To The Daily Sun,
As an annual subscriber, is there any specific reason why police arrest records and district court reports for Lakes Region area towns aren't reported as in the Laconia Citizen, etc. since the information is easily and publicly available by directly contacting them? I would make for an interesting addition to the informed content of your publications along with the overwhelming abundance of impassioned Letters-To-The-Editor.
(Editor's note: There are a number of reasons, Bill, but by far the biggest is the lack of available space. We have built a successful business model that in no small part relies on controlling costs. We need to maintain a pretty rigid balance between advertising content and news content. The more pages we print, the more money we spend. Obviously, each reader would be willing to give up some elements of our total content package in return for more space for things they like to read. We strive to balance all those competing interests.)
Last Updated on Friday, 14 March 2014 10:27
To The Daily Sun,
In 2013 the average worker's wage increased just 2.1 percent and Social Security payments increased only 1.7 percent. The inflation rate was 1.5 percent. Yet, if the Winnisquam School Board, administration, and some voters have their way, Northfield's property tax-based payment to the school district will increase 12 percent. Next year's budget will be built on that unsustainable increase. How much more can you afford to pay?
Do you expect to receive a 12 percent raise this year? I don't. My earnings expectations are grounded in reality. But our School Board and administration seem to live in a different world than I do, a world where I'm just a compliant cow with an infinite supply of milk.
In my world I have to earn the money they'll ask us to spend at the district meeting. There's nothing infinite about my earning power, and no union shields me from labor market realities. I have to produce and show good results every year — results measured in my annual assessment. My compensation is based on my performance, my company's performance, and the labor market.
That arrangement is my choice, but pardon me for feeling a bit put out when I'm asked to spend more of my earnings to fund a school system that continues to do a poor job in its primary mission yet continues to advance one solution: More money. What part of "unsustainable path" do our school leaders not understand? Despite increasing budgets, we own one of the worst-performing elementary schools and are near the bottom in NECAP scores statewide.
What new ideas have our board or administration advocated over the past 10 years? Will the new teacher contract look significantly different than the last one, or will it follow a similar degree/time-in-job model that makes teaching different than most white-collar jobs? The current arrangement ratchets up labor costs, especially when they justify compensation based on regional averages.
What metrics will they provide showing that proposed technology spending will yield results? What quantitative improvements will they promise us over the next three years? Will they hold themselves accountable — really accountable — for those promises? I remember the promises made when we bought into "everyday math."
Our district's own Value Statement promises a return on investment. How are they measuring it? What data is being collected and analyzed? How many local businesses who hire our students are surveyed every year? How many colleges and other post-secondary education programs are surveyed? How are we learning and changing based on that feedback? What new initiatives are we participating in?
Districts across the state and the country are trying new approaches to education, and there's no reason why Winnisquam couldn't as well. The time for the "more money" solution has come to an end. We need new ideas and new leadership before we tax ourselves out of our homes.
Last Updated on Friday, 14 March 2014 10:07
To The Daily Sun,
At the Selectboard meeting in February, I had a cordial and friendly conversation with Herb Vadney. Herb and I were standing facing each other, I put my hand on his arm (as a gesture, meaning I would miss him), and then I quietly without anger, addressed a news article of Feb. 1, and his decision not to run for selectman, nor to let the public know that he wasn't running. Herb stated that he loved being in the House of Representatives in Concord, but that he needed more time to devote to his position. He also said he had other responsibilities concerning his rental properties.
My next statement was a hypothetical situation regarding myself. "I might have liked to run, but now it was too late." My tone was quiet, again, without anger. Herb responded quietly to me also. "I think the board wants Seeger." The communication then ended because it was time for the 5:30 p.m. meeting to begin.
I am not a person to pull imaginary conversations out of the air, as Herb Vadney is now implying that he never told me, "I think the board wants Seeger." That is simply not my style, and I resent the insinuation that what I wrote regarding this issue was false. Right now my character is being attacked, the facts are being falsified, and the truth is being hidden from the people of Meredith. I have learned recently that a public official is not suppose to bring a "bias" in connection with an applicant for any position.
