text:
Comprehensive immigration reform is essential if we are to achieve the robust, sustainable growth necessary to secure our long-term economic future. Just one example: at manufacturing plants throughout my district, employers are having a hard time finding the skilled workers they need. As our workforce ages, retirements are expanding the need for qualified, highly skilled workers. Smart immigration policy will help American companies strategically address these challenges.
To better understand the issues around immigration, I gathered input from community and business leaders at an immigration roundtable discussion I organized last year. One participant of particular note was what many call a "DREAMer." Estefania Garcia shared her story of coming to the U.S. when she was 7 years old, growing up here, going to school here, graduating from college here and now building a career helping others here. Her story did not leave a dry eye in the room.
I was so touched by Estefania's experiences that I invited her as my guest to the President's State of the Union Address. Her success and her impact in the community personify the strong case for comprehensive reform.
When considering that case, it is perhaps most important to remember that her story is not at all unique. At colleges and universities across the country, gifted, ambitious students face the real fear that after graduation, they'll have to leave this country and apply their skills, achieve their dreams, somewhere else.
These young DREAMers are only some of the faces of immigration reform. But their stories underscore the urgent need to fix our broken system. This is why four of my Illinois colleagues joined me to invite advocates for immigration reform to the State of the Union—to emphasize the need.
Rarely do we face an issue with such significance for the social and economic fabric of our society. Yet, comprehensive immigration reform poses just such significance. Comprehensive reform is good for our economy, for our communities and for individuals across the country.
In fact, our current system is so broken that fixing it will actually save money. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates $175 billion in savings from the Senate's bipartisan comprehensive reform package.
Simply put: comprehensive immigration reform is a win-win proposition. We'll be able to attract the world's most gifted STEM minds to our schools, train them and then encourage them to stay here and help us achieve 21st Century success. Our economy will be injected with the talent and skills it needs to thrive. And 11 million people will pay taxes and become fully engaged in our democracy for the first time.
We can do well by doing right.
So let me close with one more story. Last year, I attended a naturalization ceremony and watched 53 people from 19 different countries take the Oath of Citizenship and say the Pledge of Allegiance for the first time as Americans. That powerful moment affected everyone in attendance that day—family, friends, neighbors, even strangers.
Experiencing the incredible feeling of hope and achievement at that ceremony and understanding the indisputable economic benefits of real improvements to our system, I had no doubt whatsoever about the absolute need for comprehensive immigration reform legislation. I call on all of my colleagues to join me in this effort.


text:
Each of us is only as strong as the communities we live in. With your help, the Suffolk Community Foundation can be a remarkable force for good in our county.
The quickest and simplest way to help those in need today. Either give online or contact us if you would like to know more and want to consider setting up a regular donation.
Our grants programme is here to help support local charities, voluntary and community groups who are tackling disadvantage and need across Suffolk. We do aim to make the application process as simple and transparent as possible.
As well as meeting with local charities and community groups, visiting them on site, discussing their work and ongoing needs and seeing their programmes in action, we are actively involved in the larger philanthropic world.
21 Jul 2014 | David Sheepshanks on the power of sport and communities
17 Jul 2014 | Community Foundations endorsed in new Charity Commission guidelines
07 Jul 2014 | Behind the scenes of Unscene Suffolk
Support us by coming along to Suffolk Dog Day on 27 July at Helmingham Hall. It's a fun day out for all the family! Read article

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Toyota Venza Maintenance and Repair
I purchased our 2009 Venza on February 6th of this year and just discovered that the recall notice for this vehicle was issued by Toyota on January 27th - some 10 days earlier. More than one of the salespeople helping us at the time made a point of declaring that the Venza was not on the recall list and so we went ahead with our purchase. Now, my wife does not want to drive the car and my kids don't want their kids in the car either. I am curious to know if we have any recourse, either with Toyota or the dealership. Even if Toyota had not noticed the dealership by Feb. 6th, I would think that they (the dealership) had a duty to know and an obligation to advise us prior to the purchase.
I wonder if this has happened to anyone else?
Yes, the Venza recall is for the mats, but after reading Johnk12's message, I am not convinced that it is just that. Especially after all of the issues with the Prius.
My question was more along the lines of receiving advice on how best to approach Toyota and the dealership regarding the sale of a vehicle that is known to be on any recall list - wether it is mats, software or whatever. I seriously doubt that we would have purchased the Venza knowing that it was on the recall list. We would have continued our search for a low mileage used Highlander to replace the one that was totaled recently. We did not have a lot of time to research different vehicles and were dependent on a dealership (and brand) that we have come to rely on and feel it was their obligation to be forthright with any information - especially involving recalled cars that they were selling.
Any thoughts on how to deal with this situation would be appreciated.
The Venza has the Denso pedal which is not part of the recall and isn't the same as the Prius. .
Reference: http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2010/01/toyota-recall-update-3-how-to-t- ell-which-pedal-you-have.html
FYI the Venza recall is the same recall that is on the Highlander.
While I'm not calling into question Johnk12's issue, I certainly would have left an email address on this forum and would want to talk to anyone who had a similar problem.
However, I do believe that Toyota needs to get to the bottom of whatever is going on. Some of these UA's are legitimate and others are outright scams such as is Prius in California.
After talking to several people with Toyota as well as those in the industry I have no concerns of UA with the Venza.
No matter what type of car you own, one needs to be aware of how to stop the vehicle if the worst case scenario.
Thanks for the response, Robfile, your comments are appreciated. I understand that the possibility of an acceleration problem with the Venza's are remote and that we should be able to respond to those situations rationally, but my point was not so much with the physical problems with the vehicle as much as the responsibility of the manufacturer and/or the dealership to notify a prospective owner that there is a recall pending on the vehicle that they may be purchasing.
I would like to think that when I go to a Toyota dealership (or any dealership for that matter) that I have been provided with all of the information needed to make a reasonably informed purchase decision - especially if it has to do with safety and specifically a product defect that has already been noticed to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration as this was 9 to 10 days prior to us buying our Venza.
I just got off the phone with a representative from Toyota and had a most dizzying conversation with a poor gentlemen that was doing his best to support the party line, but just could not make a rational statement when pressed for details. For example, when I asked him if he could tell me when Toyota noticed the dealerships about the January 27th floor mat related recall of the Venza, he put me on hold for 15 minutes and came back with a comment to the effect that the dealerships have not been noticed as there is not a full remedy for the problem yet. Even though he admitted that the "partial" remedy was to remove the driver's side mat, there was no obligation on their part to notify customers of this and that it was up to us to find this information on their website. He stated that they don't have a responsibility to notify their customers until a full remedy has been determined at which time we will get a formal notice in the mail. (Needles to say, this was not an acceptable response and his supervisor will be calling me in the morning.)
The bottom line is this - a customer shopping for a car should be told by a representative of a factory sponsored dealership of any recalls - whether pending or fully completed - so that they can make a fully informed decision when deciding on which vehicle to buy. I have been a loyal Toyota fan for over 25 years, but I think they have some serious issues and this situation seems to be further proof of that.
An update to my last post - a supervisor from Toyota called me yesterday and actually apologized for the "miss-information" I had received from his customer service rep. He stated that Toyota should have notified car owners by now. When I asked him if and when the dealerships were notified of the floormat recall on the Venza's, he researched it while we were on the line and reported that the dealerships were emailed the information immediately (January 27th or 28th - some 9 to 10 days before we made our purchase).
The supervisor was honest and forthright with his responses which I appreciated very much. Unfortunately, I now have a bone to pick with the dealership for not being the same with us. I'll let you know how that goes.
sam063 Posts: 1I have the exact same problem with my 2010 Venza bought in April'10 and brought it back to dealer with 4400 miles on it. I left it at Toyota for the day. (by the way - no loaner cars!) They proceeded to call me later and said the car is ready and wont surge anymore. They actually ended up cutting my rotors at 4400 miles. I have had many brand new cars and NEVER heard of this. I dont think they even though twice that there might be a defect in the brakes or rotors and whatever could be the problem besides CUTTING my rotors. I think they have a big problem and now I do also. I cannot trade it in. I have decided to ignore it for now. And I did ask my salesperson before the purchase if it was on recall list which she assured me it wasnt, and hello - 3 weeks later- I got the recall for the gas pedal problem with the mats but dont bring it to dealer as they dont have a fix for it yet. I am very disturbed and god forbid if something happens because of this to myself or my family or someone else. I am lost. Any suggestions?
marvin6 Posts: 72We bought our 6 cyl venza at the end of April and have just over 1,000 miles on it. We have no brake issues, but I do totally agree with you that you should have been informed of any recalls. That being said, I don't think there is anything wrong with the mats. I've been driving over 35 years and I have pulled the mats out from under the pedal of just about every car I've ever owned or driven (with the exception of those with retaining hooks on the mats). This car has the hooks to hold them in place. I think the old saying "if you can scare people you can take their money" (or control where they spend it) applies here. UA is not unique to toyota by any means, but I think the hype is because toyota is a foreign-owned company with non-union labor. I'd suggest you drive and enjoy the car.
I have had my Venza for 3 weeks and the AC quit cooling. Per the Toyota dealer, a rock has gone thru the grill and busted into the conderser causing it to fail. I was sitting in traffic when this occurred and obviously did not hear anything hit the car. Now they want my insurance company to pay for the repair and I pay the $500 deductible. Is this true? IF THEY ARE TELLING THE TRUTH, this is a faulty design and it can happen over and over again. It's not like I was out 4 wheeling when it happened. Any thoughts? Should I get a lawyer?
headclinic Posts: 3The condenser could have been damaged when you were driving on the highway and it wasn't until enough refrigerant leaked out did you notice it while sitting in traffic. I've had rocks crack my lights and windshield while driving. It's just the reality of driving on the road were all sorts of debris can get airborn and hit your car as you travel 50+ mph into it.
1trulove Posts: 29Just had my 5,000 mile service from a dealer in NH, wher we send the summer. I was surprised when told that there was a recall on the throttle. We, like others in this forum were told that only the mat was involved in a recall. But, better late than never and they replaced it and "reprogramed" it for free. It just makes me question the information we get. (ie. speed, honesty, PR, etc.) :confuse:
lcjesse Posts: 30what's up with the throttle body in the Venza????? I have Ford Freestyle (07) that has sudden "lurching" problems and Ford wanted to replace the throttle body but from the forum on the freestlye, i went with just cleaning the fuel injection system which seemed to have fixed my problem a whole lot cheaper that replacing the throttle body. There have been lots of Freestyle owners with the same problem and they reported having to waits months to get the replacement throttle body. Wonder if the Throttle body is the same in these cars. The Fuel Induction cleaning service fixed my problem so far (almost 6 week w/o any lurching). But now am facing having the have my CVT transmission get 60K service done and am afraid that FOrd will mess that up. Was looking at the Venza as a possible replacement vehicle but can't face more "throttle body" problems
thanks for any information.
donc9 Posts: 2There are no Throttle Body problems with the Venza. I think what you are referring to is the Sticking Throttle Peddle problems with some Toyotas. Venzas did not have this problem but to make sure this cannot happen, Toyota is doing a computer update that will cause the engine to go to idle speed whenever the brake is applied no matter what the position of the throttle peddle.
My 2009 Venza has about 19,000 miles and I have had ZERO mechanical problems. I recently completed a 600 mile round trip to St. Louis and got 30.4 mpg! This was with a load of 3 adults, one baby, one golden retriever and luggage and averaging 70 mph. I heartedly recommend the Venza as a replacement for you Freestyle.
"..The are no Throttle Body problems.."
That remains to be seen. It is entirely possible that the DBW throttle control firmware is responsible for the three apparently VALID engine runaway incidents.
"Venzas did not have this problem.."
Says who..? By what authority do you make this statement..?
" doing a computer update.."
Useless, quite possibly USELESS computer update.
Suppose, like I suspect, it actually is the engine/transaxle (DBW, CC) firmware that is flawed...? Embed another firmware routine to "signal" the DBW firmware routine to drive the throttle plate closed.
That's a false sense of security, safety, if I ever heard one.
A true failsafe for an inadvertent WOT condition would/SHOULD be implemented entirely separate from any possible causative factors/components. A simple relay system that opened the fuel injector circuit should the throttle plate not quickly return to idle upon brake application would be satisfactory IMMHO.
If I were to buy a Venza, or any DBW vehicle with NipponDenso or Denso US as the primary "electrical" component vendor, I would IMMEDIATELY add a failsafe relay that opened the fuel injector circuit if the e-brake, parking brake, were applied with the engine running. Apply the e-brake prior to starting the engine, no effect.
On the other hand I would also likely drop a front halfshaft and apply a constant 12 volts to the rear drive engagement clutch,....a safe, MORE SAFE, RWD Venza. There is an aftermarket device available so the front halfshaft could be manually (dis,) engaged.
But what I would REALLY jump at purchasing would be a F/awd Venza using the I4 but upgraded to/with DFI. Improved FE and HP/torque, 187HP now to 210-225(??). Or the displacement of the I4 could be lowered keeping the 187HP level but with absolutely STELLAR FE.
rickster01 Posts: 6I am in the market for a new vehicle and the Venza and Camry are 2 of my considerations. Which engine is in your 2009 Venza? I would assume the 4-cyl with that kind of mileage. I really like the looks and feel of these 2 vehicles over the Hondas but am concerned about safety after reading this forum.


