Happy Birthday Dr. King
This Saturday’s Recipes by The Pioneer Woman
6 years ago
Showing posts with label History. Show all posts
Showing posts with label History. Show all posts
Monday, January 18, 2010
Friday, October 9, 2009
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Ted Kennedy
Driving through Warwick today, I was happy to see that flags were at half staff in honor of the life of Ted Kennedy. He deserves the fuss being made over his passing.
Rest in Peace, Teddy. You did more good than most.
Monday, July 27, 2009
Today In Rhode Island History
Wow, I don't remember this at all!! At that time - 30 years ago - I was five years out of high school and obviously wasn't paying attention to what was going on around me. It's a little scary that the law needed to be changed to keep your name.
Projo.com - Maria Armental
It was 30 years ago today that women gained --- in the eyes of the law --- the right to decide what name when married to use in registering a car once they were married.
Until then, women had to take their husband's names.
Requiring married women to use their husbands' names, said the state registrar of motor vehicles at the time, Eugene Petit, "is in the best interest of the safety of the community. It will keep bad drivers off the road and give us better control of the registry." The safety of the community??? Holy smokes, this guy was completely out of touch!
Petit, whose comments were including in the landmark state Supreme Court case Traugott v. Petit, called the requirement "patriotic."
"Listen," Petit is quoted as saying, "I respect gals in every phase. I hope they just respect society in this." Gals??? Certainly doesn't show a lot of respect when he called women gals!
To the ACLU and the women --- and supportive men -- for whom they filed suit, the matter was a simple one: "The very least you can have in this damned life is your own name." That's how Sheila Cabral-Sousa, the volunteer lawyer who successfully litigated the case for the Rhode Island affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union, summed up the case at the time. Damn right!
The ACLU issued a press release Monday recalling the anniversary, and adding: ""It is true that the past thirty years have seen many victories for women's rights. ... However, the struggle against gender-based discrimination continues to this day in the fight for equal pay for equal work and similar issues. A look at some of the comments made by public officials only 30 years ago in this case serves as a stark reminder that gains for women's rights remain of recent vintage and, therefore, remain far from complete." Sometimes, ya just gotta like and agree with the ACLU!
Projo.com - Maria Armental
It was 30 years ago today that women gained --- in the eyes of the law --- the right to decide what name when married to use in registering a car once they were married.
Until then, women had to take their husband's names.
Requiring married women to use their husbands' names, said the state registrar of motor vehicles at the time, Eugene Petit, "is in the best interest of the safety of the community. It will keep bad drivers off the road and give us better control of the registry." The safety of the community??? Holy smokes, this guy was completely out of touch!
Petit, whose comments were including in the landmark state Supreme Court case Traugott v. Petit, called the requirement "patriotic."
"Listen," Petit is quoted as saying, "I respect gals in every phase. I hope they just respect society in this." Gals??? Certainly doesn't show a lot of respect when he called women gals!
To the ACLU and the women --- and supportive men -- for whom they filed suit, the matter was a simple one: "The very least you can have in this damned life is your own name." That's how Sheila Cabral-Sousa, the volunteer lawyer who successfully litigated the case for the Rhode Island affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union, summed up the case at the time. Damn right!
The ACLU issued a press release Monday recalling the anniversary, and adding: ""It is true that the past thirty years have seen many victories for women's rights. ... However, the struggle against gender-based discrimination continues to this day in the fight for equal pay for equal work and similar issues. A look at some of the comments made by public officials only 30 years ago in this case serves as a stark reminder that gains for women's rights remain of recent vintage and, therefore, remain far from complete." Sometimes, ya just gotta like and agree with the ACLU!
Friday, July 17, 2009
Walter Cronkite
I didn't grow up on CBS News - we were a NBC News family - goodnight Chet, goodnight David!
So I didn't really discover Walter Cronkite until after he retired. And that's when I realized what I'd missed all those years!
So I didn't really discover Walter Cronkite until after he retired. And that's when I realized what I'd missed all those years!
In 1996 he wrote his autobiography "A Reporter's Life" and it help cement my affection for a truly remarkable man and the impact he had on our lives. Even though I didn't really know him when he was the face of CBS, his impact did affect my life and I'm so grateful for him.
I know there are others who feel as I do; but, with all the media coverage, you'd have thought that MJ gave more to us than Walter Cronkite did, instead of the other way around.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
JFK Jr.
Remember this little guy? He was cute, that's for sure.
Of course he came from some pretty people.
And he grew up to be one of the most handsome of handsome men.
But looks don't mean everything. From everything I understand about him, JFK Jr. was a pretty nice guy also.
Of course he came from some pretty people.
And he grew up to be one of the most handsome of handsome men.
But looks don't mean everything. From everything I understand about him, JFK Jr. was a pretty nice guy also.
It's hard to believe that it's been 10 years since his death. It was a Saturday morning. As usual, I didn't have the TV on and I wasn't on the internet as much as I am nowadays. I drove to Warwick in the early afternoon to visit with Chelsea and Matthew. My sister-in-law Beverly opened the door and I knew that something was wrong. What's going on, I asked and she was surprised that I didn't know. We sat in front of the TV and were glued there for the rest of the day.
It's still hard to believe that he's gone. If I happen to see a photo or some TV coverage, it all comes rushing back and brings tears to my eyes. He had such potential and we'll never know what could have been. Just like with his dad.
One Small Step For Man, One Giant Leap For Mankind
I love the moon! I love it so much I always use it as my profile picture. I feel so connected to it and, as a kid, thought it was mine.
Forty years after America's launch of Apollo 11, the U.S. space program is at a different crossroads, challenged in recent years to return to the moon and to recapture the ambition that launched the space race in 1961. Back then, a dazzled nation heard the big dreams of a youthful Ivy League-educated, senator-turned president.
"I believe," President John F. Kennedy told Congress, "that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to Earth."
That was the same year Barack Obama was born. Forty-eight years later, Obama, a similarly youthful Ivy League-educated former senator is now in charge, and the nation wonders what his vision is for the U.S. space program.
Forty years after America's launch of Apollo 11, the U.S. space program is at a different crossroads, challenged in recent years to return to the moon and to recapture the ambition that launched the space race in 1961. Back then, a dazzled nation heard the big dreams of a youthful Ivy League-educated, senator-turned president.
"I believe," President John F. Kennedy told Congress, "that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this decade is out, of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to Earth."
That was the same year Barack Obama was born. Forty-eight years later, Obama, a similarly youthful Ivy League-educated former senator is now in charge, and the nation wonders what his vision is for the U.S. space program.
Forty years ago this week was the Apollo 11 lift-off and, on July 20, the first landing on the moon! I can remember it so well. It was so exciting and I'm looking forward to the next time the US lands on the moon.
Monday, July 13, 2009
27,900 Counts Of Accessory To Murder
That number is kind of staggering, isn't it? Twenty seven thousand nine hundred deaths are attributed to a monster who came to the United States and hid behind a job as an auto worker after committing atrocities.
