What’s all the fuss? Keith Ellison is preparing to take his “oath of office” and chooses to do so with the Qu’ran. For one thing, there isn’t a requirement for representatives to use any religious book…Bible or otherwise. What they are required to do is swear to uphold the Constitution. The Constitution does not require anyone to use a religious book…Bible or otherwise. There is nothing to prevent one from using such a book if they so choose, it’s not a public ceremony (though there is a photographic “record”) and Mr. Ellison is choosing to exercise his choice for that instance, which he has every right to do. Others have preceded him by using different texts, others have chosen nothing but the required raising of their right hand while swearing or affirming to uphold the Constitution. This is what we require of our representatives…nothing sacred or holy but simply that they will follow and work for their constituents according to the laws of the land. And there is a mini-uproar! Before getting knickers in a twist what about biding time, waiting to see how this man carries out his office? He has been a State Rep in Minnesota since 2002 and looks to me like he upheld that office well enough since he was recently elected to represent his State in Congress. Let’s see how his record stands in a few years…or at least until the next election before deciding how his choice of swearing in will affect our fate.

To the ‘nay-sayers‘, I would also ask…what then about those who have gone before, using their religious book, or even nothing at all…were seen to be sworn in and, ultimately, thumbed their noses, filled their own pockets or created national scandals thus bringing dishonour to their office? Let the man do his job, illustrate his effectiveness for the good of his country and his own constituents, before assuming he’ll be bringing Islam to us all.

Here are my picks for the entire Week 16 schedule, all on a hunch!

Packers over Vikings @ Green Bay

Chiefs over Raiders @ Oakland

Bucs over Browns @ Cleveland

Titans over Bills @ Buffalo

Falcons over Panthers @ Atlanta

Redskins over Rams @ Saint Louis (Campbell keeps improving as a weapon, and the defense has had a rebirth.)

Ravens over Steelers @ Pittsburgh (With or without McNair, the Ravens have an offense.)

Giants over Saints @ New York (This is a must win for the Giants over the resting Saints, and they will win with Tiki and Plaxico prevailing, and Strahan back in.)

Jags over Pats @ Jacksonville

Colts over Texans @ Houston

Bears over Lions @ Detroit

49ers over Cardinals @ San Francisco

Chargers over Seahawks @ Seattle

Broncos over Bengals @ Denver

Eagles over Cowboys @ Dallas (Dallas secondary yields to the Garcia driven momentum)

Jets over Dolphins @ Miami

An update on the Cape Henlopen fighting post.

I find it noteworthy that even to this day President Bush has continued his surveillance of the internet communications of American Citizens without a court warrant to do so.

And then we hear Newt Gingrich’s call several weeks ago that we must seek for a new interpretation of the First Amendment in order to accommodate his perceived need for that new weapon in this so-called War on Terror. This speech was made in NH before an audience gathered to honor the First Amendment, believe it or not.

This initiative to operate above the law by certain elements of our GOP leadership accounts for the loss of confidence by the American people for the Cheney/Bush leadership we continue to suffer in the Executive Branch.

This loss of confidence is reinforced when we hear Bush, in his farewell address to Rumsfeld on his departure, that Rumsfeld is “the greatest Secretary of Defense” this nation has ever had! On which planet does the President now reside???

For one other sharp critique of this Cheney/Bush/Newtonian mindset, focused this time on reworking the meaning of the First Amendment, I recommend this piece by Keith Olbermann for all to hear. Sure, he uses hyperbole to make some of his arguments; no matter, I believe the American people need to listen first, then contemplate about these attacks on our basic freedoms from our current leaders.

We Fight for Liberty by Having More Liberty and Not Less

Quite a number of years ago I was a fan and supporter of Colin Powell. At one time even hoping he’d run for the Presidency. I wasn’t alone…many people had immense admiration and support for this seemingly thoughtful, somewhat compassionate man.