text:
- 7 Comments
Welcome to Ben's Bargains. Please Register, Sign in or Sign in with Facebook
Lemme see . (twenty minus five) minus ten equals, what, exactly?
Does it work with other brands?
BTW, this keyboard corrects your AmerEnglish to the King's English. Color comes out colour, the hood (of a car) comes out bonnet and so forth.
I have this, and some of the key placements take some getting used to.. especially if you have american english enabled on your device - then some of the symbols on the keyboard don't map. Ie shift+2 will get you @, but on the keyboard the label is ' "" '. Still beats the heck out of an onscreen keyboard though.
And yes it works with other brands - I've used on Nook HD+ running CM 10.1 with no problems.
Sold out. However, users claimed it works with some but not all other brands.
Already a member? Sign in below.
Registration takes seconds! Once registered you�ll have members only access to:
The best deals, product reviews, and giveaway announcements emailed directly to you!
Sign up now for the Ben's Bargains newsletter!
Thanks! You can also register an account with us to be eligible for Giveaway Entries, Deal Alerts, and Comments.


text:
SCCRC 'queried Lockerbie verdict' (From Borehamwood Times)
Get involved: send your pictures, video & news by texting BOREHAMWOOD to 80360, or upload here
- Borehamwood Times »
- National News »
- National News
National News
SCCRC 'queried Lockerbie verdict'
12:48pm Tuesday 13th March 2012 in National News © Press Association 2014
New details of the legal grounds that could have cast doubt on the Lockerbie bomber's conviction have been disclosed, according to a newspaper report.
The six grounds for referral back to the appeal court are contained in a document by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC), the body which investigates potential miscarriages of justice, with extracts printed in the Herald newspaper.
The Scottish Government has brought forward legislation to bring about the publication of the full report but data protection rules still bar its formal publication.
On claims the verdict was unreasonable, the SCCRC report quoted in the Herald states: "The commission has reached the view that the trial court's verdict is at least arguably one which no reasonable court, properly directed, could have returned."
The six grounds for referral were previously published by the SCCRC in summary. Four of the reasons refer to undisclosed evidence from the Crown to Abdelbaset al-Megrahi's defence team.
Those grounds cover evidence about a positive identification of Megrahi by Tony Gauci, a Maltese shopkeeper who said he sold clothes to a Libyan man. The clothes were linked to a suitcase loaded onto the plane, which was then linked to the bomb and eventually to Megrahi.
The SCCRC raised concerns that evidence suggesting Mr Gauci had seen a magazine article linking Megrahi to the bomb was not passed to the defence.
Contradictions about the day Megrahi was said to have bought the clothes were also highlighted. The court was told the purchase was on December 7 but the SCCRC said Mr Gauci also thought it might have been November 29.
"In the commission's view, by withholding this information the Crown deprived the defence of the opportunity to take such steps as it might have deemed necessary," the report in the Herald adds.
Also of concern to the SCCRC was undisclosed evidence about Mr Gauci's interest in rewards. A fifth reason covered "secret" intelligence documents not seen by Megrahi's legal team while the sixth referred to new evidence on the date of clothes purchased in Malta.


text:
Pa Ventura: April 9, 2011
To taxpayers
The county of Ventura is looking for ways to control public pension costs. One is to stop spiking employees' pay through buy-backs of unused vacation time. If their unions agree, it will be a vacation from business as usual.
To patients
A study shows that families with high-deductible health insurance plans go to the doctor less than families with more traditional plans. It would have been a surprise if researchers had found the opposite.
To Thousand Oaks
Your fair city's agitated debate over a proposed roadside sign makes other folks wonder if there's more to the disagreement than that.
To Port Hueneme
For book lovers, all roads today lead to the Ray D. Prueter Library, 510 Park Ave., for the 27th annual used book sale put on by the Friends of the Port Hueneme Library. The event begins at 10 a.m.
To property owners
Due to a county error, you have an extra 24 hours — until the close of business Tuesday — to get your semi-annual property tax check in the mail or pay it in person at the County Government Center or online.
To residents
The entire community should take note who was honored recently as being tops on the bench: Superior Court Judge Vincent O'Neill Jr. was named Judge of the Year by the Ventura County Trial Lawyers Association.
To everyone
Numerous county public-safety officials recently kicked off the "April Pools Day" campaign that focuses on preventing child drowning in pools and hot tubs. This serious message should be taken to heart by every parent, especially since a drowning usually can happen suddenly and without warning.
To freeway drivers
It's not much, but a few motorists have been enjoying the new northbound offramp at Highway 101/Rice Avenue that's been open for more than a week. For drivers weary of the detours and freeway slowdown, the opening signals a bit of progress on improvements to the overpass scheduled for completion by mid-2012.
To Oxnard
Nature lovers will be converging on your Plaza Park today for a festive celebration of Earth Day, from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. The 20th annual event features environmental displays, marine-life exhibits, earth-friendly gardening tips, live music and more. Best of all, it's free.
To Simi Valley
The Simi Valley Friends of the Library hosts the free, annual Children's Book Festival from 1:30 to 4:30 p.m. Sunday at the Simi Valley Library. This year's theme is "Passport to Adventure," and the featured guest is the noted children's author Barney Saltzberg.
To Santa Paula
This is solid evidence of the city's perilous budget situation: the City Council decided to forgo the expense of hiring a consultant.
To students
Unless a miracle occurs in Sacramento's budget fiasco this year, prepare to find fewer of the college classes you need while paying even higher tuition at UC, CSU and community college campuses.
To politicians
If, as some say, the federal government is an inept do-nothing, then why does shutting it down create so many problems for millions of Americans of every age, status and income level?
Subscribe to the Ventura County Star
Need Help? Call us at 1-877-710-6182.
Monday-Friday: 6am-3pm / Saturday: 6:30am-10:30am / Sunday: 7am-11am