I'm not Jewish. I don't even know that many Jewish people. What I do know is that the Holocaust was wrong in every possible way. Too many people got away with murder, literally. How right it is that someone is being brought to justice, even all these years later.
"The effort to bring Demjanjuk to justice sends a very powerful message that the passage of time in no way diminishes the guilt of the perpetrator," says Efraim Zuroff, the top Nazi-hunter at the Simon Wiesenthal Center.
German prosecutors formally charged John Demjanjuk on Monday with 27,900 counts of being an accessory to murder at a Nazi death camp during World War II. He is accused of serving as a guard at the Sobibor camp in Nazi-occupied Poland during World War II. Being the sort of murderer he is, of course he denies it. He was a victim too, saying he was a prisoner of war.
But Nazi-era documents obtained by U.S. justice authorities and shared with German prosecutors include a photo ID identifying Demjanjuk as a guard at the Sobibor death camp and information that he was trained at an SS facility for Nazi guards at Trawniki, which was also in occupied-Poland.
"This is obviously an important step forward," Zuroff said by telephone from Jerusalem. "We hope that the trial itself will be expedited so that justice will be achieved and he can be given the appropriate punishment."
Charges of accessory to murder carry a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison in Germany. Even I can do that math 27,900 X 15 years each = a death sentence for a man who is 89 years old. I just hope he lives through the trial.
I'm not Jewish. I don't even know that many Jewish people. What I do know is that the Holocaust was wrong in every possible way. Too many people got away with murder, literally. How right it is that someone is being brought to justice, even all these years later.
"The effort to bring Demjanjuk to justice sends a very powerful message that the passage of time in no way diminishes the guilt of the perpetrator," says Efraim Zuroff, the top Nazi-hunter at the Simon Wiesenthal Center.
German prosecutors formally charged John Demjanjuk on Monday with 27,900 counts of being an accessory to murder at a Nazi death camp during World War II. He is accused of serving as a guard at the Sobibor camp in Nazi-occupied Poland during World War II. Being the sort of murderer he is, of course he denies it. He was a victim too, saying he was a prisoner of war.
But Nazi-era documents obtained by U.S. justice authorities and shared with German prosecutors include a photo ID identifying Demjanjuk as a guard at the Sobibor death camp and information that he was trained at an SS facility for Nazi guards at Trawniki, which was also in occupied-Poland.
"This is obviously an important step forward," Zuroff said by telephone from Jerusalem. "We hope that the trial itself will be expedited so that justice will be achieved and he can be given the appropriate punishment."
Charges of accessory to murder carry a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison in Germany. Even I can do that math 27,900 X 15 years each = a death sentence for a man who is 89 years old. I just hope he lives through the trial.
Friday, July 3, 2009
Declaration Of Independence
Two-hundred and thirty-three years ago Saturday, church bells rang out over Philadelphia as the Continental Congress adopted Thomas Jefferson's draft of the Declaration of Independence.
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
— That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
— Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.
The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world. He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us: For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury.
A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people. Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us.
We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence.
They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare,
That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; And that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do.
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
— That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
— Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.
The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world. He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us: For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury.
A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people. Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us.
We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence.
They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare,
That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; And that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do.
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Finally
Exxon to pay interest on Valdez oil spill damages
By MARY PEMBERTON, Associated Press Writer
ANCHORAGE, Alaska – Oil giant Exxon Mobil Corp. has decided not to appeal hundreds of millions of dollars in interest on punitive damages resulting from the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill.
The Irving, Texas-based company will pay about $470 million in interest on more than $507.5 million in punitive damages following the 11 million gallon spill of crude in Prince William Sound, company spokesman Tony Cudmore said Monday.
The company expects to make payment on the interest in the next few days, said plaintiffs' lawyer David Oesting. Exxon's decision was first reported Monday by the Anchorage Daily News.
The decision is a turnaround for the company. Exxon Mobil since the mid-1990s has appealed court rulings on punitive damages.
"I think they recognized they weren't going any further from a legal standpoint," Oesting said.
Earlier this month, Exxon Mobil was ordered to pay interest on the punitive damages. The ruling issued by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco nearly doubles the average payout of about $15,000 to 33,000 Alaska Natives, fishermen, business owners and others.
Numerous studies have found the region has not fully recovered from the disaster that fouled 1,200 miles of coastline in the nation's worst crude oil spill.
In June 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court set punitive damages at $507.5 million. But two months later, the high court declined to decide whether Exxon Mobil must pay interest on the punitive damages and instead sent it back to the appeals court.
Cudmore said he couldn't elaborate on why Exxon Mobil decided to pay interest, except to say the company felt it should adhere to the appeals court decision.
Exxon argued unsuccessfully that if interest had to be paid, it should be calculated from the date the punitive damages were set last by the Supreme Court. But the appeals court said interest on the $507.5 million judgment should run from 1996, when the original settlement was entered into court records, at a rate of 5.9 percent.
Legal battles over the Exxon Valdez spill have lasted years but now appear to be ending. The only remaining sum in dispute is $70 million in court fees, Cudmore said.
An Anchorage jury in 1994 awarded plaintiffs $5 billion. That was cut in half by the 9th Circuit. The Supreme Court in a split decision reduced the total to $507.5 million.
Oesting said the plaintiffs' have "clearly prevailed" in the case, even if the original $5 billion judgment was drastically reduced.
By MARY PEMBERTON, Associated Press Writer
ANCHORAGE, Alaska – Oil giant Exxon Mobil Corp. has decided not to appeal hundreds of millions of dollars in interest on punitive damages resulting from the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill.
The Irving, Texas-based company will pay about $470 million in interest on more than $507.5 million in punitive damages following the 11 million gallon spill of crude in Prince William Sound, company spokesman Tony Cudmore said Monday.
The company expects to make payment on the interest in the next few days, said plaintiffs' lawyer David Oesting. Exxon's decision was first reported Monday by the Anchorage Daily News.
The decision is a turnaround for the company. Exxon Mobil since the mid-1990s has appealed court rulings on punitive damages.
"I think they recognized they weren't going any further from a legal standpoint," Oesting said.
Earlier this month, Exxon Mobil was ordered to pay interest on the punitive damages. The ruling issued by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco nearly doubles the average payout of about $15,000 to 33,000 Alaska Natives, fishermen, business owners and others.
Numerous studies have found the region has not fully recovered from the disaster that fouled 1,200 miles of coastline in the nation's worst crude oil spill.
In June 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court set punitive damages at $507.5 million. But two months later, the high court declined to decide whether Exxon Mobil must pay interest on the punitive damages and instead sent it back to the appeals court.
Cudmore said he couldn't elaborate on why Exxon Mobil decided to pay interest, except to say the company felt it should adhere to the appeals court decision.
Exxon argued unsuccessfully that if interest had to be paid, it should be calculated from the date the punitive damages were set last by the Supreme Court. But the appeals court said interest on the $507.5 million judgment should run from 1996, when the original settlement was entered into court records, at a rate of 5.9 percent.
Legal battles over the Exxon Valdez spill have lasted years but now appear to be ending. The only remaining sum in dispute is $70 million in court fees, Cudmore said.