His initial opposition to the pre-emptive attack on Iraq was welcomed, both by many of his fans and those who did not believe this to be a just course of action. And then…inexplicably…he caved to the demands of his office, his boss or both. Many, certainly myself among them, watched in disbelief and horror when he made his presentation to the U. N. and the many who respected, had faith in this man didn’t only wane…it pretty much was tossed into the trash along with his previously good name.

So today, when it was announced he would be first up on “Face The Nation” (the first interview he has given in a year) I wanted to see what he had to say for himself. Wish I hadn’t bothered…in fact, about half-way through I switched off, nothing restored but angrier than I’ve been in some time. Of course I may be wrong in thinking that what he says today gives some voice to how he really believed those few years ago. In which case, why on earth did he cave? Why has it taken those years, too many lives, a country’s destruction and far more unrest there than existed before we ever attacked for him to publicly voice what so many…including, perhaps, himself believed at the time. Now…when he is in no position to be effective as he once could have been; when position, status, perhaps ambition had him detour from the person we thought he was and could have been more. Would the real Colin Powell please stand…or does he even have difficulty remembering which he is?

Today, far too little much too late for who could believe the “real’ Colin Powell could not, did not, see this coming when he first resisted any idea of this “war“.

UPDATE BELOW!

A concerned parent writes:

Mr. Gaffney, 

This morning, my daughter told me that she was happy school was delayed; wishing though, that it would have been 2 hrs vs. 1 hr.  I thought to myself, she never complains about going to school - but her tone was different.  I pursued and asked her why the negativity with school?  She began to tell me that the past 2 weeks it seems that there have been fights among the students and even the police has been involved.  The latest episode being yesterday morning and the police were brought in to help the situation.  And then last Friday, there were rumors a gang fight was going to happen and so the police were there at the end of the day while the kids got on the buses. So, knowing your “getting to the bottom of things”, I was wondering if you could ask your listeners if their children have been talking about the fighting that is going on at the HS.  My daughter did not know who specifically or what the fights were about, but she felt afraid going back to school this morning.  That maybe there would be more fighting, like retaliation. I tried calming her by telling her to not worry that it was a good thing the police were there - but thinking to myself, I thought “wow, with all the staff and even a resource office; the police had to help out”  and “it might have been a bad situation” 

During today’s Dan Gaffney Show, some students and other parents confirmed the story about fights between “groups” of students, but the class of 2007 wants you to know Cape is still a great place:

Our names are Laura and Elizabeth Hinkle and we are seniors at Cape Henlopen High School.  We were in school this week when two fights occurred between two groups of students.  First of all, we would like to say that we feel safe at Cape; we have never ever been scared or intimidated in school.  The groups of students at Cape that got into the fights were separated quickly and the administration at Cape handled the ordeal in a safe and constructive matter.  Mr. Yore has raised morale at Cape and has made the students feel more positive about the school.  Cape is a public school and not a private school which is probably why some of these events happen.  These fights do not occur on a daily basis and are isolated incidents when kids do not know how to handle their problems in a constructive matter.  There are many positive things that are happening at Cape that should get more media attention.  Our sports are excelling this year.  Our teachers are building up our AP and honors classes and we are constantly being offered more opportunities for new and interesting learning experiences.   Mr. Yore has made a huge positive impact on the students and staff.  He has constantly showed us dedication by showing up to every Cape sporting, marching band, and scholastic event.  Students treat him with the utmost respect because he has shown us respect. We understand that these fights were an unfortunate event but they in no way should be a reflection of the whole Cape Henlopen High School.  The students who get into fights put themselves into those situations and it is not the Cape environment that encourages it. Thank you for your time and understanding. 

 Elizabeth Hinkle , Class of 2007 President 

 Laura Hinkle , Class of 2007 Secretary

We welcome your comments about the Cape Henlopen fights. 