text:
temporary closings
Five Guys Midtown Out for a Month
The fire that temporarily shuttered Menchanko-Tei 55 in midtown last week also ravaged Five Guys. The burger spot will be closed for at least four to six weeks; if you want food sent uptown from the West Village location, it's a minimum twenty-burger order. [Midtown Lunch]


text:
Under 30 Minutes
Chicken and Pineapple Salad
Get MoreSubscribe to Martha Stewart Living
- 2 tablespoons Dijon mustard
- 1 tablespoon olive oil
- 1/4 cup freshly squeezed lime juice
- 12 ounces shredded and poached or store-bought roasted chicken (about 3 cups)
- 1 small head napa cabbage (1 1/2 pounds), halved lengthwise and finely shredded crosswise
- 4 plum tomatoes, thinly sliced lengthwise
- 4 scallions (about 1/2 cup), thinly sliced
- 1/2 small pineapple prepared, and thinly sliced crosswise
- Salt and pepper
Step 1
In a small bowl, whisk together mustard, oil, and lime juice. In a large bowl, toss together chicken, cabbage, tomatoes, and scallions.
Step 2
Just before serving, toss chicken mixture with pineapple and dressing (do not let stand). Season with salt and pepper.


text:
The annual IS Career Development Dinner is an opportunity for MIS students to meet with industry professionals and leverage their MIS degree for a successful career. Dinners are open to any MIS major or anyone interested in the major.
2014 Career Development Dinner
The 2014 IS Career Development Dinner will be held Tuesday, 2/4/14 beginning at 6:00 pm on the 5th floor Cashion, Hankamer School of Business.
Olive Branch will cater our dinner which will include Fettuccini Alfredo, Grilled Chicken Breast, Fresh Vegetables, Salad, Homemade Bread and Cupcakes.
|Welcome and Introductions
|Evan Corcoran
AITP Vice President
KPMG Intern
|What the Association of Information Technology Professionals (AITP) Can Do For You
|Melody Liang
AITP Outreach Coordinator
Protiviti Intern
|Landing a Job/Internship
|Brent Pollard
AITP Event Coordinator
SunGard Consulting New Hire
Interned for Fidelity Investments
|Promoting Yourself, Rocking the Career Fair and Acing Interviews
Thad Satterfield
Vy Truong
David Doerries
Taylor Savage
|Question and Answer Panel
|Phillips66 Recruiters, Baylor AITP Officers and Baylor MIS Faculty


text:
The 148-room Mandarin Oriental in Back Bay offers some of Boston's most luxurious standard rooms, plus a 16,000-square-foot spa and extraordinary service. It has no pool; and the views aren't as grand as those at the high-end properties on Copley Square. But it's as special as any hotel in Boston -- and a clear winner if you prefer contemporary to traditional decor and ambience.
One of the city's top hotels with amazing service, a parkfront location, a great health club with a beautiful pool, and an iconic restaurant, the 273-room Four Seasons offers luxurious and spacious rooms with stunning granite bathrooms. But there's no full spa on-site.
With impeccable service, some of the biggest guest rooms in Boston, and a phenomenal gym, spa, and lap pool, the 230-room Boston Harbor Hotel is among the city's most luxurious hotels. The restaurant is celebrated for its extensive wine collection, and the harborside location means gorgeous water views from many of the rooms.
A 63-room upscale hotel with exquisite service and sleek décor in the residential Beacon Hill, Fifteen Beacon (or XV Beacon) offers a luxury boutique experience. The building, built in 1903, blends historic New England elegance with modern, minimalist design and hi-tech amenities. Rooms are spacious, stylishly masculine and expert concierge make it a great fit for discerning business or leisure travelers.
The Boston Ritz-Carlton is refreshingly intimate with spacious, luxurious standard rooms and access, for a fee, to one of the city's best gyms, with its own spa, salon, and pool. But it doesn't thrill stylewise, service is uneven, and the restaurant is unremarkable.
A former Federal Reserve bank turned luxury hotel in the grey, sterile Financial District, the Langham boasts immaculate, distinctively Bostonian rooms (with flat-screen TVs and Wi-Fi), spot-on service, and a stellar spa, but significant street noise keeps it from attaining perfection.
Dating back to 1912, this iconic 383-room Fairmont hotel in tony Back Bay has the most opulent lobby in the city, a classic oak-paneled bar and restaurant, and top-tier service. But most of its guest rooms are much smaller than standard rooms at most other luxury hotels in Boston (almost half the size), and extras are pricey -- including Wi-Fi and valet parking.
Just around the corner from Newbury Street, this French-inspired, 95-unit Back Bay boutique offers mostly spacious, elegant suites with (smallish) marble bathrooms, a well-regarded French restaurant and sashimi bar, free passes to Boston Sports Club, and in-room touch-screens through which guests can make lots of service requests.
Opened in 2008, the 150-room Fairmont Battery Wharf has great harborside views, attentive service, spacious standard rooms, a celebrated restaurant, and a location on the site of one of Boston's most historic wharves. Overall, it's a great harborfront pick.
With large, playfully furnished rooms, the 236-room Hotel Marlowe is one of Cambridge's most family-friendly hotels. Its neighbor, the Royal Sonesta Hotel, is cheaper and has a pool, but the Marlowe offers a boutique-like feel at a reasonable price, with personality to spare.
You will be signed out of Oyster and Facebook


text:
The fate of Gladys Terry's brother after his plane disappeared during World War II was unknown to the 91-year-old woman for 70 years.
And until Saturday, what happened to his Purple Heart was a mystery to her too.
The tale of the medal starts with a plane crash in Bhutan, and — with the help of a good Samaritan reader of The News Tribune — ends at Terry's home in Fairbanks, Alaska.
Terry traveled to Tacoma in July for a memorial ceremony hosted by the Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 91 in honor of her brother, Pfc. James C. Mohn, who was raised in Tacoma.
After years of searching for her brother, Terry recently learned the wreckage of his plane had been found in Bhutan, though experts were unable to determine what caused the crash.
The information gave Terry a great deal of closure, she said, but she still hoped to receive a medal for her brother's sacrifice.
"One of the things I really want is a Purple Heart because it can be passed down to all the other Jameses in the family," she said after the Tacoma ceremony. "I thought it would be something to keep the memory alive. Their parents will tell them about the wonderful experience of the memorial."
Meanwhile, another mystery had been puzzling Ray Mohn.
The Summit-area man isn't related to Terry or her brother, but last fall he acquired a Purple Heart with the name James C. Mohn and had been trying to find its owner ever since.
"It was just automatic that I had to try to figure out who it belonged to," Mohn said recently. "I had to find out. Try to at least."
How the medal ended up near Summit remains unclear.
A neighbor, who since has died, brought the Purple Heart to Mohn.
The neighbor said she found it while moving things around the house, and since Mohn shared a last name with the service member on the medal, she thought it might belong to his family.
A veteran of the U.S. Navy, Ray Mohn offered to try to find the rightful owner of the award. Calls to several veterans groups proved unsuccessful.
Then he read a front page News Tribune story about the ceremony for James Mohn and realized he'd found the right serviceman.
"I was amazed. I really was," Ray Mohn said.
He called VFW Post 91, and a representative from the chapter presented the medal to Terry at a ceremony Saturday in Fairbanks.
Terry had been told there was going to be another ceremony, this time in Fairbanks, to honor her brother.
Getting the Purple Heart was a surprise.
"I was just overwhelmed," she said Saturday. "It's almost unbelievable."
It took nearly 70 years for Terry's brother to be welcomed home. Now the medal honoring him has found its way home, too.
"It made me feel like I have a sense of happiness," Terry said, "a sense of happiness I haven't had in a long time."
Staff writer Weston Morrow of the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner contributed to this report.
Alexis Krell: 253-597-8268