An Anchorage jury in 1994 awarded plaintiffs $5 billion. That was cut in half by the 9th Circuit. The Supreme Court in a split decision reduced the total to $507.5 million.
Oesting said the plaintiffs' have "clearly prevailed" in the case, even if the original $5 billion judgment was drastically reduced.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Give Me A Break
PROVIDENCE, R.I. – The country's smallest state has the longest official name: "State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations."
A push to drop "Providence Plantations" from that name advanced farther than ever on Thursday when House lawmakers voted 70-3 to let residents decide whether their home should simply be called the "State of Rhode Island." It's an encouraging sign for those who believe the formal name conjures up images of slavery, while opponents argue it's an unnecessary rewriting of history that ignores Rhode Island's tradition of religious liberty and tolerance.
The bill permitting a statewide referendum on the issue next year now heads to the state Senate.
"It's high time for us to recognize that slavery happened on plantations in Rhode Island and decide that we don't want that chapter of our history to be a proud part of our name," said Rep. Joseph Almeida, an African-American lawmaker who sponsored the bill.
Rhode Island's unwieldy name reflects its turbulent colonial history, a state that consisted of multiple and sometimes rival settlements populated by dissidents.
Banished from the Massachusetts Bay Colony for his unorthodox religious views, minister Roger Williams set out in 1636 and settled at the northern tip of Narragansett Bay, which he called Providence Plantations. Williams founded the first Baptist church in America and became famous for embracing the separation of church and state, a legal principle enshrined in the Bill of Rights a century later.
Other settlers made their homes in modern-day Portsmouth and Newport on Aquidneck Island, then known as the Isle of Rhodes.
In 1663, English King Charles II granted a royal charter joining all the settlements into a single colony called "The Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations." The name stuck. Rhode Island used that royal charter as its governing document until 1843.
Opponents of the name charge argue that "plantations" was used at the time to describe any farming settlements, regardless of slavery.
Rhode Island merchants did, however, make their fortunes off the slave trade. Slaves helped construct Brown University in Providence, and a prominent slave trader paid half the cost of its first library.
Still, Stanley Lemons, a professor emeritus of history at Rhode Island College, said changing the state's name ignores the accomplishments of Williams, whose government passed laws trying to prevent the permanent servitude of whites, blacks and American Indians.
"There are different meanings for this word," Lemons said. "To try to impose their experience on everyone else wipes out Roger Williams."
By RAY HENRY, Associated Press Writer Ray Henry, Associated Press Writer – Thu Jun 25, 2009
A push to drop "Providence Plantations" from that name advanced farther than ever on Thursday when House lawmakers voted 70-3 to let residents decide whether their home should simply be called the "State of Rhode Island." It's an encouraging sign for those who believe the formal name conjures up images of slavery, while opponents argue it's an unnecessary rewriting of history that ignores Rhode Island's tradition of religious liberty and tolerance.
The bill permitting a statewide referendum on the issue next year now heads to the state Senate.
"It's high time for us to recognize that slavery happened on plantations in Rhode Island and decide that we don't want that chapter of our history to be a proud part of our name," said Rep. Joseph Almeida, an African-American lawmaker who sponsored the bill.
Rhode Island's unwieldy name reflects its turbulent colonial history, a state that consisted of multiple and sometimes rival settlements populated by dissidents.
Banished from the Massachusetts Bay Colony for his unorthodox religious views, minister Roger Williams set out in 1636 and settled at the northern tip of Narragansett Bay, which he called Providence Plantations. Williams founded the first Baptist church in America and became famous for embracing the separation of church and state, a legal principle enshrined in the Bill of Rights a century later.
Other settlers made their homes in modern-day Portsmouth and Newport on Aquidneck Island, then known as the Isle of Rhodes.
In 1663, English King Charles II granted a royal charter joining all the settlements into a single colony called "The Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations." The name stuck. Rhode Island used that royal charter as its governing document until 1843.
Opponents of the name charge argue that "plantations" was used at the time to describe any farming settlements, regardless of slavery.
Rhode Island merchants did, however, make their fortunes off the slave trade. Slaves helped construct Brown University in Providence, and a prominent slave trader paid half the cost of its first library.
Still, Stanley Lemons, a professor emeritus of history at Rhode Island College, said changing the state's name ignores the accomplishments of Williams, whose government passed laws trying to prevent the permanent servitude of whites, blacks and American Indians.
"There are different meanings for this word," Lemons said. "To try to impose their experience on everyone else wipes out Roger Williams."
By RAY HENRY, Associated Press Writer Ray Henry, Associated Press Writer – Thu Jun 25, 2009
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Remembering...
Tim RussertIt was one year ago that Tim Russert of NBC news died. One of his favorite sayings was "What A Country" and what a year this country has had. I still feel sad after a year because of the impact he had on me. His demeanor, sense of humor and integrity was something I much admired and I miss. There's a lot of press on how the mainstream media has a 'love affair' with President Obama - if Tim were still here, and I so wish he were - he would be the one journalist who would treat our President the same as he treated everyone else, with respect. Tim's wife and son have shown remarkable composure in this past year and I admire them for that.
Julia Langello
This past Thursday, the 11th, was my birthday. As I do every morning, I was looking through the obituaries at projo.com and I saw a name that I knew I would be seeing before long. Many years ago, I met Julia Langello while I was working for ADT. My job was to place a 'I've fallen and I can't get up' type unit at her home. She was 91 years old at that time and was one of the nicest, sweetest women I had ever met. She lived with her daughter who worked full time and was concerned about her mother.
When I got to their house, Julia was waiting by the door for me. I knew the moment I saw her that there was something special about her, (really, look at her picture and tell me she isn't one of the cutest grandmother type women you've ever seen) and I was so very right (for once!)
Even though she was elderly, and had lost her right eye at some time, she was a spirited woman whose mind was as sharp as a tack. She wanted the unit placed in her bedroom because she spent much of her time in there. As we sat on her bed, we chatted a bit while I set the unit up.
She told me about her family, her late husband who had died quite some time ago, and her life as it was at that time. I explained the unit to her as I plugged it in and tested it. Unlike many other seniors, she understood how it worked right away and that left some time for us to visit before I had to leave.
She called me a couple of months later and I went back to her house and swapped out the unit because it was acting up. So, we had time for another visit while I was there. A few weeks later she called me as she was trying to reach her grandaughter Melissa, who worked for ADT in Florida. I tracked Melissa down and asked her to call her grandmother. And so it went. Julia and I spoke on the phone several times over the last few years and I enjoyed every minute of it.
Whether I was helping her or just chatting with her, she was just the sweetest woman. So, I was sad to see her obituary on Thursday. Last night I deleted her number from my cell phone. She was 96 years old. I'm sure her family will miss her dreadfully. I know I do.
Ann Grady
My first real boyfriend was Eddie Grady. I met him through my best friend Beverly Sardelli's then boyfriend, Bob something. This was 1972. Eddie had long wavy hair and boy did we like to make out. No matter where we were, we were always trying to get somewhere so we could kiss. One of our favorite places was under a big shrub on the grounds of the Aldrich mansion. We loved it there because no one ever knew we were there.