Many untruths have filled the space in the news around the Meredith selectman election and I do not appreciate being the scapegoat. So I repeat, what I wrote was the truth, regardless of what officials are saying. I would not have printed anything in the newspaper that I didn't hear correctly.
Last Updated on Friday, 14 March 2014 09:49
To The Daily Sun,
It is unconscionable and cowardly that Dr. Moneysmith and his partner, Dr. Mills, continue to put out ads with misleading, nonsense information. Unconscionable because just like their ad in which they reference a study (which does not exist) which proposes that chiropractic manipulations can increase your immune system, they now have an ad which states that 90 percent of children reported improvement in their asthma, following 60 days of chiropractic care.
They reference the Journal of Vertebral subluxation research, from a study from 1997. There are no studies that show any objective improvement in children with asthma treated with chiropractic care, period; the study they reference included. If there was some significant benefit wouldn't the chiropractic community jump on it and do studies proving their point?
By objective improvement this means improvement in air flow with demonstrable changes on spirometer testing. Maybe they missed the New England Journal of Medicine article from 1998 vol. 339. 1010-1020 which showed no change in spirometric measurements following chiropractic manipulation in patients with asthma. The New England Journal of Medicine is one of the most highly regarded medical journals in the world. But my bias is showing. So what does the chiropractic literature say about asthma?
Did they miss this article from the chiropractic literature, from the Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association 2010, March 54 (1) 24-32. Entitled "Chiropractic care for patients with asthma, A systematic review of the literature." Their conclusion: "Results of the eight retrieved studies indicated that chiropractic care showed improvement in subjective measures, and to a lesser degree objective measures, none of which were statistically significant". ...chiropractor care should be used as an adjunct not a replacement to traditional medical therapy."
Or how about another article from Chiropractic & Osteopathy 2010 18:13? "To date there is insufficient evidence to evaluate the efficacy of Chiropractic care for paediatric and adolescent ADHD."
A review on line at www.chiro.org research/ABSTRACTS/Chiropractic care for patients with asthma 9/2010 found "no statistical significances were obtained with chiropractic care during the treatment of children with asthma."
As a parent you are just throwing your money away if you seek this kind of care. More importantly you, just like their false claims regarding vaccines, are putting your child at risk . This I find deplorable, that these "doctors" without any clinical evidence continue to print this nonsense. If chiropractors want to claim these benefits they should then do good research to prove them. Chiropractic research is missing in action.
Finally from www.chiroaccess.com/news/claims "subluxation causing disease prohibited in Great Britain," 12/2010, they go on to state that "the chiropractic vertebral subluxation complex is a historical concept but it remains a theoretical model. It is not supported by any clinical evidence that would allow claims to be made that it is the cause of disease or health concerns." If it is not the cause of disease, how can treating a theoretical subluxation treat any disease. Dr Moneysmith, you continue to refuse to address these concerns. Please Dr Moneysmith explain your position?
Finally believing that chiropractic manipulation can treat any medical disease is akin to believing that professional wrestling is a sport. Believing it does not make it so. And when it comes to treating our children we should deal with scientific evidence, not make-believe.
Mirno Pasquali, PA-C
Last Updated on Friday, 14 March 2014 09:45
To The Daily Sun,
Totalitarian governments come from the left. Communism, Naziism, and fascism differ only in style. They seek total government control. The extreme right, on the other hand, operates outside the law. They are anarchists who have no respect of the law. The left wing refers to conservatives as right-wing radicals because they work to stop the endless creep of government power upon our lives. It is a smear tactic developed decades a go by communist insurgents and their agents. The ploy seems to have worked well.
In the Federalist papers. No. 45 pp 293-3 James Madison describes the powers of the federal government. "The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite ... the powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the state."