text:
Latest Posts
All Hail Mayor Rahm Emanuel, All-Powerful Ruler of Chicago
As a Chicago resident, I for one welcome our new 9.5-fingered overlord…
Rahm Emanuel, a top adviser to two U.S. presidents who returned to Chicago just months ago, swept into the mayor's office Tuesday, inheriting a city reeling from recession and promising to reshape City Hall.
He achieved what was once considered almost unthinkable, collecting a majority of support against five opponents in the first Chicago election without a sitting mayor on the ballot since 1947…
Emanuel amassed 55.2 percent with 99.5 percent of city precincts counted, above the 50 percent-plus benchmark he needed to win outright to avoid an April runoff.
I suppose it's for the best. I don't really know what kind of damage Emanuel will do to the city. But I do know that it's nothing compared to the kind of damage he would have done if he'd lost.
He gets angry.
Tags: Chicago, Illinois, Rahm Emanuel
Illinois LGBT Community Wins Hospital Visits!
Nearly lost in the hoopla over that small Egyptian event is the fact that the gays have a big reason to party in Illinois!
Governor Pat Quinn on Monday made Illinois the 16th U.S. state to give spousal rights to same-sex couples by signing into law a measure allowing civil unions.
Both houses of the Illinois legislature narrowly passed the measure that takes effect in July, though it does not alter a state law that limits marriage to a man and a woman.
Alright, it ain't full marriage, but still! Gays and lesbians will get all sort of new rights regarding stuff like "hospital visitation, making health-care decisions, and matters concerning probate of a partner's estate."
Congratulations to Illinois gays, and here are our suggestions for a few Illinois-appropriate civil union receptions/parties…
1. Served bootlegged liquor at your reception. Guests dressed as Al Capone get an open bar; everybody else has to pay twice as much or risk getting his/her knees broken.
2. Ask One True Mayor-for-Life Rahm Emanuel to perform your ceremony. Sure, he just barely sneaked onto the ballot and he hasn't actually been elected yet, but when has that stopped any powerful Chicago politician from getting things done? As a bonus, you'll have the pleasure of hearing your officiant say, "Do you, [insert your name], take this mutha#$%@!r to be your civilly-wedded husband? YOU F&%^ing better say yes, you son of a bitch!"
3. Make Rod Blagojevich a bridesmaid. Seriously, that guy will do anything these days. Have you seen his pistachio commercial?
Tags: Chicago, Illinois, LGBT, Marriage Equality, Rahm Emanuel, Rod Blagojevich
Illinois Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Rahm Emanuel
It's been a crazy half-of-a-week, but long-suffering Chicago mayoral candidate Rahm Emanuel is finally back on the ballot and back on track to realize his several-month-long dream of ruling his native city…
The ballot roller coaster for Rahm Emanuel finally stopped Thursday with the former White House chief of staff very much in the race for mayor and the Illinois Supreme Court emphatically rejecting a contentious challenge to his Chicago residency.
Within minutes of the high court ruling, Emanuel was back shaking hands with voters, taking a congratulatory call from his old boss, President Barack Obama, and working to recapture an aura of invincibility he had worked hard to project until an Appellate Court ruling threatened to boot him from the Feb. 22 contest.
The New York Times' Caucus blog speculates on the possible fall-out from these few days of highly-publicized debate…
Some Chicagoans suggested that the incident might tarnish Mr. Emanuel's campaign, repeatedly reminding voters that there had been a question about Mr. Emanuel's legal status as a resident of this city — and, perhaps, a more psychic question about whether Mr. Emanuel was really as fully steeped in Chicago as, say, Richard M. Daley, the departing mayor, who was nothing if not a Chicagoan. Mr. Emanuel, who was born in Chicago, lived in the suburbs during some of his youth and, as a Congressman from Chicago, spent time in Washington even before he worked there as White House chief of staff.
So, wait. The implication here is that because he lived part-time in Washington D.C. for a few years while representing Chicago in the U.S. House of Representatives and then spent two years living there full-time while working for a President from Chicago, with a White House staff plucked, almost in total, from the world of Chicago politics, that somehow makes him less of a Chicagoan?
That's not leaving Chicago; that's colonizing the rest of the country.
Tags: Barack Obama, Chicago, Illinois, Rahm Emanuel
Jon Stewart and John Oliver on Rahm Emanuel and Chicago Politics
It's admittedly a little hard to understand the warp and woof of Rahm Emanuel's quest to become the feudal lord of Chicago. The city's political infrastructure can seem somewhat byzantine and murky to the uninitiated. Jon and John, though, do their best to make it seem a little less confusing…
However, if you're still somewhat confused about the whole scenario, this video from NMA TV should clear it all up for you…
There. Now you get it, right?
The Daily Show airs Monday through Thursday at 11/10c.
Tags: Chicago, Illinois, John Oliver, Jon Stewart, Rahm Emanuel, The Daily Show, Video
It Somehow Took a Whole Day for Rahm Emanuel's Name to Be Returned to the Ballot
Seems like it was only yesterday that former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel's name was ordered by an appeals court to be removed from Chicago mayoral ballots. We were all so much younger and full of wonder back then, remember? Who could have thought that a thing like this could happen to a member of the Chicago Democratic royalty?
Some might say that we were naive in thinking that Emanuel might not get exactly what he wanted in his city, but I say that we were innocent…
The Illinois Supreme Court will hear Rahm Emanuel's appeal to remain on the ballot in the Chicago mayor's race.
The court granted a motion by the former White House chief of staff seeking an expedited hearing on his residency case… It will hear the case without oral arguments or new briefs, allowing for a faster ruling on the matter. The quick proceedings are necessary, with the race less than a month away and early voting set to begin next Monday.
It was the second break in a matter of hours for Emanuel. The court ruled earlier Tuesday that no ballots may be printed without his name, at least not until the court has dealt with the appeal.
Now, with the benefit of the tens of hours of maturity we've all gained since yesterday's heartbreak and tribulation, I'm finding it hard to believe that it took an entire 24 hours for this road bump to get smoothed over. That's just unacceptable.
Can't say I'm disappointed about the decision, current resident of Chicago as I am. The incessant stream of wailing profanities that has been ringing throughout the city had been getting somewhat unnerving.
Tags: Chicago, Illinois, Rahm Emanuel


text:
By Corbin Hosler
The Norman Transcript
NORMAN — The "preseason" is now over, and the news couldn't be better for Norman High and Norman North.
The Crosstown Clash gave a glimpse into both squads, and we came away impressed at the possibilities but aware of the roadblocks. And, as you would expect with two inexperienced squads, the last two weeks have been both ups and downs.
Norman High (2-1) has put together three slow starts, and it finally caught up to them on Friday at Yukon, where the slow start allowed the Millers time to climb back into the game and eventually take the lead. For all of the Tigers' explosiveness on offense, the consistency hasn't been there.
It's a similar story at North. While the offense has been putting up points, the defense hasn't made enough stops for it to matter much. After giving up 38 points in Week 1 to NHS, the Timberwolves (1-2) seemed to make progress against Del City in Week 2. Despite giving up 38 points again, they came through with a late stop that allowed them to win the game. But the defensive struggles resurfaced last week, with the T-Wolves forcing Westmoore into just one punt on Friday night.
Nor have they been able to catch much of a break. Injuries have surrounded this team from the start, from Mason Volk missing part of the preseason to Trevor and Trace Magee both missing Friday's contest against Westmoore.
So with district play upon us, with North taking a trip to Midwest City while the Tigers travel to Mustang, a fresh start is something both squads could use. Not that it's going to get any easier. Mustang (2-1) lost only to Yukon, the same team that topped the Tigers by two points on Friday. A newly-resurgent Midwest City (3-0) is ranked tenth in the state and owns a win over No. 6 Edmond Santa Fe.
Both Tigers and Timberwolves face a much more difficult path to the playoffs this season than in years past, and that battle begins this week. North faces a District 6A-3 that, besides undefeated Midwest City, also has a host of improved teams including Yukon and Edmond North. NHS, meanwhile, faces one of the tougher districts in the state, with No. 4 Lawton and No. 6 Edmond Santa Fe sitting at the top and much-improved teams in Edmond Memorial and Southmoore all expected to compete with NHS for a playoff berth.
Reflecting on his team's loss to Yukon, NHS coach Greg Nation said that the best thing that happened is that his team is now 0-0 and "the NFL preseason just finished. They don't worry about the preseason and we don't either. The next seven games are what matters and that's what we're excited about."
Excitement is good; continued improvement is better. And that's what both teams will need, beginning this week, if they want to follow up on last year's success with more this season.
It all comes down to district play, and district play comes to us this week.
Corbin Hosler
Follow me @Chosler88


text:
Tiltan Games is sort of dream come true for me. I'm a gamer of both PC and Board games since I was little, and I've started coding simple games when I was at the 4th grade on a Commodore 64, using cassette tapes !
I've been around games for very long, but its only been very recently that I gathered the courage to start something of my own, and in the area I love most. Games.
I've started Tiltan Games in an attempt to build cool, fun games for everybody. Although, I admit, I'm leaning towards heavy games myself, I love playing those fun little games, especially on mobile devices.
My first go will be Traveler, a light arcade like game, where you can save the princess, collect tons of treasures and simply destroy everything in your way. I Hope you enjoy it, as much as I did building it .
For anything you want to personally tell, share or say, please contact me at email@example.com
Happy Playing


text:
- Mobile site
- E-Newsletters
- News feed
- Find us on Twitter
Be first with breaking news
- Find us on Facebook
The Bolton News
All the latest news from Bolton
Snow couldn't dampen community spirit in the 1950s (From The Bolton News)
North West RSS Feed
Snow couldn't dampen Leigh's community spirit in the 1950s
8:20am Saturday 9th February 2013 in North West
COMMUNITY spirit was well to the fore in the early 1950s as highlighted by this photograph of snow shovellers ready to clear the pavements.
With the horrors of the second world war still a vivid memory people tended to look after one another.
Perhaps none more so than Kaz Jabkiewicz a Polish man who moved to England in 1948 as a teenager after enduring the nightmare of being sent to graft in a forced labour camp in Germany.
Kaz, who lived in Oxford Street, Leigh, is pictured sixth from the left in this shot of trainee miners preparing to clear a pathway along Leigh Road, Leigh.
He died in 2005 aged 81.
"I think the photograph was taken about 1952 or 1953," said Kaz's widow, Lucy.
"Kaz would have been about 22 or 23 when it was taken. The photo is of trainee miners called in to help clear the streets. People really did help each other in those days."
She recalled how her late husband was a real Anglophile.
"He used to say 'people in England don't realise they live in the best country in the world, what a pity it is being ruined'. He was a good worker and spent 20 years as a tunneller for ATC at Lowton. When he retired he used to clear rubbish from the backs in Oxford Street. And people appreciated what he did," said 74 years-old Mrs Jabkiewicz.
Comments are closed on this article.