My first real boyfriend was Eddie Grady. I met him through my best friend Beverly Sardelli's then boyfriend, Bob something. This was 1972. Eddie had long wavy hair and boy did we like to make out. No matter where we were, we were always trying to get somewhere so we could kiss. One of our favorite places was under a big shrub on the grounds of the Aldrich mansion. We loved it there because no one ever knew we were there.
I don't recall why we stopped seeing each other, but we remained friends. We saw each other in school and for years after, he would come to our house each Christmas day for a visit. He wanted to be a fireman back then and today he is Deputy Chief of the Cranston Fire Dept..
In today's projo.com obituaries was the notice of his mother's passing. I had met her a few times and, of course, as a 15-16 year old, I was scared of her. She was a single mother as Eddie's father had died when he was younger and with two daughters as well as Eddie, she had her hands full.
I have a really clear memory of going to his house one day and we were up in his room. The walls were covered with posters and he had the black-light on, the windows were covered with aluminum foil (no idea why, but it seemed to make sense back then.) We were kissing, as usual, and his mother threw open the bedroom door making us both jump and his front tooth hit my front tooth which chipped. To this day, I often think of him when I run my tongue over my tooth chip.
Shortly after 9/11/01 I won at auction, a bid on two firefighter rememberance artwork in frames. I gave one to the EG fire department and the other I delivered to Eddie's (he's called Ed now) office in Cranston. He wasn't in, but I left it for him. I'm so very sorry for their loss.
Friday, June 5, 2009
Making History
How about that President of ours?
What a great job he did giving the speech in Egypt. No one else could have given that speech - could you imagine the Idiot Bush? The crowd would have been throwing more than shoes at him.
We are so lucky to have him as our President. And while I'm not happy with everything he has done, he's been pretty much on task, considering that much of what he is dealing with was not what he campaigned for. He certainly has my support and appreciation for all of his hard work.
NBC news did a 'Behind the scenes of the Obama White House' special this week which was fascinating to watch. It boggles the mind to think of everything they have going on there and Obama, man, he is the coolest guy.
I'm very impressed with him. And grateful too.
What a great job he did giving the speech in Egypt. No one else could have given that speech - could you imagine the Idiot Bush? The crowd would have been throwing more than shoes at him.
We are so lucky to have him as our President. And while I'm not happy with everything he has done, he's been pretty much on task, considering that much of what he is dealing with was not what he campaigned for. He certainly has my support and appreciation for all of his hard work.
NBC news did a 'Behind the scenes of the Obama White House' special this week which was fascinating to watch. It boggles the mind to think of everything they have going on there and Obama, man, he is the coolest guy.
I'm very impressed with him. And grateful too.
Friday, May 1, 2009
Pandemics In Perspective
This is the best article I have read regarding the H1N1 flu. acdc
How bad can a flu epidemic get? The raw numbers indicate that over the past 90 years, far more people have been killed by relatively run-of-the-mill seasonal flu viruses than by the exotic bugs that have grabbed most of the headlines - such as bird flu or the current strain of swine flu.
But to get a more useful perspective on a flu epidemic's potential impact, you have to go back to the mother of all pandemics: the "Spanish flu" of 1918.
Newly published research supports the view that the H1N1 virus behind the current outbreak is a distant cousin of the virus that sparked the infamous 1918 epidemic. But all the signs so far indicate that the 1918 flu was much more lethal. In fact, some researchers report that today's headline-making microbe lacks some of the molecular machinery that made past versions of the virus deadlier.
Citing such reports, the Los Angeles Times noted today that the current outbreak "may not even do as much damage as the run-of-the-mill flu outbreaks that occur each winter without much fanfare."
So far, the raw numbers bear that out. Typically, about 36,000 Americans die each year due to flu complications, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The worldwide toll is estimated at 250,000 to 500,000 annually. If you go back to the most recent officially recognized flu pandemic, the 1968-69 Hong Kong flu, the death toll is about the same: 34,000 in the U.S., 500,000 globally. The figures for the 1957-58 Asian flu pandemic are 70,000 U.S. deaths and 2 million deaths worldwide.
Even those figures pale in comparison with the 1918-19 flu pandemic: At least 550,000 people died in the United States alone. The worldwide death toll was estimated at 20 million to 40 million, or perhaps even as many as 100 million by some accounts. The flu killed more people than World War I (which may have contributed to its spread).
Compared to past pandemics, the current swine-flu outbreak is hardly a blip on the chart. (Speaking of charts, you can click onto a couple that show you mortality rates since 1900 and since 1950.) Last year, MIT researcher Peter Doshi pointed out that not all pandemics turn out to be as serious as the annual seasonal flu. And in its swine-flu FAQ, the Canadian government makes a similar point.
So does that mean the current outbreak is just a piddling pandemic? Not necessarily.
For one thing, it's far too early to assess how this outbreak will end up. For another thing, the pattern of the deaths so far is distressing. Both those caveats draw on the lessons learned from the 1918 flu.
The age factor
"The big difference between seasonal flu and pandemic flu is that when you move to pandemic flu, you get a pattern that the older people are not affected," said Lone Simonsen, an epidemiologist at George Washington University who is also the founder and president of SAGE Analytica. The age distribution curve for a typical seasonal flu looks like a "U," while the distribution pattern for the 1918 flu was more of a "W," as seen on this chart.
Experts worry that the distribution pattern for the current outbreak looks similar. Every death from the flu is a tragedy, but it's particularly tragic when a significant number of the fatalities come in the 20-to-50 age bracket rather than the over-85 bracket.
"That's a lot of life years lost," Simonsen said. "It has another flavor to it."
Simonsen and her colleagues are still trying to figure out why the 1918 flu hit people in the prime of their lives so hard. One hypothesis is that the virus could somehow push a healthy immune system into such a violent response that the body suffered irreparable damage. Another idea is that the older people had acquired immunity from a previous flu epidemic, while younger people missed out. Simonsen said a third possibility is that some sort of bacterial co-infection made the flu worse. Or it could have been a combination of factors.
Wave of the future
Even if the current outbreak turns out to be relatively mild, that's not necessarily the end of the story. "When you look at the past pandemics, you observe that they often come in waves," Simonsen said.
She said a review of the records from 1918 show that the year's first flu flare-up actually came in the spring and summer, in the form of a less lethal but highly transmissible infection. That appears to have been the precursor for the deadlier waves of influenza that swept across the world that fall.
If the current outbreak turns out to follow a similar pattern, that would be "good and bad news," Simonsen said. It's bad news because a worse outbreak could conceivably follow. But it's good news, she said, because we'd have "more time to defend ourselves," using all the defenses that have been developed since 1918.
Patrolling the pigs
In recent years, the biggest concern on the minds of epidemiologists has been avian flu, not swine flu - but the current outbreak is a sign that experts will have to pay attention to the pigs as well, said Juergen Richt, a veterinary researcher at Kansas State University.