UPDATE 12/18/06:

I asked the nice young ladies from Cape; “who are these groups of students”?

As far as we know about the fights it was two groups of black students.  They are seperate groups of friends from different parts of the county.  What we have heard in school is that they are friends (from for example, because we aren’t sure, Rehoboth and Milton) not necessarily gangs.  We have a police officer who is on campus at all times and we know that he was there right away and we believe other officers came as well.  Everyone involved in the fight was taken into the school office and no one is really sure what happened after that.  Because we aren’t directly friends with anyone involved in the fights this is about all we know.

 Groups, not necessarily gangs?  Thanks ladies.

 

 

 

 

Do you know where your marriage licence is? How many times have you looked at it, thought about it, depended upon it since you were married? Sure…every once in a while someone in authority may want to know if you are married, where you were married. They don’t care by whom or how many were in attendance, only that you are legally bound each to the other. And, sometimes, that doesn’t matter a whit. I know…I’ve been there. Now I’m somewhere else, where friends, colleagues, acquaintances, neighbors, are fighting for the right to be “married” with all it entails. A civil union apparently will never be enough…and I cannot, for the life of me, understand why not. In this day and age of seeking equality, marriage is not an equalizer and anyone who believes it is should really get into marriage vows. Yes…a couple may change, delete or ignore the “obey” (I know I would!), make up their own version of marriage vows. They may be married in the church, on the beach, in a garden, house or court. With the exception of, perhaps, the church a civil union can be performed in any of those places; all friends, family, may attend the ceremony to wish the couple well just as they could a marriage. A cake could be baked, fancy clothes worn…even rings exchanged! A traditional marriage gives legality to a union of two people, first and foremost so what makes a civil union different? If either couple have and raise children who want to question marriage or not, the bottom line remains the same, surely…we are legal partners. A married couple is a legal partnership, civil union is a legal partnership (though, for sure, only in a few places at the moment). I never once asked my parents…or anyone…if they were legally married.

But what is really the point, here? We fall in love, decide to spend the rest of our lives together…sharing joys, sorrows, ups, downs, raising children, goats, dogs…whatever. We make joint purchases of homes, cars, trucks, furnishings and contribute to joint bank accounts. We do this whether same-sex or hetero couples, we do this married or not. As I see it, the difference IS…while we live and share our lives no differently than married couples we can neither enjoy or feel secure in any of the benefits legality provides them. Whether in illness, death or on April 15^th. I strongly believe…and maintain…we DO deserve and should have the right to share the same comforts and benefits as any other couple spending a lifetime together. I’d even go so far as to say that in the instance of civil union it wouldn’t be a bad idea to ensure the couple had been together for a couple of years and/or have no entitlements if their union/partnership dissolves in less than ten. Why not? Those who spend a career in the military already fall under those guidelines as far as some of their benefits are concerned. If you haven’t been a military spouse for at least nineteen years of his/her service your benefits and “rights” are limited. It might not be a bad idea, even, to extend that same ruling to a married couple given that too many of them may only stay together for a few years. Why do we want to replicate the traditional heterosexual union called marriage? Too many of them don’t plan on their marriages lasting “forever”, moving on to greener (or younger) pastures. Already, even though gay marriage is only recognized in a very few states and there have been couples who’ve taken advantage of it, enough of them have seen fit to divorce after either months or a year or two. That is a mockery of any union…civil, marriage, whatever. Unfortunately, it leaves a taste of “Why did they bother? So that, legally, when they move on to someone else, they’ve secured their “investments”?” What price “cleaving each to the other as long both shall live”? What on earth makes some think that the word, the ritual of marriage will make any difference? I’ve known couples…too many for my liking…who were “together forever”, had commitment ceremonies with friends, family attending, even had the gift registry only to be introduced a year or so later to “my new partner, Bob/Sue”. So to what end marriage?