text:
Every Tues. & Thurs. night – 9 pm EST712-432-3566 – passcode 340794#Archive – Listen on the web
Alan Keyes
Hazleton, Pennsylvania
April 15, 2008
Praise God. Thank you. Good evening.
It feels good to be in Hazleton. I had many thoughts as I was coming here today through this part of western Pennsylvania, looking over an area that in many ways represents one of the important roots of America's strength, in terms both of its industrial might, the might that helped to build this nation, but also the strength of faith and the strength of family, and the strength of folks who had come to America from places of different heritage in order to seek a better life for themselves and their families, but also in order to find here the dignity of their liberty.
This was dignity of a way of life in which, though there would be those who sought to exploit them, yet there would also be opportunities for them to come together, to know their strength, and in the end to build an economic future that was based upon greater justice and respect, both for their needs and for their capacities, and for the justice that is due to each and every human being.
This part of the country reminds us of the deep and solid roots that America has, and that those roots extend to places all around the world.
It seems, then, in some ways incongruous that Hazelton has come to be a symbol of what is regarded these days as our great crisis of immigration. But I think that is at least in part because of that very way of understanding that misunderstands what really is going on. That misunderstanding, and part of the effort to set it right, is why I have chosen to come to Hazelton this evening — in order to talk not only about that crisis and what it represents, but about the larger crisis that it manifests.
This is a crisis that goes beyond this or that issue of the day. It goes beyond our borders. It goes beyond the issue of immigration. It goes beyond the question of the impact that that is having upon our communities and upon our nation. It touches, indeed, upon the deepest question that confronts us as a people in this time, and that is the question: What has become of our liberty? What has become of our Republic?
What has become of that government of, by, and for the people, for which so many have given their all — have shed their blood?
I think it's time we understood what I have tried to get across in many statements and speeches. I don't think that what is concerning so many people in America right now is that folks are coming from elsewhere, seeking a better life in America, seeking jobs, and so forth and so on. C'mon. We all know that in many ways the very community in which we are gathered here today is the result of that self-same movement of peoples toward the light of better hope and better opportunity. But that light of better hope and better opportunity was a light held aloft by a nation that respected the simple principle that, at the end of the day, government is the servant and instrument, not the master of the people.
And what is so disturbing to Americans throughout our country right now as they look at what has been going on with our borders, at the impact of uncontrolled illegal immigration on our hospitals, on our schools, on the safety on our highways — they look at this problem, they express their concern, they manifest the different ways in which it has affected their lives, and time and time and time again, those they have elected to represent them have ignored their heart, ignored their concerns, ignored their feelings, ignored their plight.
I think that what concerns us in the issue of immigration is not that people are coming, but that the people are not being heard. It's not that we wish to slam the door in the face of hope and opportunity, but that the door is being slammed in the face of our concern that we should have secure borders and policies that are governed by our interests, not by the interests of others.
I have tried to express what I call the crisis of our sovereignty. I will spend some time on this evening — and it's not that I want to be pedantic or in any way academic, no — but I think we are faced with a crisis of discourse in America because we have allowed people to deprive us of the words and terms we need, in order to talk about the situation we are in.
When people are trying to take something away from you, one of the sure and effective ways in which they can do it is by removing the understanding that allows you to see how valuable and important it is, so that you won't recognize what they are stealing.
I use the word "sovereignty" because it's one of those words we don't employ enough anymore. And yet, the government of, by, and for the people established by the Constitution of the United States embodies the concept of the sovereignty of the people.
It's not the sovereignty of judges or governments or others. No. The sovereignty of the people — that's what Lincoln meant when he referred to this government of, by, and for the people.
It means that, at the end of the day, the folks who are sitting in the great offices of power in the presidency, in the Congress, in the governorships, the legislatures, they are chosen by and answer to the people.
It means that, at the end of the day, the very documents we refer to — even the Constitution, the supreme law of the land, is not the sovereign of the land, for it is ordained and established by we the people, and derives its authority from our will.
We have come upon a moment where something that is very important and of great concern to our people, like our borders, is not only being neglected and ignored but is in various ways abused to such a degree that some little cliques of power who benefit from cheap labor, who promote ideologies of internationalism seem to be having more control over the situation than the folks in our communities who must live day-to-day with its consequences.
And this is natural in America. People raise their voices and they want some response. But it is interesting to me that on this issue, really for the first time consistently in my lifetime I have seen an issue where the overwhelming majority of the American people have expressed their will for secure borders, for the enforcement of our immigration policies, and yet time and time again, we have had lip service, we have had gestures, and they have continued the inexorable movement toward the destruction of our borders, and with it, the destruction of the physical identity of these United States.
What is happening? What is happening?
What is happening is that, on an issue that is of deep concern to people, the people are being ignored.
As I wrote once in an article, if the folks who are responding to us in this way are no longer listening to the American people, if they are no longer representing the American people, then who do they represent? Who are they responding to?
More and more, it seems as if we have drifted away from that paradigm of republican self-government that our founders established in this land. And instead of a government of, by, and for the people, where, by constitutional means, we can achieve representative government that reflects our concerns, our priorities, our faith, and ultimately our will as constitutionally-determined, we have a system more and more catering to the few, based upon the manipulation of our electoral process to such a degree that these days, it seems more and more as if, though we have choices, yet we have no choice.
All of this suggests that somewhere along the way, our system of self-government, our regime supposed to guarantee the liberty and self-government of the people, has been hijacked. It has been subverted. It has been taken over in some respect by forces no longer responding to our people.
They follow their agendas of globalism and internationalism. They cater to the interests of foreign nations and leaders. They will not listen anymore to the voice of the people who have chosen them and who, under our republican system of self-government, they are supposed to represent.
That means that the reason that we don't hear much talk anymore about the sovereignty of our people is that there are amongst our elites and amongst our leaders now, it seems, a preponderance of forces who no longer believe that the people are, or should be, the sovereign people of the United States — the ones who, at the end of the day, represent the authority for the law, derived not from human power and strength or even their own numbers, but from the simple principle set forth in our great Declaration of Independence: that government must be upon their consent, in order to respect those unalienable rights that come to them by the will of Almighty God.
Now, the other purpose that brings me here today, though, is very much exemplified by this issue in the sense that, over the course of the last several years, as you know, there has been a great debate over our borders. Some of us have been fighting to get a priority attached to securing those borders, to doing what is necessary to restore the control of the American people over the precincts of our own nation.
And yet, there have been forces in the Congress of the United States who seem more interested in making life easier for those who are violating our laws, easier for those who are seeking to exploit cheap labor, easier for those who are burdening our social system and our health system than they wish to respond to the American people.
Now, I will have to say, if you were to point out to me, as someone who has been a lifelong Republican, a bunch of Democrats and say they have been doing that, I wouldn't be surprised. I would probably try to get you to understand that long ago, under the influence of leftist Marxism and other ideologies, a lot of the elites in the Democrat Party abandoned their allegiance to the Constitution of the United States, abandoned their allegiance to the idea and ideals of self-government, abandoned their allegiance to the Republic. They manipulate the forms, they abide by the rules in order to gain power, and that is their only objective, not to represent the people nor to pass on our heritage of self-government.
So, if you had pointed them out to me and said, "Well, that's what they are doing," I would not be surprised at that. That's what they will pursue.
But, it has over the course of the last couple of months been increasingly clear that the Republican who represented the greatest disregard for this deep concern of the American people, who stood as the greatest champion of the amnesty bills and those who were indifferent to the concerns of the American people for the sovereign control of their own borders, that that Republican who, time and time again, has sought to revive these notions against the will of our people, is now considered by the media and the process that has been presented to us as the "presumptive nominee" of the Republican Party.
On the day that I realized that John McCain was now going to be presented to the American people as the one that everyone wearing the Republican label has to back, that's the day I had to start thinking about taking that label [Applause overwhelms audio].
Some folks will say, "But Alan, that's drastic. A drastic reaction. This is just one issue, after all." But I think that that's because they fail to understand that this issue of our sovereignty is the issue of the future of our freedom, of our liberty, of our Constitution, of our Republic itself.
Now, you tell me. Do you think it's an accident that the self-same individual who has been in the forefront of championing the policy that essentially effaces our borders, who shows no respect for the desire of the American people to reassert their sovereign control of their own territory — do you think it's an accident that that self-same individual was in the lead in authoring a piece of legislation that in its consequences was a deathblow aimed at the political and grassroots activism of the American people?
Is it an accident that the same man who ignored the requirements of sovereignty with respect to our borders is the man who ignored the prerequisites of the capacity of the people to organize and mobilize in their political life when he sponsored the McCain-Feingold bill and put those regulations that were aimed at destroying the possibility of grassroots politics in America?
People want me to believe, "Well, that's just a coincidence. See, that's one issue over here, that's the borders, and the other issue over here is McCain-Feingold." The common thread that unites them is that both represent an assault on the sovereignty of the American people — the one in its manifestation, the other in its possibility.
What better way to destroy self-government then to erect a system in which you have burdened the people with such trammels that they can't get their business done?
See, I have to be suspicious anyway of politicians who believe that it is their right and business to regulate the association of the people when it comes to political character. I don't see how this could possibly be, because the people we elect to the government are the folks for whom politics exists to oversee and constrain. How could we then allow them to write the rules on the basis of which people can associate, fund, and otherwise express themselves in political life?
The business of politics is not under the authority of the politicians. It must remain directly under the authority of the people, or those people will have no way to control their politics.
I find it intriguing that as you examine the way in which these various measures supposedly aim at cleaning up our politics — and let's make a parenthesis here. This is a very interesting situation, in which you have politicians who see the world so burdened by the possibility of corrupt influence among politicians that they want to take away all of the fundraising mechanisms, all of your organizing mechanisms, and so forth, from the people themselves. So, corruption among the politicians results in the destruction of the right of the people to organize themselves for politics. Don't you find that a little convenient?
That's like somebody lighting a fire in the backyard and then showing up at the front door with a fire extinguisher. "Here, let me put that out!" You are the cause of the problem, and you're telling me that you're going to solve it by making it more difficult for people to oversee what you do?
That doesn't make any sense.
The telltale signs of this were the provisions of the McCain-Feingold bill that were actually aimed at preventing people in an organized way from communicating to one another about the record of their representatives in the three weeks before an election.
Somebody had probably told the authors of this bill that it's only in the last three weeks before an election that the American people pay attention. Therefore, if you keep the grassroots organizations from talking to them in that time, you'll get away with anything you please.
Now, I can believe many things, but you're not going to get me to believe that I can trust the same individual who is trying to destroy the ability of the people to oversee abuses, when that individual happens also to be one of the people in the lead in perpetuating one of the greatest of those abuses, which is the destruction of our sovereign control of our border, and the unleashing and entrammeling of a wave of immigration aimed at utterly subverting, in a demographic sense, the sovereign people of the United States.
