall, listed as “active” on the DOE’s website.
Sensible Florida, which launched its "Regulate Marijuana in a Manner Similar to Alcohol" petition campaign in 2016 and had only 92,566 signatures as of Thursday, has already announced it will not qualify for the 2020 ballot.
At least four measures will, however, meet the signature requirement to qualify for November’s election, including Florida For A Fair Wage’s “Fight For $15” proposal seeking to raise the state’s minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2026.
The others are a measure that would allow all registered voters to cast ballots in “open” primary elections for state Legislature, Governor and Cabinet, regardless of political party membership; a constitutional amendment stipulating “only,” rather than “any,” U.S. citizen can legally vote; and a proposal to allow individual customers choose energy providers or produce their own.
The Center Square
With the coming of the new year I send to you all.... Best Wishes for a Prosperous and Happy 2020!
This time of year we look back at the months that have passed and reflect, ponder and resolve to improve ourselves.
As life goes on, certain things happen that shape our lives, our perspectives and help mold our futures. Recently, my best friend was diagnosed with Cancer, there was history in the family so it wasn't a complete surprise but knocked the wind right out of me. Another good friend had a brain aneurism burst, needed emergency surgery and spent Christmas and New Years in ICU and is scheduled to be released soon.
A few months ago a friend died while on a Sunday ride on his Harley, he was hit from behind at a traffic light. Last month, some friends were involved in a multi-bike accident, while riding in a group something went wrong with the lead rider and he went down, I only got third hand information so it is hard to say what actually happened, but 5 motorcycles were involved and one man lost his life with others dealing with multiple operations and some still in ICU. Makes one wonder if riding is still a good idea.
Then the other day............ a good friend came down with an illness and became deathly ill. It crept in slowly over a week's time, we finally took him to ER on Christmas Eve. We still are not sure what it was, tests were done and speculations were made........... leaving only more questions than actually offering answers...some CDC epidemic? Some strain of the flu that had mutated? Who knows? The doctors sure didn't......... after a few days, it appeared to many, especially himself, that he was not going to make it.
I'll never forget being in his hospital room the other day when he took my hand in his and told me "Please take care of my wife" I told him NO...he wasn't done here yet and he needed to be strong and lick this thing whatever it was. He was weak, he looked drained and defeated........In my heart I wondered if I was lying to my friend but I was hopeful that he would pull through, sometimes a true friend lies to you to give you strength to push through such obstacles! But he was too weak to be hopeful and believed he would soon die.
As fate would have it...... it was not his time yet! He is not completely out of the woods but is doing much better and looks like he will be okay!
And now, a few days ago, on the next to last day of 2019 another friend, Benito "Benny" Mata died from a heart attack at a very young age of 45...He turned 44 last September and had just started on his 45th year!
He was a good man, a hard worker and good friend to many.... he always had a smile on his face, and would literally give you the shirt of his back.......he will be missed. As soon as I have any information about any celebration of life I will post it to our Facebook page.
You may wonder why I am sharing all this with you? It is because I have decided that life is too short and I am working too much! I need to take some more time, do some traveling and smell a whole bunch more roses before it's too late!
My labor of love that is the Sun Bay Paper has been an incredible ride..... But with all this in mind..... I have decided to sell the Newspaper! Previous owner Trent Townsend spent a small fortune establishing this paper, I will be selling it pennies on the dollar.
On another note: I could really use an advertising sales person to help bring in more revenues, so if you are a people person and have the gift of gab, please give me a call. I'm offering 30% commission.
This paper would be perfect for a couple who have a passion for sharing conservative values and believe that the main stream media is way too biased. I will be happy to train you in all the software I use and will be available for a smooth transition.
I have about 20 new paper boxes ready for placement in an expansion plan I was going to implement but will leave that for the future owners.
Over the next few months, I will entertain offers to purchase the paper, if you are interested, I have listed it with a Broker and I am offering some owner financing, his name is Don and you can reach him at 239-216-7062.
I got a kick out of a letter to the editor I saw about my last column. It was from another bitter liberal -- Is there any other kind? -- who complained that I'm a liar. The writer argued that President Donald Trump's economy is not so great and said it's actually worse than the economy under former Presidents Barack Obama and Jimmy Carter.
This just shows that the more liberals say, the better Trump looks to voters.
The November jobs report came out Friday. Set aside the fact that Trump has produced one of the greatest stock markets in history; that gross domestic product is far above its pace during the administrations of Obama or Carter, who both produced disastrous economies that nearly destroyed the middle class; that 3.5% unemployment is the lowest in 50 years; that the highest number of Americans are working in history; and that black and Latino unemployment are the lowest in history.
The latest jobs report is better news than all of that.
There were 266,000 jobs created in November. That's 79,000 jobs more than economists expected ... in a month. The number of jobs was also revised upward by 41,000 for the two preceding months.
Manufacturing jobs soared by 54,000 in November, the biggest monthly gain since 1998.
Wages were up 3.1%. That's the 16th month in a row wages are up 3% or higher. Ask any worker if a bigger paycheck for 16 months in a row matters. I dare you.