My partner and I discussed a commitment ceremony a few months after we set up home together. Neither of us believed there was a need. It brought nothing into our relationship that wasn’t already there…nor would it. We had already committed to each other and that commitment is as strong now as it was then. We had invested our feelings, thoughts, intellect into our partnership and nothing will change that between us.. We have made bigger financial and material investments in our life together…and nothing will change those between us as long as we make the decisions, are healthy and competent. Just as it doesn’t with married couples who do likewise for the long haul…and mean it. What does concern us is that outside influences will…and do…affect us where it won’t a legally joined couple and that IS a problem…yet nothing a civil union wouldn’t alleviate or that “only marriage” could make right.

If one truly cares for the other partner, each other’s best interests, what difference does terminology make? Why is civil union “less than”…or “marriage” more than? Why, tonight, in New Jersey are gay couples…or even singles…balking at a good step in the right direction instead of rejoicing in hope? Why can’t we be magnanimous in accepting that our affairs…legal and financial, that is…may well be on their way to easing many of our concerns, will likely provide us with the same rights, benefits, privileges as married couples only without the “M” word. I don’t care…but I do care that this attitude of “I want what I want when I want it” will continue to hinder those like me who believe it’s not the word which counts but the deed and how we decide to both live honouring it while expecting our government to do likewise. 

 

To Lamda Legal in Gennessee Valley I’d suggest that “equality, dignity and fairness to families” doesn’t come from one word such as “marriage”.  It’s up to us to live and be equality, dignity, fairness.

Taking the annual WGMD Radio station trip to Atlantic City was a whoppin’ good time, however, I do have a question regarding security protocol on the NJ side by the Delaware River and Bay Authority and the Operation of the Ferry.

Does this seem suspect to you? Going to NJ from the pristine DE terminal, Security agents checked bags, emptied pockets and even made riders walk through a metal detector, all the time acting in a polite and professional manner. However, on the way home, in the NJ terminal, no security officers were present during the pre-boarding 5pm process.. and odd still, the metal detector check in station was left un-manned and closed. One listener remarked to me, “I guess the terrorists retire at 4 pm.”

What good is it to offer security on the DE side and not on the NJ side.. do they figure that criminals and terrorists would only be going to NJ and not to Lewes?

The DRBA authority website says “Policing a ferry is like no other kind of policing. Officers at the Cape May and Lewes troops actively patrol ferry vessels, terminals and access roads, with a multifaceted mission. First, officers proactively patrol the vessels and terminals to deter and detect criminal activity. Secondly, officers look for possible security breaches. Lastly, but certainly not least, officers are highly visible representatives of the ferry operation.”

However, no metal detection, no ID checking, no even looking any of the passangers up and down… In an era where travel security is of the utmost concern, what is the excuse for such a lack of planning? Why offer any security in the first place?

But not scared to death! This afternoon I received an email from a friend, advising of the problem with buying gift cards…the kind you see at check-outs, in pharmacies etc. Having learned to check such well-intentioned warnings through snopes.com, I did just that. Well…it’s not false, certainly, although the site did indicate it’s a bit tougher to scam than the mail said. Also, as snopes points out, even buying your gift cards from customer service personnel won’t, necessarily, afford you a guarantee of security from such theft.

Can you imagine, though? Gift cards are a fair solution to difficulties knowing what to buy for employees, friends “who have everything”, the baby-sitter/pet-sitter etc. but you get a selection, present them with a good heart…they’re received and welcomed, only to find there is no value? You and recipient have been ripped off? “Merry Christmas…HAHAHA”! Granted, apparently it’s not quite the dire problem these emails seem to indicate but one thing does bother me. We…as a society and with the best will in the world…are so free with information and “how-to’s”, can’t help wondering if this doesn’t put bad ideas into the wrong heads, creating a bigger problem than it originally was thought! Come to think of it…I suppose I’ve just contributed to this, myself with this well-intentioned warning. Okay, in my defence I’d say that no-one reading this has intention to scam anyone out of a Christmas present and might just be interested in safe-guarding their holiday generosities, so this might help. On the other hand…should we really give out so much information on how the unscrupulous make such (and other) scams work for them and thus increase the perp load?