This, of course, confronted me with a great crisis. It brings me to a crossroads. But I guess in some ways — I'm like a lot of folks in America — it's been coming for a while. I don't want to give the impression that it has come to this point for me where I really must look for an alternative just because of the incidents and episodes of this election year, though I think it is a particularly crucial one. No, I have been watching with greater and greater dismay as all of those things that are essential to the maintenance of true self-government for our people are systematically destroyed.
I will tell you, as I have been clear everywhere I can, that my main concern in that regard, and the one that I believe would have been the main concern shared by our founders, is the assault on the character and the moral capacity of our people to govern ourselves.
The fact is that we are being severed from the fundamental principles that establish our right to government by consent, beginning with the great principle that those rights come from Almighty God. Why weren't we suspicious when a people whose rights are based upon an appeal to God found themselves confronted by courts telling us that we could not teach our children the name of God, could not mention in schools the authority of God?
Why did they wish to separate us from this fundamental and most vital element of the argument on which our liberty is built?
We should have known that something was in the offing — when these self-same courts had driven God out of our precincts then usurped to themselves the power of our people and our states and our legislatures to decide the great moral issues that confront our country, including the issue of how we shall regard the innocent life in the womb that has as much claim to be respected by the authority of God as the life that He has given to each and every one of us — when they told us that it would be by the fiat of these self-same judges that the marriage issue would be decided, not by our understanding, not by those things that reflect our heart and our faith as a people, but by an understanding imposed upon us by elites that no longer share that faith, but instead seek at every turn to subvert and destroy it.
This is a crisis that has long been coming to a head.
And it has come to a head, as McCain-Feingold suggests, in our electoral system as well.
It's been a long time that I have watched American politics and wondered. We blame the media for this in great part, but I wonder if we shouldn't just blame them. We blame them because certain voices weren't being heard, and certain voices were being suppressed, and so forth and so on, until we finally got to a point — which is a point, sadly, that I reached this year. It will come to a great surprise to many of you who are watching this over the internet and here in the audience that I actually ran for president in the Republican primary. But I was systematically barred from the debates. That is, the individual who was widely acknowledged to have won every debate in the year 2000, was not admitted in the debates in the year 2008.
The one that was standing up to speak unequivocally for the heart of the people on immigration, on life, on the need to return the judges to within the boundaries established by the Constitution — on all these issues, speaking from the very place that the Republican Party platform says is the place on which the party stands — barred from the discussion.
And I mention this, not so much because I suffered by being excluded from debates, being falsely and fraudulently kept off of ballots, not having votes counted in Iowa and elsewhere. I mean, these are the things that can, of course, happen in the course of politics, but you know, y'all, it's time we began to realize that when such things are done in order to exclude voices from the political arena, the people excluded may seem to be the ones hurt, but the truth is that it is the people who never hear it, the people who are never aware of the choice before them, they are hurt in the most fatal and vital way by such exclusions.
Because eventually we reach a certain point, and who is deciding your elections? It will be just like the old Soviet Union. They used to say they had free elections in the Soviet Union. They did. Of course, every slate of candidates was meticulously predetermined by the politburo, by the party bosses and others. People appeared to have a choice, but in point of fact, all of the "choices" had already been made for them.
My sense during the course of this primary season was that that was exactly, sadly, what is happening in the United States: a combination of the media oligarchs and the party bosses now deciding what is best for the American people.
Now, I say again: Did I expect this from Democrats, perhaps? Well, maybe, because this whole notion of despotic paternalism has been very much at home in the Democratic Party for a long time — the idea that the way you justify yourself in government is by telling people, "Well, see how well I'm taking care of you?"
Did you ever watch the gangsters movies? That's what the Godfather always says to somebody asserting a little freedom: "Why are you getting so upset? Don't I take good care of you?"
And this is what the government now, and these elitists like Obama, that's what they want to turn and say to us. When we start standing up for our Second Amendment rights, and we start standing up for the rights of our faith, and we start standing up for those things that constitute our liberty, they say we're "bitter" because they are not taking good care of us!
But this is what I would like to remind them of, and remind you of, and remind the Republican Party which once had such allegiance from me of: Every official in this country does not swear an oath to "take good care of us." They swear an oath to uphold, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States!
Their first responsibility, by sworn oath, is not to "take care of us," but to take care of our liberty, to take care of our system of self-government, and to take care of all of those things which must be preserved in order for it to be perpetuated in strength.
That's their job. But that's not the job they are doing.
Instead, they are acting in the very much in the spirit that our great first president and founding leader, George Washington, warned against in his famous farewell address. Unaccustomed as I am to reading anything during my speeches, I did want to do justice to Washington's words.
So, I want to read these words verbatim from the farewell address, because I think that they are very instructive in our time. He said, "I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.
"This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.
"The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty."
I have read and reread and pondered these thoughts over the course of the last several weeks, as I have listened to the growing chorus of argument being made, particularly on the Republican side — folks who are heading us toward a general election in which we will have a choice between the anti-Republicans of the Democrat Party and the anti-Republicans of the Republican Party.
They are more and more telling us that we've got to choose the lesser of evils, we've got to have that Republican victory, we've got to have that Republican Congress. They even went so far during the course of the election in some of these places — like Virginia, I noticed — to propose that before people be allowed to vote, they take an oath of party loyalty.
They apparently haven't read Washington's address.
They apparently don't understand that parties are to be tolerated only insofar as they are the instruments of the people, only insofar as they are instruments aimed at combining our deliberations in the public good. When they become an end in themselves, seeking to serve the elevation of this one or that one, this group or that group, factionally based to political power, then they are destroying the liberty that each and every one of these politicians is sworn to uphold, and those such parties should be abandoned.
I sadly conclude that both the Democrat and Republican parties in this country have degenerated into factions — factions understood by our founders to be combinations of individuals for political purposes that do not encompass the public good, that do not respect our common good of liberty.
I think that's clear, even in the way they talk about politics now: "coalition-building." See, you get together a bunch of people who happen to be traveling in the same direction, farm out to them some benefits and all so they will support you and put you into power. Is that what our politics is now about?
It has been, I know, the understanding of things on the Democrat side — the New Deal, and all of that. Sit around the table, deal out to each participant just enough to keep them at your table, so that you can win your party victory. But you know what that's forgetting? It's forgetting the heritage of America.
It's a heritage, by the way, that respected the idea I'm about to articulate, at great cost, because it was the idea that motivated and animated the discussion and actions of so many people in those first years and decades of our Republic — and that was the idea of our Union.
The wonderful thing about the word "union" is that it suggests that great phrase on our coins, E Pluribus Unum, "Out of Many, One": that, yes, we are many, but that in some sense we come together, we covenant in such a way that we can stand together on a common ground, on a common principle that transcends all those differences and that forms of us one nation, one people, one community, capable of respecting together the principles of justice and right that make us free.
I listen to the things that are now being lauded in our media from the mouth of people like Barack Obama, the empty phrases of "hope" and so forth and so on, and I say to myself, "What lies. What delusions."
We have come from a heritage that offers us a solid ground for hopeful community, because it is a heritage that offers to each and every human being God-ordained and authorized respect for their individual dignity, their worth, their responsibility, their aspirations, and their capacity responsibly to govern not only themselves but their community as a whole.
This is a basis for hope, and it is what has bound Americans together in the face sometimes of terrible challenges — challenges that led to the battlefields of the Civil War, that lead to the sacrifices of World War I and World War II; challenges that have given to the great words of our Declaration, the great words of our Pledge of Allegiance, the notion that we are nation about more than our selfishness and our lust and our greed, that we do as the founders said, representing human hope and aspiration that governments can be based on something other than accident and force and fear, but can be based upon the deliberate choice for justice, of people who were willing to make that choice, so that they can be treated with justice by all.
That's community. That's people who have come together, not because of some physical accident, and not because of some momentary selfish interest, but because, acknowledging the truth they see in the God-ordained moral equality of all humanity, they are happy to be part of a land building up an example of what can be done when that moral truth is respected.
As I was coming along, this is what it meant to be an American. And I took it seriously, even though these were the days, as I was growing up, of the civil rights movement and the great efforts that were needed in order to achieve equality and to banish racial discrimination. All those things were possible because great leaders could appeal to these common principles and move the conscience of our people, as Martin Luther King did, with these common ideas and ideals.
But today we are engaged in a kind of political sham. I find it incongruous, for instance, now that folks wish to tout somebody like Obama as somebody who represents "transcending race." And yet, I go on the Mike Schneider program, and this guy looks at me, this news fellow, and he says, "Well, don't you feel proud that somebody like Barack Obama is being treated seriously for the presidency? Because, after all, he's of the same race as you are."
I tried to explain to this man that when you look at me or anybody else and expect behavior and action and opinion based solely on the color of our skin, what you do epitomizes the worst kind of racism.
I think it's time we told Obama and all these people in the media and everywhere else: You won't transcend racism until you have realized that the very notion that physical characteristics determine human groups and communities is a fatal lie.
Communities are built upon our common moral ideas and premises, like our common commitment to that justice which the Declaration of Independence outlines in its understanding and which our Pledge promises to all Americans. Because we are committed to these things and care about these things, we can stand together as a people.
But you see, I had thought in my naiveté that that's what the Republican Party is about. Maybe I'm the only person in America who was a Republican because I believe in the Republic. Isn't that odd?
Now, you might say that's a coincidence of things. No, it's not. The founding president of the Republican Party, Abraham Lincoln, who was willing to see this nation endure a terrible Civil War — why? For the sake of making sure that the hallowed moral principles of God-given human equality would be respected as the very foundation of our community as a people. That is why he felt that slavery had to be abolished. It wasn't because he opposed racism and all these other things we talk about these days. It was because he loved justice, and justice required respect for the God-given moral equality of all human beings.
And I have thought that the Republican Party would represent and did represent these great principles down through the years. While the Democrats were wandering about building coalitions, appealing to selfishness, dividing us by class and race and creed, Republicans were calling us to respect our national ideals, were calling us to be courageous in the defense of those ideals in the world, not to abandon them in the face of communism, not to abandon them in the face of fascism, not to abandon them in the face of terrorism or any other threat, because what we do is important not only to ourselves but to all human beings, because it is evidence of God's providence.
I was a Republican because being a Republican meant standing firm for all these things, and also understanding in the end that there was a deep connection between our allegiance to these principles and our respect for the human capacity for true freedom.
You don't want to stand in somebody's way when they are building up a business enterprise. You don't want to sand in their way when they are finding a better way to grow our food and to put our buildings up. You don't want to stand in the way when they are trying to advance the horizons of our scientific knowledge because you have respect for the truth that in each and every human being, there is a kernel of God-given dignity, of God-given mystery, of God-given capacity, and we should not put it out, but rather let it shine so that it can benefit us and all the world.