CNBC called it "a blowout jobs report" and said, "You can't contradict that these are the best numbers of our lives." CNN said, "A couple of generations of people have not seen this kind of unemployment rate continue to be that low." Fox Business reported, "This is one of the best reports. ... What a way to end the decade, on this report. It's outstanding."
So, I ask all my readers: Who is the delusional one?
I don't need to wait for an answer. Just look at the latest Rasmussen presidential approval poll. It was already a robust 49% for Trump before the latest impeachment hearing on Wednesday. That's when Democrats trotted out a bunch of America-hating, capitalism-hating, Ivy League law school professors to testify in front of the nation.
Smart move. This group even makes Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren seem likable.
The very next day, Trump's approval soared to 52% -- just a smidge below the highest of his presidency. Those law professors made quite an impression. I'm surprised Democrats didn't trot out used car salesmen and dentists.
On Friday, Trump's approval was 51% -- significantly above where Obama was on the same day of his presidency -- even though Trump has faced overwhelmingly negative news coverage.
Among white voters, Trump's approval is positive, 53% to 46%. Among male voters, it's positive, 59% to 40%. And, most shocking, Trump's approval rating is 31% among black voters.
It's clear what voters think about President Trump and the economy. It's clear who they believe and who they think is lying. But please keep the angry, delusional liberal letters to the editor coming. You're making my job so much easier.
I'm honored to report I received an invitation from President Trump to visit the White House next week. I'll be sure to tell him congratulations and thank you from all my fans who have good jobs, higher wages and far higher retirement accounts thanks to his policies.
All I can say is the Trump economic miracle is the best revenge.
Wayne Allyn Root
Here is a chilling case of sanctuary chickens coming home to roost.
Upon being convicted of armed robbery, kidnapping, home invasion and the brutal murders of two doctors on Tuesday, African criminal Bampumim Teixeira taunted the Massachusetts prosecutor who won the case and vowed to rape his wife. "You better hope I don't get out of jail," Teixeira threatened as he was dragged away in handcuffs by a quartet of court security officers. The killer appeared to greatly enjoy the media spectacle while striking fear into the hearts of innocents. He will be sentenced on Friday.
I am outraged on behalf of the victims' families and pray for the prosecutor's loved ones. But let's be clear: This homicidal beast is a beneficiary of liberal Bay State policies that coddle foreign evildoers and give them cover to wreak havoc in our homeland. The architects of open borders Boston have blood on their hands.
Teixeira was a repeat offender well-known to law enforcement and government officials before he snuck into the South Boston condo of Richard Field and Lina Bolano in 2017, bound and gagged them, slit their throats and stabbed them to death. A homeless vagrant from Guinea-Bissau in West Africa, Teixeira had been convicted of two bank robberies and was released from prison just weeks before the massacre at Field and Bolano's condo. This thieving bum's lawyer secured a deal with the Suffolk County district attorney's office to sentence him to 364 days for the second heist and downgraded the second felony crime to larceny.
Why one day shy of a year? Why the reclassification of a felony to a misdemeanor?
The soft-on-alien-crime agreement allowed him to escape deportation, which any green card holder would normally face for committing crimes of moral turpitude or crimes that result in sentences of 365 days or more. Ultimately, he served only 9 months behind bars. This evilness is part of a nationwide move by far-left Democratic prosecutors, many subsidized and supported by open borders billionaire George Soros, to minimize "collateral immigration consequences of criminal convictions" and help immigrants evade "disproportionate collateral consequences, such as deportation. All in the name of "public safety" and celebrating diversity, of course.
For those outside of New England, let me tell you about the infamous public enemy, Suffolk County DA Rachael Rollins. In March, she ordered her employees to monitor and snitch on federal ICE officers hanging around any courthouse while trying to do their jobs. She is overseeing a radical "restorative justice" agenda to decrease arrests, detentions and prosecutions for both citizens and noncitizens. Our office, she announced, "will begin to factor into all charging and sentencing decisions the potential of immigration consequences."
Let me translate that for you: If foreign adults commit crimes that would separate them from their families and lead to imprisonment and deportation, DA Rollins will drop charges or shorten sentences in the name of social justice -- the law-abiding victims of these criminal immigrants be damned.
The anarchy-promoting DA grudgingly admitted to Boston talk show legend Howie Carr earlier this year that the Teixeira case was a "horrific situation." She said she would have "no problem" deporting convicted criminal immigrants, but only after they "shoot or rape or kill somebody." In other words: Always look the other way at immigration crimes until it's too late to save the lives of innocent people sacrificed at the altar of open borders.
As the people of Boston face a crucial vote by their city council this week on whether to make their sanctuary policies even more radical and welcoming for the world's homeless, jobless, drug dealers and gangbangers, I have questions:
Why shouldn't foreign law-breakers face "immigration consequences" for every single civil and criminal law they violate?
Why are Soros-bots across the country elevating the rights of criminal immigrants above law-abiding citizens?
Why aren't more Americans rising in revolt against open borders-sponsored politicians and prosecutors turning our neighborhoods into safe spaces for foreign outlaws?
Over the past three months, thousands have joined me at rallies to Stand with ICE and defend American First in so-called sanctuary cities from Boston to Aurora to Portland to Montgomery County, Maryland? What about the rest of you? What's your excuse?