A+ A A-

Vaccines are biological agents & must be treated as such

To The Daily Sun,

The other day I read in The Laconia Daily Sun that the Waterville Valley town hall offices were hosting a flu shot day on October 4. I was in the Belknap County Superior Court yesterday and thought I was seeing things. Please tell me I was imagining things. I thought that they too, are having a flu shot day on October 10? This is disturbing on many levels.

The United States Department of Labor (OSHA) has specific HazMat and Emergency Response Procedures with regard to biological agents and the event of a spill or breakage. Yes, vaccines are biological agents and must be treated as such. Have these offices been briefed on these procedures? Do they have a chain of custody procedure that is being implemented? Have they been briefed on the procedures in the event that someone is accidentally jabbed with a contaminated needle? I mean, haven't we all seen those bio-hazard boxes in the doctors' offices in which used needles are to be placed in?

(https://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=standards&p_id=9765)

These are legitimate concerns. The last time that I read up on the HazMat procedures with regard to vaccine vials breaking or spilling, I read that an entire area must be evacuated in the HazMat crew must perform cleanup — you know, the men in "HazMat suits."

Dawn Crim

Laconia

Last Updated on Thursday, 10 October 2013 12:53

Hits: 328

The Tea Party doesn't care as long as Pres. Obama gets hurt

To The Daily Sun,

They are standing firm and refusing to give an inch. Henry Ford would never have an assembly line under the GOP. Thomas Edison and electricity/the telephone — forget about it. We would still be walking around with candles. But as usual the GOP hasn't thought this out because they thought the Dems would fold on demand.

The GOP is good at telling us what to do as long as they are not affected personally, like health care, wars and anything they can use as a prop. They will stand up for POWs and MIAs but if the vets need help they will turn their backs. Unless someone is watching of course. The Tea Party doesn't care as long as Obama gets hurt. That has been in the works since day one. It has nothing to do with health care (which seems to be off to a busy start) but that was a workable excuse to unify against the Dems. It is easier to say how bad this law can be than how good it can be. They can make up any number of reasons no matter how far fetched they are because no one is checking each thing they say.

The bottom line is we have to find out how it works and repair the problems as they arise. I really don't understand the reasoning or mentality of this type of anti-Obama terrorism. Bill Krystal on Morning Joe this AM, when told people might get hurt from services being cut, just gave his "joker style grin" as if to say no big deal get over it. But that is the Tea Party for you as they live on a different planet from the rest of us. Some in the GOP are now asking for a clean CR to vote on and hopefully the ranks are falling apart.

Jon Hoyt

Plymouth

Last Updated on Thursday, 10 October 2013 12:49

Hits: 178

So-called Defense Department has had its way too long

To The Daily Sun,

There are only two legal methods for this country to declare war on another country: As you might know it is within the power of Congress to declare war. The president doesn't have that authority. Second to that, the United Nations Security Council, by a unanimous vote, can sanction a military attack on a country. (I can't recall that happening!) Other than those two legal options, military assault is illegal and therefore criminal!
If you recall, more than 10 years ago, President George W. Bush and his cohorts took their case for military assault on Iraq. The evidence was faulty and the U.N. did not accept it as legitimate or adequate. Kofi Annam, Sec./General of the U.N. said any subsequent military action by the United States would be illegal. That ruling did not deter the U.S. from bombing and invading Iraq with devastating results. Iraq lost more than a half million people, soldiers and civilians alike, in the ensuing years. There still is just cause to arrest George W. Bush for "crimes against humanity" as described in defining documents all lawyers and military personnel are familiar with! Of course, it never happen.
Since then, we have, with impunity and disregard for human life, bombed other mid-eastern counties. Our excuse has been, in doing so, we are killing dangerous people who pose a threat to our own security. Although not one American has been killed by foreign terrorists we cling to that alibi with tenacious authority. Every bombing raid we conduct is illegal, therefore criminal. American citizens (for the most part) accept this brutality with disdain and give their passive approval — which allows these killings to continue. Even churches have withheld their condemnation of this brutality which is against every moral law we have agreed to uphold!
The so-called Defense Department and the leaches in the weapons industries have had their way for too long. Make a positive statement, and do all you can — even in a small way, to end wars and bombing raids by the United States. Do not support criminality!

Leon R. Albushies
Gilford

Last Updated on Thursday, 10 October 2013 12:44

Hits: 165

Individuals don't matter to progressives; they're about the collective

To The Daily Sun,

A really bad week of political posturing was had by the progressive collective, otherwise known as the Democrat Party. So darn cocksure that the media will hide the truth, the Democrats brazenly and shockingly dissed aging veterans and sick children. Then like so many puffed up peacocks, they blamed the Republicans for shutting down the government when it is they who refused to take any action on numerous resolutions proposed and passed by Republicans to fund vital services.Now that takes chutzpah even with the "stoned on socialist weed" media providing them shameful cover.

It appears for all the world that President Obama is punishing his own citizens for political advantage. Actually ordering his underlings to act against the best interests of the public. In an absolute shocking and spiteful maneuver, barricading 90-year-old WW II veterans from their once in a lifetime trip to honor their comrades. Something that has absolutely nothing to do with the partial government shutdown. Closing commissaries for our service men and women (thank you Sam's Club for giving free passes for our vets). Closing Mount Vernon which doesn't even involve federal property or personnel. Forbidding Catholic priests from performing mass for the troops, even on a volunteer basis. Yes, let's threaten to arrest Omaha Beach vets and Catholic priests in order to show the world how heartless those Republicans are.