That, to me, is what it meant to be a Republican. Sadly, that sense that it wasn't just about greed, it wasn't just about money, it wasn't just about serving the corporate moguls so that they would promote your campaign, and build you up in power — no, it was about things that would be true, whether the moguls liked them or not, about things that would be vitally important, not because they led us to great wealth, but because they respect our great dignity. And that's why I was a Republican.
Over the course of the last years, and especially the last couple of years, I have just seen too much that suggests that though the Republican Party of today still pays lip service to these things, they now are much like the Democrats, caring only about power, caring only about success, caring only about victory for themselves, and their friends, and the little cliques that sponsor them — not for that great victory for America, which is the perpetuation of our freedom.
And I look at this, and I'm afraid I'm feeling an awful lot like Ronald Reagan said he felt about the Democrats years ago. I am still standing where I was — standing where I stood as a result of the years when I tried to understand the terrible injustice of slavery and came to the conclusion the best understanding of it is based upon our founding principles, and the best refutation of it is based upon living out our American creed.
I'm still standing there. I'm still standing for the America that was not afraid to shoulder the burdens and the responsibilities that came with that providential success which God gave us in the world.
Now, I know there are people right now dissatisfied, I guess, with some of the things that I believe because I won't go along with the Clinton/Obama-like desire to withdraw America from engagement with the world, and they think that this is evidence of some terrible design. No. Do you know why [I think the way I do]? A couple of reasons. Step number one: We need to remember that there are two sides to sovereignty.
That's why I wish we would reintroduce this term into our understanding. Sovereignty isn't just about having your way. No. The sovereign is the person responsible, the one responsible, for making decisions that affect the whole people, the whole community, the whole nation.
I wonder if Americans think about that when they look at the way these politicians — McCain and everybody else — panders to them now. "Wanna win votes? Promise them a tax cut!"
I tell you, I have always been irritated by Republicans who stand up and act like if they give us a tax cut, they are doing us a big favor by letting us keep some of our own money, and therefore we should vote for them.
We have been so debased, so degraded that we can be bribed with an offer to keep what is already ours. They have falsely asserted that somehow it belongs first and foremost to the government that is supposed to serve us.
And of course, the Democrats are bribing us with our own money in programs that they filter through bureaucracies where the effects don't even get to the people that they are supposed to help.
That understanding, that you come before the people and say, "I'll take care of you! I'll let you pursue your lusts! I'll you let you pursue your greed! I'll let you pursue your selfishness! I'll let you make your choice! I'll relieve you of the burden of defending yourself and defending your country and defending your community! You'll live in safety and security and prosperity! I'll feed you and shelter you and clothe you! I'll do all these things for you!" — that's what they want us to believe.
Is this the way to speak to the sovereign? To speak to the sovereign as if the only thing that sovereign should care about is to cater to its own appetites, its own lusts, its own passions, its own greed?
Sovereignty involves responsibility. We do not show respect for the sovereign people of the United States if we are not willing to remind them that they have a responsibility for American freedom. They have a responsibility for the future generations who are supposed to enjoy that freedom. They have a responsibility before God to respect the right which is the foundation stone of all our rights.
And if they don't, then we will lose it all.
But we don't have leaders anymore willing to say these unpleasant things. I'm taken to task for this all of the time. See, I will not treat the American people without respect. And you treat people without respect when you act as if all they are about is their own mortal and vital passion, that they have no aspiration to live in some way for that which shall outlast us all, because it reflects the permanent will of our Creator, God.
I long for such a politics again, for we have had leaders who understood it. But now we have parties that have degenerated below the level of that kind of statesmanship.
I long for a time when we will come together again as a people — we can call it a party if you like, but it will really represent an community of principle — and will challenge each and every person and each and every group and each and every community to outdo the others in making sure that the great principles that strengthen our liberty and our institutions are respected, not destroyed, so that they can be served.
I long for a party that will, in giving priority to those great principles, restore both the form and the policy content that must go along with our rights as a free people, and not let abusive judges usurp the rights of our legislatures, not let abusive legislators destroy the rights of our people.
But where shall we find it? I am pondering this question.
I think there is some hope. I have been looking at a party that bears a good name — the Constitution Party.
But I think there are challenges no matter where I look, because, as I just said, I will neither abandon the great moral principles that make us free, nor will I abandon the practical application of those principles that requires strong and secure borders that reflect the sovereign control of our people; that requires judges who have been put back into their place to judge according to, not make, the laws; that require legislatures that respect the prerogative of the people not to be "cared for" by a despotic government, but rather to care for themselves as they use that government for the limited purposes for which it is the proper instrument.
I long for this. But I also long for a people that will not shrink from its responsibilities in the world, will not hide behind some words spoken in a different time by our great founding president. When he cautioned against entangling of alliances, in order to keep a young, fledgling country from involving itself in the great disputes of the greatest powers in the world which could gobble that little country up — you all have noticed, haven't you, that we are now the greatest power in the world?
We cannot shrink from that engagement! We cannot shrink from the responsibility that goes along with that great blessing!
Sometimes I wonder, the very same people who say, "Oh, no! We've got to get out of Iraq tomorrow! We've got to do this and we've got to do that, because we shouldn't be involved anywhere doing anything!" — and I'm thinking to myself, "Wait. Where does this come from?"
Is it a coincidence some of the same people dislike the idea of universal service to our country, the draft and all of that? "Oh no! Don't do that to me!" These are people who forget that liberty is not about the individual doing what he pleases. It's about giving to every individual the opportunity to do what is right, so that in doing what is right, they have the right to what they do.
See, but we forget this. We want to have licentiousness instead of liberty. We want to have despotism and a government that cares for all our needs, rather than a liberty which leaves us responsible not just for our own welfare, as some conservatives would say, but for the welfare of our whole nation and its impact upon the world.
That is what it means to be part of the sovereign body.
The other day, I was looking at a book title by a fellow I know, Grover Norquist, who has many good campaigns to keep our taxes down and other things, and the title of his book was Leave Us Alone, and it seemed to be referring to people in America who want the government to leave them alone.
But I ask you to consider this question: If the people of the United States are the sovereign here — they are like the king or the sultan and so forth and so on — and they have ministers who are the president and the legislatures, do we really want the ministers to leave us alone? When they come in to tell us about some great problem that confronts the nation, do we want to say, "No, I'm too busy fornicating. I'm too busy pursuing my interests. I'm too busy pursuing money. Don't bother me with the public business!" is that what we say? Because, I'll tell you, that's not the characteristic of a good sovereign, that's the characteristic of a bad, soon-to-be-deposed sovereign who is refusing the responsibilities of his great office.
If we want to be the sovereign people of America, if we want this to be a government of, by, and for the people, then we should not ask the government to "leave us alone," we should have no intention of leaving them alone with the power that they can abuse against us, and against right.
It's in that spirit that I come to my final point tonight. What does one do? A lot of people in this country are pondering this right now.
I know that there are a lot of Republicans and others trying to give the impression, "No, everybody is going to jump on the bandwagon," but they are wrong. It's not going to happen. I went around this country for the longest time, talking to all kinds of audiences — especially audiences in the black community that are traditionally Democrat — trying to point out that, look, you can't sacrifice your allegiance to God and right and justice and all these things you profess to believe for some party label!
And then God, in His providence, as if to put me to the test, now confronts me with a situation. What am I to do? Am I or is anyone like me who has stood so long and fought so hard for these things that we believe to be right for our country, to be right in the eyes of our God, can we put it all aside for the sake of a party label, in order to back someone that we believe will be ultimately destructive of our liberty, of our rights, and ultimately of the moral foundations of all our freedom? No, we cannot. Not if they are Republican, not if they are Democrat, no matter what label they wear, for our allegiance is first to God and our country, above every party whatsoever.
There are many people in this quandary, and they keep saying, "Well, what are we going to do? We don't have a choice." [Keyes: Sighs.]
Because a manipulated system has failed to offer people a choice that corresponds to their true desires for their country, their true principles, people are now saying, "We must choose the lesser of evils." You do realize that if you choose the lesser of evils in that way, you're making evil your standard. You also realize that if you get to a place where the only choices you have for people to represent you in our country are evil, then you must be in the wrong place. And you ought to wonder how you got there.
See, I don't think we are in that place. I've met too many good-hearted Americans, people of good conscience, people who share and deeply believe in — and indeed as our young people are proving this instant in far-flung battlefields in Afghanistan and Iraq, people who still will risk and give their lives for the things that do not die, though they do; for the things that make death noble, because through them we join with the deathless glory of our God.
There are still many people like that. We know them as our spouses and our children. We know them as our fellow citizens. We know them, I dearly hope, as we know ourselves.
What shall we do now? Throw up our hands and let our country be taken to the devil — the lesser of evils? Or shall we do what people had to do in the past, when they stood up to make a revolution, when they stood up to make a country — not because it was the lesser evil, but because they sought a better destiny and a greater good?
Can no one offer this true hope to America? Will no one back it up?
I don't know the answer. I look at all these folks out there, with their lies and their delusions. They are raising money, hand over fist. It's almost as if all the good people have decided they are not going to bother anymore, they're not supporting, they're not giving, they're not sacrificing. Do you think that's how America was built, because all the good people sat on their hands and didn't give their effort and didn't make the sacrifice, but instead took the easy way out and said, "Well, let's go with the lesser of evils, because that's all we've got"?
If you don't see a better choice, make a better choice! Build a better choice! Be part of the movement that will offer a true, better hope for this country!
If there are people out there who have this on their hearts, who have it in their will, if they are willing to reach into their pocketbooks, reach into time, reach into their lives to make it happen, then their will and their fervor and their hearts and their conscience will call forth a leader who will stand with them, no matter what the sacrifice! No matter what it costs! Because this country now, as then, is worth the commitment that will pledge life and fortune and honor and all, so that the good that it represents may still survive for all humanity.
If you wish to be part of that kind of an effort, then I would say and hope that you would give a thought to what could be possible in November if someone stood forward representing the things you truly care about, and instead of listening to the sham and phony arguments that seek to manipulate you into choosing those who do not represent you, you instead make every sacrifice to back that which you believe represents your wholehearted desire for America's freedom and America's good.
If people can do that, then I think hope revives, liberty is restored, and we shall once again get past this dark place of a politics of pandering, and come to a true, free politics that once again corresponds to its right meaning.
For, politics is not the work of those who seek office for the sake of their ambition. It is in the truest sense the business of the citizen. Don't let them turn it into a dirty word. For, then we are put off of that without which we cannot sustain our liberty.
Instead, by your faith, and by your actions, and by your will, and by your sacrifices, and ultimately by your prayers and your reliance upon the God Who has so blessed our nation build a politics of true citizenship in which this government of, by, and for the people will once again have in its midst the shining truth of that people's sovereignty.
Their freedom, yes — but also their responsibility. Their satisfaction, yes — but also their willingness to satisfy the obligations of their justice and their leadership.
If we can be such a people, then I think God will take away the clouds that now darken our vision. He will show us again the light of that destiny which shone so bright in Reagan's eyes that he could ever see us ever as a shining city on a hill.
But from whence the light? I think the light that shines in that city is the light that shines from within the hearts that have admitted their allegiance to the will of God for justice. And by opening themselves to all that is needed to satisfy that allegiance, they share His light with their country and with the world.
God bless you.
BTTT for reminder