Don’t be fooled, Rich Collins and his PGA organization are promoting growth policies that benefit a small minority of Sussex Countians.

He represents developers, realtors, and land owners who, in cahoots with the majority on the Sussex County Council, wish to have no controls on the rate and manner of land development in our Sussex County.

Make no mistake, I am not opposed to development — but I am realistic enough to know that it has to happen, especially with the retirement of the baby boomers beginning about now, the youngest of whom are now about 60 years old.

Instead of Rich Collins striving for managed growth, he is in favor of unbridled growth. Rich proclaims himself as the champion of property rights, which of course has appeal to farmers and developers who are land owners. But what about the entire community of Sussex Countians. Shouldn’t there be some kind of a middle ground where we can all come together? Rich Collins doesn’t appear to think so.

Don’t go by Rich’s language, go by his actions. Has there been a development that he opposes because of poor infrastructure planning or unsuitable placement? Have you seen him speak out: against potential pollution problems of our inland bays; in favor of adequate wetland protection buffers; against our sewage and waste disposal shortfalls; against our road problems; in favor of substantial impact fees on developers?

I have not, and I don’t expect to, because to me Rich Collins represents moneyed interests who are interested in their own self-aggrandizements irrespective of the interests of Sussex Countians as a community. (Note: This is a generalization certainly not typical of all developers, farmers, realtors, lenders, …. But again, we can only go by what we see actually happening in total)

Ask Rich Collins about Livable Developer, a state plan aimed at expanding development out from already existing centers, together with a voluntary program to preserve farm lands and a program to purchase lands for open space preservation. He hates it, but offers no alternative other than absolute property rights. That’s no development solution for anyone except the very few that Rich represents!

Look, I am not against development, but I want it to be managed. Right now it is not, and Rich Collins is part of the problem. So are Thurman Adams, Dale Dukes, Vance Phillips, and the rest of these people working in cahoots to forward their own personal interests, at the expense in quality of life of the rest of the residents of Sussex County, including the conscientious and caring farmers who love this land called Sussex County.

George Cole asked out loud the other day why we even have a zoning and planning organization, when the Sussex County Council majority do what they wish in spite of their recommendations.

This is no joke, folks, though I think it is to Rich Collins and his troops. No, it is a disgrace that we are allowing them to run all over us as they grin on the way to the bank. These folks do not have the better interests of Sussex Countians at heart.

Ask Rich Collins where he plans to live 15-20 years down the line. I’ll bet it is not Sussex County. Where is it Rich?

Rich Collins, again, represents only a wealthy fringe who are focused on squeezing every penny of profit, having too little regard for the welfare of the county in which we all reside. Let us learn from the mistakes of New Castle and Kent Counties, both of which are now in the process of getting a grip on their unmanaged growth. Let us not wait as long as they did to take control of our county.

Development can and should be managed in such a way that every single citizen benefits: developers, realtors, construction workers, farmers, other land owners, and the rest of the residents of Sussex County. There are other areas in this country have been successful at managed development. Let us find some models to assist us in generating plans for our managed growth, before it is too late.
Let Rich Collins know how angry you are, if you are angry, at his stances against managed growth, and let the above named neglectful politicians know as well.

Positive Growth Alliance
17577 Nassau Commons Blvd.
Suite 201
Lewes, DE 19958

(302) 644-3579 Phone
(302) 644-3879 Fax
Email: information@pgalliance.org

http://www.sussexcountyde.gov/departments/countycouncil/index.cfm

http://www.legis.state.de.us/Legislature.nsf/sen?openview&nav=senate

http://www.legis.state.de.us/Legislature.nsf/Reps?openview&Count=75&nav=house