The left wing was supposed to be the problem-solving wing. It was considered the progressive wing. The intention was to fulfill the needs of the people, not to control and rule over them. Right wing had the responsibility of preserving the nation's resources and people's freedom. They looked at the cost and could it create a financial bondage for the following generations. Would it curtail individual rights of the people. The guardians of liberties rested here.
If wing #1 dwells on solving all the problems of the country and the right wing does not bring it back, the eagle will soar out of control and lean left. This is tyranny. If the right wing fails to solve any problems the people may take matters into their own hands. Which is anarchy.
Thomas Jefferson saw fringe elements and political extremist in both parties. In the Federalist Party were those who would pull the eagle away from its balance center toward the tyrannical left. That it would become so strong a monarchy might form. In the Federalist Party he saw fringe elements who called themselves federalist, but "under that name there lurks the heretical set of monarchists." Jefferson wrote Dr. George Logan in May of 1805, "I am with infinite pain the bloody schism which has taken place among friends of Pennsylvania and New York, and will probably take place in other states. The main body of both sections mean well, but their intentions will produce great public evil." He further said it was "immoral for one generation to pass its extravagance and debts on to the next generation ... we shall all consider ourselves unauthorized to saddle posterity with our debts, and morally bound to pay them ourselves."
Samuel Adams said, "The utopian schemes of leveling (redistribution of wealth) and a community of goods (central ownership of the means of production and distribution) are as visionary and impractical as those which vest all property in the crown." He reiterated, "(They) are arbitrary, despotic, and in our government unconstitutional."
A 1978 Congressional investigation looked into how our Founding Fathers warnings had become ignored. The hearings found as early as 1900 some of the wealthiest men in the country wanted to promote a new system of economics and political control. They placed much of their money into tax-free foundations, colleges and universities that would promote their ideas. J.P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie bought up networks of media, gained control of the Federal Reserve System and invested heavily in political candidates. In 1932 the wealthy who operated within the Democratic Party sought to capture the majority of Congress. By 1936 they captured the majority of the Supreme Court. Dr. Carroll Quigley, who Bill Clinton praised, wrote in "Tragedy and Hope" of these men. William Simon's description of the results that followed is worth reading and pondering in his book "Time for Truth."
In 1936 the Butler Case (297 U.S.) U.S. Supreme court voted 5-4 in favor of federal intervention. Justice Roberts ruled that congress could appropriate money under the General Welfare clause to special groups and any region. They altered the interpretation of limited government and unlocked the U.S. Treasury to any good-sounding cause.
Sen. Joseph Clark of Pennsylvania sought to move the government even more to the left. In 1963 he stated, " ... the executive should be strengthened at the expense of the legislature." Governor Albert Smith warned that the Democratic Party was not adhering to the party platform of 1932, promising "to reduce governmental expenditures by abolishing useless commissions and offices." Instead, he said, "... on the other hand, the alphabet was exhausted." He further said new departments were created.
Socialist Norman Thomas stated in the Congressional Record for April 17, 1958, "The United States is making greater strides towards socialism under Eisenhower than under Roosevelt, particularly in the fields of federal spending and welfare legislation." He stated in 1962 the Democrats have accepted some ideas of socialism cheerfully, while Republicans have accepted them reluctantly." Cleveland Plain Dealer, Oct. 19, 1962.
Leonard Peikoff wrote in his book "The Ominous Parallels, the End of Freedom in America" " the Nazi party did attract many thugs, crooks, and drifters into its ranks. But such men are an inconsequential minority in any country; they were not the reason for Hitler's rise. The reason was the millions of non-thugs in the land of poets and philosophers, the decent, law-abiding Germans who found hope in Hitler.." (Are we there yet?)
Before the presidential election of 2008, Barack Obama stated, "we're five days away from the fundamental transformation of the United States." Once he moved into the White House it is the only promise he has lived up to.
Gene F. Danforth
Last Updated on Thursday, 13 March 2014 10:40