He and his colleagues infected pigs with the 1918 "Spanish flu" virus, as well as a virus from 1930 that is thought to be a descendant of the 1918 strain, under Biosafety Level 4 lab conditions. The experiment, described in the May issue of the Journal of Virology, showed that the swine suffered mild respiratory disease but recovered from the infection.
"A virus which is lethal to monkeys, ferrets and mice, and was lethal to people [in 1918], is not lethal to pigs," Richt told me. That suggests that swine could have played a role in maintaining and spreading the 1918 flu, he said.
It also suggests that swine populations might have to be monitored more closely for evidence of potentially dangerous disease strains, perhaps through diagnostic screening. It's not enough to wait until pigs drop dead, he said.
Richt said swine-flu strains appear to be undergoing mutations more rapidly today than they did a decade ago. "Something happened 10 years ago, where the whole evolution of swine flu changed and became very dynamic," he said. Why? Richt said the reason is unknown, although it may have something to do with a genetic change enhancing the virus' ability to jump between pigs, birds and people.
Richt is a big advocate for research that bridges the gap between human medicine and veterinary medicine, and he told me the current flap over flu viruses just underscores the point.
"It's not only bird flu and swine flu," he said. "There are lots of zoonotic diseases - tuberculosis, Rift Valley fever, Lyme disease. ... We have to realize that only together can we solve these problems."
Alan Boyle covers the physical sciences, anthropology, technological innovation and space science and exploration for MSNBC.com. He is a winner of the AAAS Science Journalism Award, the NASW Science-in-Society Award and other honors; a contributor to "A Field Guide for Science Writers"; and a member of the board of the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing.
How bad can a flu epidemic get? The raw numbers indicate that over the past 90 years, far more people have been killed by relatively run-of-the-mill seasonal flu viruses than by the exotic bugs that have grabbed most of the headlines - such as bird flu or the current strain of swine flu.
But to get a more useful perspective on a flu epidemic's potential impact, you have to go back to the mother of all pandemics: the "Spanish flu" of 1918.
Newly published research supports the view that the H1N1 virus behind the current outbreak is a distant cousin of the virus that sparked the infamous 1918 epidemic. But all the signs so far indicate that the 1918 flu was much more lethal. In fact, some researchers report that today's headline-making microbe lacks some of the molecular machinery that made past versions of the virus deadlier.
Citing such reports, the Los Angeles Times noted today that the current outbreak "may not even do as much damage as the run-of-the-mill flu outbreaks that occur each winter without much fanfare."
So far, the raw numbers bear that out. Typically, about 36,000 Americans die each year due to flu complications, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The worldwide toll is estimated at 250,000 to 500,000 annually. If you go back to the most recent officially recognized flu pandemic, the 1968-69 Hong Kong flu, the death toll is about the same: 34,000 in the U.S., 500,000 globally. The figures for the 1957-58 Asian flu pandemic are 70,000 U.S. deaths and 2 million deaths worldwide.
Even those figures pale in comparison with the 1918-19 flu pandemic: At least 550,000 people died in the United States alone. The worldwide death toll was estimated at 20 million to 40 million, or perhaps even as many as 100 million by some accounts. The flu killed more people than World War I (which may have contributed to its spread).
Compared to past pandemics, the current swine-flu outbreak is hardly a blip on the chart. (Speaking of charts, you can click onto a couple that show you mortality rates since 1900 and since 1950.) Last year, MIT researcher Peter Doshi pointed out that not all pandemics turn out to be as serious as the annual seasonal flu. And in its swine-flu FAQ, the Canadian government makes a similar point.
So does that mean the current outbreak is just a piddling pandemic? Not necessarily.
For one thing, it's far too early to assess how this outbreak will end up. For another thing, the pattern of the deaths so far is distressing. Both those caveats draw on the lessons learned from the 1918 flu.
The age factor
"The big difference between seasonal flu and pandemic flu is that when you move to pandemic flu, you get a pattern that the older people are not affected," said Lone Simonsen, an epidemiologist at George Washington University who is also the founder and president of SAGE Analytica. The age distribution curve for a typical seasonal flu looks like a "U," while the distribution pattern for the 1918 flu was more of a "W," as seen on this chart.
Experts worry that the distribution pattern for the current outbreak looks similar. Every death from the flu is a tragedy, but it's particularly tragic when a significant number of the fatalities come in the 20-to-50 age bracket rather than the over-85 bracket.
"That's a lot of life years lost," Simonsen said. "It has another flavor to it."
Simonsen and her colleagues are still trying to figure out why the 1918 flu hit people in the prime of their lives so hard. One hypothesis is that the virus could somehow push a healthy immune system into such a violent response that the body suffered irreparable damage. Another idea is that the older people had acquired immunity from a previous flu epidemic, while younger people missed out. Simonsen said a third possibility is that some sort of bacterial co-infection made the flu worse. Or it could have been a combination of factors.
Wave of the future
Even if the current outbreak turns out to be relatively mild, that's not necessarily the end of the story. "When you look at the past pandemics, you observe that they often come in waves," Simonsen said.
She said a review of the records from 1918 show that the year's first flu flare-up actually came in the spring and summer, in the form of a less lethal but highly transmissible infection. That appears to have been the precursor for the deadlier waves of influenza that swept across the world that fall.
If the current outbreak turns out to follow a similar pattern, that would be "good and bad news," Simonsen said. It's bad news because a worse outbreak could conceivably follow. But it's good news, she said, because we'd have "more time to defend ourselves," using all the defenses that have been developed since 1918.
Patrolling the pigs
In recent years, the biggest concern on the minds of epidemiologists has been avian flu, not swine flu - but the current outbreak is a sign that experts will have to pay attention to the pigs as well, said Juergen Richt, a veterinary researcher at Kansas State University.
He and his colleagues infected pigs with the 1918 "Spanish flu" virus, as well as a virus from 1930 that is thought to be a descendant of the 1918 strain, under Biosafety Level 4 lab conditions. The experiment, described in the May issue of the Journal of Virology, showed that the swine suffered mild respiratory disease but recovered from the infection.
"A virus which is lethal to monkeys, ferrets and mice, and was lethal to people [in 1918], is not lethal to pigs," Richt told me. That suggests that swine could have played a role in maintaining and spreading the 1918 flu, he said.
It also suggests that swine populations might have to be monitored more closely for evidence of potentially dangerous disease strains, perhaps through diagnostic screening. It's not enough to wait until pigs drop dead, he said.
Richt said swine-flu strains appear to be undergoing mutations more rapidly today than they did a decade ago. "Something happened 10 years ago, where the whole evolution of swine flu changed and became very dynamic," he said. Why? Richt said the reason is unknown, although it may have something to do with a genetic change enhancing the virus' ability to jump between pigs, birds and people.
Richt is a big advocate for research that bridges the gap between human medicine and veterinary medicine, and he told me the current flap over flu viruses just underscores the point.
"It's not only bird flu and swine flu," he said. "There are lots of zoonotic diseases - tuberculosis, Rift Valley fever, Lyme disease. ... We have to realize that only together can we solve these problems."