Petty political theater of the absurd. Harry Reid's "cold as ice" callous remarks regarding the funding of cancer trials for children in dire straights. Besides offering to fund essential services during the shutdown negotiations, Republicans have compromised on Obamacare repeatedly, by moving from defeating to defunding, to delaying for one year the individual mandate. In order to be fair and to work out the massive kinks in this not ready for prime time, job killing, Constitution ball wrecking law. Oh yes, and to remove the special privileges and subsidies for Congress, the White House and their staff.

Obama and the Democrats say sorry, it's our way or the highway because we don't give a hoot about the welfare of our citizens. We're in it to win it (the Capitol Hill battle) and besides, only our so-called benevolent leader can pick and choose which parts of the Affordable Care Act law he decrees should be delayed or ignored. Chutzpah and arrogance all wrapped in a secretive cone of narcissism.

I'm afraid Derek Hunter, Townhall.com is correct. "Individuals never have mattered to progressives; they are about the collective. Individuals are replaceable, interchangeable and expendable to progressives. Not those in power, naturally, but the faceless masses and 'great unwashed'. History tells this tale repeatedly." He goes on to note, "once you cede power to the government, you aren't likely to get it back. A political movement willing to sacrifice children for the cause, a political philosophy with hundreds of millions of bodies behind it, will think nothing about adding a few more to the pile". Sick children, aging veterans and Catholic priests, all appropriate, sacrificial lambs for the progressive agenda. When do you think the government will come after you?

This is socialism at it's transparent worst, led by a phony Utopian leader who is using the lessons taught to him by Saul Alinsky, Francis Fox Piven, Richard Cloward and Obama's Marxist idols and mentors. Be afraid, be very afraid because we have a massive crisis brewing that has been created by our president, Democrats and establishment Republicans. Maybe Ted Crus hasn't done everything picture perfect, but I love the man for standing on his principles and not backing down even though he is now the most hated man around D.C. and beyond. That kind of says it all for me.

Russ Wiles
Tilton

Last Updated on Thursday, 10 October 2013 11:51

Hits: 246

Why wouldn't we want not high standards, but the highest?

To The Daily Sun,

I have a few questions in response to Anne Rogers letter where she regurgitates the "party line" on Common Core Standards.
The ONLY reason for expending the massive time and resources instituting any new standards should be that it would benefit the children of N.H., I'm sure you would agree.
You state that these new Common Core Standards are more rigorous than N.H.'s current standards. I'm willing to concede that point however, it is also true (as you yourself seemingly point out) that the Common Core Standards are NOT the most rigorous of existing, time-tested standards that could have been adopted by N.H. State Board (or may still be adopted by individual school districts).

So I ask you, given that we all seem to agree that new standards were needed. . . Why would any school district not adopt the highest standards possible for it's children?
This has been asked of the N.H. State Board of Education time and time again. . . Where is the comprehensive analysis they used to make the monumental decision of using Common Core vs. adopting any of the more rigorous standards from other states (for example Massachusetts)? Surely they did this analysis. Why not share that with the public and the school districts so that they might perform their own critical analysis that ironically the Common Core Standards are designed to instill in our children? I suspect the state board did no such analysis. For shame if that is the case.

The commissioner stated herself on videotape this past week that "school districts should decide whether to use Common Core or another set of standards". She also stated that regardless of the standards used, the state will mandate that every k-12 public school student take the new assessment, Smarter Balance, (which will replace our failed NECAP tests) which are aligned to Common Core beginning in 2015. These Smarter Balance tests are eventually required to be taken on computer (thank you Mr Microsoft/Bill Gates for that!) leading school districts to significantly increase our school budgets for technology (purchases of bandwidth and computers for all). Why, you might ask, is this not unconstitutional? Section 28-a of our N.H. Constitution says that the state must pay for any mandates and yet no money is coming from the state or feds to pay for the outlay taxpayers in N.H. must endure.

Lastly, Ms. Rogers, among a number of inconsistencies in your response, let me point out just one,. You repeat the party line on the desire for commonality of standards across the country to create a "more level playing field" for those that frequently move. The Common Core Standards are supposed to be MINIMUM Standards, meaning that some states/districts will presumably desire to reach higher, in varying degrees, than these minimum Common Core Standards, correct? To continue your analogy of the NFL rules vs. the playbook, wouldn't this mean that some districts have a much thicker playbook and students moving into those districts would have the same difficulty of catching up to the other students? I believe this stated goal of commonality to accommodate transient society is a red-herring.

There is much, much more to contradict in your letter, Ms. Rogers but I would like each responsible parent to ask three simple questions of their school board. If you feel it necessary to change our standards, have you (or anyone else) examined ALL the available standards, weighted those that have a history of working, and chosen the highest standards possible for our children? If not, why not? Where is that analysis?

Gregory Hill

Northfield

Last Updated on Thursday, 10 October 2013 11:45

Hits: 184

 
The Laconia Daily Sun - All Rights Reserved
Privacy Policy
Powered by BENN a division of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Login or Register

LOG IN