text:
Music Theatre of Idaho presents the epic musical Les Miserables as the finale to its summer season. The musical based on Victor Hugos sweeping novel follows Jean Valjean (Alan Ellis, pictured), a man cruelly imprisoned for stealing bread. He is released after 20 years, and because of fate and fortune he changes his name and becomes a good citizen but is pursued by the relentless police captain Javert. The story is told through the riveting music of Claude-Michel Schonberg and Alain Boublil.
Weekend event
7:30 p.m. Aug. 23-24; 1:30 p.m. matinee Aug. 24, Nampa Civic Center, 311 3rd St. S. $17. 468-2385, mtionline.org.
Join The Conversation
Idaho Statesman is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.


text:
I've received a few messages from people wondering if they can get a Flex Belt second hand or find a discount somewhere.
I have a pretty detailed post on using my Flex Belt coupons, but I thought I'd write this specific post about discounts as well for those of you that have contacted me.
The base price on The unti is $199 if you buy it from their official site. I've also seen it sold on some sites (which look like they are probably owned by the parent company as well) for a $99 payment up front then two more payments of $49. This of course still equals $200 bucks.
The best discount on a new belt I've found is using the 10% off and free shipping coupon when ordering direct from the manufacturers site.
If you use that coupon you'll save
- Almost $20 on the actual belt
- $14.95 on the regular shipping
So a total of almost $35 bucks.
You can of course also use the 25% off coupon I have available, however you'll then have to pay for your shipping so everything ends up being more or less equal.
How about at Ebay?
I've done research on ebay and I've never found an actual Flex Belt for sale. All I've ever found is a System Abs belt.
NOTE: You can tell the difference based on if it says X-10 on the belt or X-70 (the later denotes the flex belt with more intensity levels and programs)
The other downfall to buying on an auction site is you don't know if it's new or used sometimes, you don't' get a money back guarantee and you don't get a warranty.
How about Amazon?
You can buy it on Amazon, however you're going to pay the exact same as you will at the official website. I'd suggest using a coupon and buying from the official site to get not only the best discount, but also the guarantee and warranty.
So in conclusion, to get a discount on the Flex Belt don't bother looking for a used one, don't buy it on Ebay or another auction site. Definitely don't go looking on Craigslist or Kijiji. Use one of my coupon codes. You'll get the best discount I've been able to find, you'll get their 60 day money guarantee and the manufacturers warranty.


text:
Salem — Mr. Milton O. Laureano, 37, of Salem, died December 16, 2012, at Beth Israel Deaconess Hospital in Boston, following an extended illness.
Born in Salem, he was the son of Adriana (Marquez) Laureano of Salem and the late Milton Laureano. He was raised and educated in Salem and was a graduate of Salem High School, Class of 1993. While at Salem High, Milton was a member of the Salem Witches Football team for all four years and took great pride in his team's accomplishments.
Milton had been employed as a clerk at Home Depot and previously had been employed as a security officer at J.C. Penny. Milton was talented with technology and worked in computer systems for many years as well.
He was a lifelong resident of the City of Salem and was a loving son, brother and cousin who will be deeply missed.
In addition to his loving mother, Milton is survived by his half-brother, Milton Laureano; his sixteen cousins; his uncle and seven aunts and many dear friends and extended family.
ARRANGEMENTS: His funeral service will be held in The O'Donnell Funeral Home, 46 Washington Square (At Salem Common), Salem, Thursday, December 20, at 9 a.m. Relatives and friends invited. Burial in Greenlawn Cemetery, Salem. Visiting hours Wednesday, December 19, from 4 to 6 p.m. To share a memory or offer a condolence, please visit www.odonnellfuneralservice.com