Alan Boyle covers the physical sciences, anthropology, technological innovation and space science and exploration for MSNBC.com. He is a winner of the AAAS Science Journalism Award, the NASW Science-in-Society Award and other honors; a contributor to "A Field Guide for Science Writers"; and a member of the board of the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing.
Monday, April 20, 2009
35 Years Seems Wrong
This June 7, it will be 35 years since I graduated from high school! In so many ways that time seems to have flown by. In other ways, it seems so like a really long time since getting up and going to school every day.
My high school reunion is scheduled for sometime later in June. I've already sent back my questionnaire and let them (whoever they are) know that I will not be attending.
I didn't have a really great time in high school. It was okay and I was relieved to graduate and move onto working full time. I still stay in touch with the people who I want to stay in touch with. Jerry and I met in 11th grade cooking class, where we were assigned to the same table. He and Faith, who I met in 12th grade, got married a couple of years after graduation and I see them pretty regularly. I am godmother to their daughter and look forward to spending time with all of them. Tom, who married Janice about 3 years after graduation, graduated with me and Faith. Jerry had gone to Tollgate and Janice to Pilgrim, yet we have all remained best friends all these many years later.
So I did (very grudgingly) go to the 20th reunion. It was okay. Not great and not bad, just okay. It was strange to see people who looked familiar, yet different. There were no great surprises, just a bunch of people who used to know each other a long time ago. Now, 15 years past that, it seems pretty silly to go. I suppose it would be interesting to see who ended up where, but we did all that at the 20th and I don't remember who ended up where. I think I forgot because I didn't really care.
Faith/Jerry and Tom/Janice have gone to every reunion. Each time I would tell Faith to let me know if one particular classmate was there. If so, I would get dressed and meet up with them. But he never showed. About 6 years ago, I ran into his brother who gave my numbers to him. I got a call and we reconnected. He was living in DC and after talking for a couple of months he planned a trip to RI. I picked him up at his downtown hotel and we went for dinner and then to a PawSox game. During our dinner conversation I realized two things; the first being that he was a total and complete drunk and, secondly, he had no recollection of me at all. After all those years of wondering what happened to him, now all of a sudden, I couldn't get rid of him. It took some time and many late night calls where he was pretty loaded to finally get him to stop calling. I also moved and changed my phone number which may have helped as well.
So, mostly, I don't want to know the details of the lives of a bunch of people I don't recall all that well and didn't really care about to begin with.
However, at 52 years old, I am finding that life is pretty tenuous. Just a couple of days ago I ran into an old school friend. She is having some health problems and has lost most of her eyesight. She also mentioned that a guy from our class, who was at that kitchen table with Jerry and I back in 11th grade, had come to a mini-reunion that was held in March. A couple of weeks later, he was dead after suffering a massive heart attack.
A few years ago, I ran into the mother of another classmate who I was pretty close to in 9th and 10th grade. They were a pretty wealthy family and when I would go to their house, I was surprised that they had a live-in housekeeper and an elevator in their house. The big surprise, however, was the master bedroom and bathroom which was one big room. The bed was huge and round and the bathtub was a double and there was a beer tap right into the tub! We'd hang out in that bedroom, not that we drank the beer, but it was funny to sit on the round bed and look at the double tub and the two toilets, one of which had a phone next to it. Anyway, when I ran into Mrs. Casey, I asked how Mary was and found out that she had passed away a few years earlier from cancer. I couldn't believe that I hadn't known.
Just in the past couple of months there have been two other classmated who's obituaries were in the newspaper. One guy I didn't recognize at all, but I did remember the girl (hard to say woman.)
So my thinking is that why should I spend time filling my brain with information that I don't need to store, when there is so much I work hard to remember, mostly regarding my nieces and nephews.
The only thing is that 52 is much too young to die.
My high school reunion is scheduled for sometime later in June. I've already sent back my questionnaire and let them (whoever they are) know that I will not be attending.
I didn't have a really great time in high school. It was okay and I was relieved to graduate and move onto working full time. I still stay in touch with the people who I want to stay in touch with. Jerry and I met in 11th grade cooking class, where we were assigned to the same table. He and Faith, who I met in 12th grade, got married a couple of years after graduation and I see them pretty regularly. I am godmother to their daughter and look forward to spending time with all of them. Tom, who married Janice about 3 years after graduation, graduated with me and Faith. Jerry had gone to Tollgate and Janice to Pilgrim, yet we have all remained best friends all these many years later.
So I did (very grudgingly) go to the 20th reunion. It was okay. Not great and not bad, just okay. It was strange to see people who looked familiar, yet different. There were no great surprises, just a bunch of people who used to know each other a long time ago. Now, 15 years past that, it seems pretty silly to go. I suppose it would be interesting to see who ended up where, but we did all that at the 20th and I don't remember who ended up where. I think I forgot because I didn't really care.
Faith/Jerry and Tom/Janice have gone to every reunion. Each time I would tell Faith to let me know if one particular classmate was there. If so, I would get dressed and meet up with them. But he never showed. About 6 years ago, I ran into his brother who gave my numbers to him. I got a call and we reconnected. He was living in DC and after talking for a couple of months he planned a trip to RI. I picked him up at his downtown hotel and we went for dinner and then to a PawSox game. During our dinner conversation I realized two things; the first being that he was a total and complete drunk and, secondly, he had no recollection of me at all. After all those years of wondering what happened to him, now all of a sudden, I couldn't get rid of him. It took some time and many late night calls where he was pretty loaded to finally get him to stop calling. I also moved and changed my phone number which may have helped as well.
So, mostly, I don't want to know the details of the lives of a bunch of people I don't recall all that well and didn't really care about to begin with.
However, at 52 years old, I am finding that life is pretty tenuous. Just a couple of days ago I ran into an old school friend. She is having some health problems and has lost most of her eyesight. She also mentioned that a guy from our class, who was at that kitchen table with Jerry and I back in 11th grade, had come to a mini-reunion that was held in March. A couple of weeks later, he was dead after suffering a massive heart attack.
A few years ago, I ran into the mother of another classmate who I was pretty close to in 9th and 10th grade. They were a pretty wealthy family and when I would go to their house, I was surprised that they had a live-in housekeeper and an elevator in their house. The big surprise, however, was the master bedroom and bathroom which was one big room. The bed was huge and round and the bathtub was a double and there was a beer tap right into the tub! We'd hang out in that bedroom, not that we drank the beer, but it was funny to sit on the round bed and look at the double tub and the two toilets, one of which had a phone next to it. Anyway, when I ran into Mrs. Casey, I asked how Mary was and found out that she had passed away a few years earlier from cancer. I couldn't believe that I hadn't known.
Just in the past couple of months there have been two other classmated who's obituaries were in the newspaper. One guy I didn't recognize at all, but I did remember the girl (hard to say woman.)
So my thinking is that why should I spend time filling my brain with information that I don't need to store, when there is so much I work hard to remember, mostly regarding my nieces and nephews.
The only thing is that 52 is much too young to die.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
20 Years Later - Still Reasons To Boycott Exxon/Mobil
Twenty years after the Exxon Valdez spilled 11 million gallons of crude oil in Alaska's Prince William Sound, oil persists in the region and, in some places, "is nearly as toxic as it was the first few weeks after the spill," according to the council overseeing restoration efforts."This Exxon Valdez oil is decreasing at a rate of 0-4 percent per year," the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council stated in a report marking Tuesday's 20th anniversary of the worst oil spill in U.S. waters. "At this rate, the remaining oil will take decades and possibly centuries to disappear entirely."
The council's findings come two decades after the March 24, 1989 disaster, when the single-hulled Exxon tanker hit a reef, emptying its contents into Alaskan waters. The spill contaminated more than 1,200 miles of shoreline and killed hundreds of thousands of seabirds and marine animals.
Captain convicted of misdemeanor
The council, made up of three state and three federal appointees, was created to administer the $900 million that Exxon paid to settle lawsuits filed after the accident, which also resulted in criminal charges against the ship's captain, Joseph Hazelwood.
Hazelwood, was accused but then acquitted on a charge of being drunk at the time. He was, however, convicted of negligent discharge of oil, a misdemeanor, and sentenced to a $50,000 fine and 1,000 hours of community service.
In the weeks and months following the spill, thousands of people tried to clean up the contamination. But two decades later, oil persists and is estimated to total around 20,000 gallons, according to the council. One of the lessons learned is that a spill's impacts can last a long time in a habitat with calm, cold waters like Prince William Sound, the council said.
"Following the oil and its impacts over the past 20 years has changed our understanding of the long-term damage from an oil spill," the council stated. "We know that risk assessment for future spills must consider what the total damages will be over a longer period of time, rather than only the acute damages in the days and weeks following a spill."
"One of the most stunning revelations" from studies over the last decade, the council said, "is that Exxon Valdez oil persists in the environment and, in places, is nearly as toxic as it was the first few weeks after the spill."
As a result, some sea otter populations as well as bird species have been slow to recover. Overall, some 200,000 seabirds and 4,000 otters were thought to have died from the contamination.
Oil found 450 miles away
Moreover, surveys "have documented lingering oil also on the Kenai Peninsula and the Katmai coast, over 450 miles away," according to the council.
None of that was expected "at the time of the spill or even ten years later," it added. "In 1999, beaches in the sound appeared clean on the surface. Some subsurface oil had been reported in a few places, but it was expected to decrease over time and most importantly, to have lost its toxicity due to weathering. A few species were not recovering at the expected rate in some areas, but continuing exposure to oil was not suspected as the primary cause."
It turns out that oil often got trapped in semi-enclosed bays for weeks, going up and down with the tide and some of it being pulled down into the sediment below the seabed.
"The cleanup efforts and natural processes, particularly in the winter, cleaned the oil out of the top 2-3 inches, where oxygen and water can flow," the council said, "but did little to affect the large patches of oil farther below the surface."
Sea otter concerns
That area is also biologically rich with mussels, clams and other marine life that help sustain sea otters and ducks.
"Sea otters usually have very small home ranges of a few square kilometers," the council said.
"In these small ranges, it is unlikely that the otters are avoiding areas of lingering oil when foraging.
As a result, "while overall population numbers in western Prince William Sound have recovered, local populations in heavily oiled areas have not recovered as quickly."
There is a plus side to the foraging by otters, since digging in oiled areas does release the contaminants to the water, where they are diluted and dispersed.
Bird concerns
The American Bird Conservancy issued its own warning, stating that while many bird species have recovered several significant ones have not.
The spill killed 5-10 percent of the world's population of Kittlitz's Murrelets, the group said, a species whose numbers declined 99 percent from 1972 to 2004.
"Prior to the spill, the rate of decline was 18 percent per year, but since 1989 that rate has increased to 31 percent," the group stated. "The growing impact of global warming in the Arctic and the melting of glaciers, caused by the burning of oil and other fossil fuels, may also be a factor in this decline."
Two other species cited are: the Pigeon Guillemot, whose populations have steadily declined throughout the sound since the spill; and the Marbled Murrelet, which has not met the recovery objective of a stable population.
The group cited a faster transition to double-hulled oil tankers as the best protection for wildlife. Single-hulled tankers are still allowed in U.S. waters until 2015.
"A similar requirement for double-hulled tankers needs to be made globally to protect birds and other wildlife from future spills," said Michael Fry, the group's conservation director. "Additional marine reserves and no-go zones for tankers during sensitive breeding and staging seasons should also be implemented to protect the most vulnerable species."
Thursday, February 12, 2009
February 12, 1809 - April, 1865
Our 16th President ABRAHAM LINCOLN 1809 - 1865
Lincoln warned the South in his Inaugural Address: "In your hands, my dissatisfied fellow countrymen, and not in mine, is the momentous issue of civil war. The government will not assail you.... You have no oath registered in Heaven to destroy the government, while I shall have the most solemn one to preserve, protect and defend it."
Lincoln thought secession illegal, and was willing to use force to defend Federal law and the Union. When Confederate batteries fired on Fort Sumter and forced its surrender, he called on the states for 75,000 volunteers. Four more slave states joined the Confederacy but four remained within the Union. The Civil War had begun.
The son of a Kentucky frontiersman, Lincoln had to struggle for a living and for learning. Five months before receiving his party's nomination for President, he sketched his life:
"I was born Feb. 12, 1809, in Hardin County, Kentucky. My parents were both born in Virginia, of undistinguished families--second families, perhaps I should say. My mother, who died in my tenth year, was of a family of the name of Hanks.... My father ... removed from Kentucky to ... Indiana, in my eighth year.... It was a wild region, with many bears and other wild animals still in the woods. There I grew up.... Of course when I came of age I did not know much. Still somehow, I could read, write, and cipher ... but that was all."
Lincoln made extraordinary efforts to attain knowledge while working on a farm, splitting rails for fences, and keeping store at New Salem, Illinois. He was a captain in the Black Hawk War, spent eight years in the Illinois legislature, and rode the circuit of courts for many years. His law partner said of him, "His ambition was a little engine that knew no rest."
He married Mary Todd, and they had four boys, only one of whom lived to maturity. In 1858 Lincoln ran against Stephen A. Douglas for Senator. He lost the election, but in debating with Douglas he gained a national reputation that won him the Republican nomination for President in 1860.
As President, he built the Republican Party into a strong national organization. Further, he rallied most of the northern Democrats to the Union cause. On January 1, 1863, he issued the Emancipation Proclamation that declared forever free those slaves within the Confederacy.
Lincoln never let the world forget that the Civil War involved an even larger issue. This he stated most movingly in dedicating the military cemetery at Gettysburg: "that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain--that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom--and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."
Lincoln won re-election in 1864, as Union military triumphs heralded an end to the war. In his planning for peace, the President was flexible and generous, encouraging Southerners to lay down their arms and join speedily in reunion.
The spirit that guided him was clearly that of his Second Inaugural Address, now inscribed on one wall of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D. C.: "With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds.... "
On Good Friday, April 14, 1865, Lincoln was assassinated at Ford's Theatre in Washington by John Wilkes Booth, an actor, who somehow thought he was helping the South. The opposite was the result, for with Lincoln's death, the possibility of peace with magnanimity died.
Our current President surely admires and looks to Abraham Lincoln as a source of strength and wisdom.
Abraham Lincoln said "I am in favor of animal rights as well as human rights. That is the way of a whole human being."
Lincoln warned the South in his Inaugural Address: "In your hands, my dissatisfied fellow countrymen, and not in mine, is the momentous issue of civil war. The government will not assail you.... You have no oath registered in Heaven to destroy the government, while I shall have the most solemn one to preserve, protect and defend it."Lincoln thought secession illegal, and was willing to use force to defend Federal law and the Union. When Confederate batteries fired on Fort Sumter and forced its surrender, he called on the states for 75,000 volunteers. Four more slave states joined the Confederacy but four remained within the Union. The Civil War had begun.
The son of a Kentucky frontiersman, Lincoln had to struggle for a living and for learning. Five months before receiving his party's nomination for President, he sketched his life:
"I was born Feb. 12, 1809, in Hardin County, Kentucky. My parents were both born in Virginia, of undistinguished families--second families, perhaps I should say. My mother, who died in my tenth year, was of a family of the name of Hanks.... My father ... removed from Kentucky to ... Indiana, in my eighth year.... It was a wild region, with many bears and other wild animals still in the woods. There I grew up.... Of course when I came of age I did not know much. Still somehow, I could read, write, and cipher ... but that was all."
Lincoln made extraordinary efforts to attain knowledge while working on a farm, splitting rails for fences, and keeping store at New Salem, Illinois. He was a captain in the Black Hawk War, spent eight years in the Illinois legislature, and rode the circuit of courts for many years. His law partner said of him, "His ambition was a little engine that knew no rest."
He married Mary Todd, and they had four boys, only one of whom lived to maturity. In 1858 Lincoln ran against Stephen A. Douglas for Senator. He lost the election, but in debating with Douglas he gained a national reputation that won him the Republican nomination for President in 1860.
As President, he built the Republican Party into a strong national organization. Further, he rallied most of the northern Democrats to the Union cause. On January 1, 1863, he issued the Emancipation Proclamation that declared forever free those slaves within the Confederacy.
Lincoln never let the world forget that the Civil War involved an even larger issue. This he stated most movingly in dedicating the military cemetery at Gettysburg: "that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain--that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom--and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."
Lincoln won re-election in 1864, as Union military triumphs heralded an end to the war. In his planning for peace, the President was flexible and generous, encouraging Southerners to lay down their arms and join speedily in reunion.
The spirit that guided him was clearly that of his Second Inaugural Address, now inscribed on one wall of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D. C.: "With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds.... "
On Good Friday, April 14, 1865, Lincoln was assassinated at Ford's Theatre in Washington by John Wilkes Booth, an actor, who somehow thought he was helping the South. The opposite was the result, for with Lincoln's death, the possibility of peace with magnanimity died.
Our current President surely admires and looks to Abraham Lincoln as a source of strength and wisdom.
Abraham Lincoln said "I am in favor of animal rights as well as human rights. That is the way of a whole human being."
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
February Presidential Birthdays
There are four presidents whose birthdays in February make up a historic lineup. They include two of the presidents, George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, for whom there are major monuments in Washington, D.C., and whose faces are sculpted into the side of South Dakota’s Mount Rushmore.
The bicentennial of Lincoln’s birthday, on Feb. 12, 1809, will be marked on Thursday. Lincoln, the 16th president, served from 1861 until his assassination in April 1865 at age 56.
Washington, the nation’s first president, was born on Feb. 22, 1732, making this year the 277th anniversary of his birth. He served as president from 1789 until 1797, and died in December 1799 at age 67.
The other successful February-born president was the 40th, Ronald Reagan, who served from 1981 to 1989 and is regarded by many Republicans as their most significant leader of the modern era. Reagan was born Feb. 6, 1911 and died in June 2004 at age 93.
The fourth February-born president made history, too, but for the wrong reason. William Henry Harrison was born Feb. 9, 1773, and died at age 68 on April 4, 1841 — exactly one month after he was sworn in as the ninth president of the United States. Harrison has since held the enduring record as the president with the shortest tenure in office.
The bicentennial of Lincoln’s birthday, on Feb. 12, 1809, will be marked on Thursday. Lincoln, the 16th president, served from 1861 until his assassination in April 1865 at age 56.
Washington, the nation’s first president, was born on Feb. 22, 1732, making this year the 277th anniversary of his birth. He served as president from 1789 until 1797, and died in December 1799 at age 67.
The other successful February-born president was the 40th, Ronald Reagan, who served from 1981 to 1989 and is regarded by many Republicans as their most significant leader of the modern era. Reagan was born Feb. 6, 1911 and died in June 2004 at age 93.
The fourth February-born president made history, too, but for the wrong reason. William Henry Harrison was born Feb. 9, 1773, and died at age 68 on April 4, 1841 — exactly one month after he was sworn in as the ninth president of the United States. Harrison has since held the enduring record as the president with the shortest tenure in office.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Inauguration Day At Auntie's House
Jaelyn and Vanessa joined me to watch the inauguration. Jaelyn, like her auntie and mom, really likes Barack Obama!
She was watching lots of different things...the crowds
And the President with his daughters...
She didn't seem to have a whole lot of interest in Senator Diane Feinstein, though.
We had bells and whistles to make lots of noise when the oath was done.
Of course, there was lots of clapping.
She watched even when the event was over...
I'm so glad that my niece and great-niece were with me on such a historic day. We'll show these pictures to Jaelyn when she is older so that she will know that she was part of history.
She was watching lots of different things...the crowds
And the President with his daughters...
She didn't seem to have a whole lot of interest in Senator Diane Feinstein, though.
We had bells and whistles to make lots of noise when the oath was done.
Of course, there was lots of clapping.
She watched even when the event was over...
I'm so glad that my niece and great-niece were with me on such a historic day. We'll show these pictures to Jaelyn when she is older so that she will know that she was part of history.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
What A Day
From Aretha's fabulous hat (that only she could wear) to Michelle's beautiful golden yellow dress and coat.
To the oath that our new President took to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
To the history of Barack Obama being the only President (besides Abraham Lincoln) to use the Lincoln bible when taking the oath of office.
To the endearing way that the First Lady held onto the President's hand while out for a stroll.
To the love that these two share together and aren't embarrassed to show to us.
To the coolness of who they are.
To being a proud American again!! WHAT A DAY!!!
To the history of Barack Obama being the only President (besides Abraham Lincoln) to use the Lincoln bible when taking the oath of office.
To the endearing way that the First Lady held onto the President's hand while out for a stroll.
To the love that these two share together and aren't embarrassed to show to us.
To the coolness of who they are.
To being a proud American again!! WHAT A DAY!!!
(and, oh, how badly I wish that Tim Russert were here to see all this) What A Country!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
