Janis Kliphardt (Emery)

Ron,

Thanks for reminding us there are only winners and no losers on the Forum.

Peace to you,

Janis

Stewart Myrent

​I want to thank Ron Zager for his timely (and well-thought-out) post about establishing the, very aptly named, "Once We Were Indians" Awards, or as I would suggest, the "Indies".  Ron, I might be wrong, but I feel as if you are, perhaps, bucking for the class archivist position, as you seem to have a pretty good handle on the posting stats.  I am obligated to say that I am thrilled to have won the Newcomer-of-the-Year Award, but I must say that I am accepting my "Indie" on behalf of all my fellow-nominees (of whom I know not one).  I would also like to mention that I whole-heartedly agree that Janis deserves the Lifetime Achievement Award, as, even now, late in her career, she sets the standard for all of us.  I do have one question (and it's not "When was America last great?")  Where do I pick up my "Indie", the little Indian man of my dreams?  I have a spot picked out, in my place, where he will fit perfectly (sort of, like a little shrine).  And does he come with a polishing cloth, to keep him nice & bright & shiny?

Donald Henry Kuehn

Ron, I want to thank all of the little people who made this award possible.  

DK

Nancy Doyle (Sudlow)

Theodore John Forsberg

An award should go to all of us lurkers and a special award to all who were chased off the site,but i wish would return with at least a shout out. It would be nice to here from all to know that we are still classmates and Indians forever ( I know it is socially incorrect to be an Indian inasmuch as Indians are now wolves)

Stewart Myrent

​Ted Forsberg, you want an award for being a "lurker"?  I'm not sure I agree that being a "lurker" deserves any award, as, by definition, a "lurker" does, or says, basically nothing, except for the negative connotation associated with "lurker".  I was more disturbed by reading, "...and a special award to all who were chased off this site..."  I was not aware of anybody being, "chased off this site".  Who was chased off this site?  And by whom, were they chased?  Not knowing the identities of those who were chased off, or who feel like they were chased off, I am left to contemplate what horrible barbs & inequities, they were forced to face, from those who disagreed with them.  (I am guessing that these unknown persons, faced mainly disagreement, and nothing worse, to cause them to flee the site.)  Or was there some threat of physical harm, that I am not aware of, that would cause them to flee?  Just asking.  Hi, Nancy!  Janis, I hope you were not offended, in my last post, praising your well-deserved Lifetime Achievement Award, by referring to you, as being, "late in your career".

Janis Kliphardt (Emery)

Stewart, no way did you offend me... My sincere thanks for your shout out - praising me for the Lifetime Achievement Award bestowed on me by Ron Zager and the "Indies".  I am later in my career than you - be assured you can move beyond Newcomer-of-the-Year. 

I celebrate the "Indies" with you and our classmates now, and would celebrate whoever might be awarded the Newcomer-of-the-Year or Lifetime Achievement Awards in future years on the Forum. Janis

Stewart Myrent

​Steve, thank you for the clarification on my most recent post, as I was mystified as to how any adult, could be "chased away" by others.  My guess is, no one gets "chased away" from this site, however, I can see how someone could decide to not participate on this site.  Certainly, to participate, or not, is each person's choice.  It is difficult for me to remember, exactly why I decided to start participating, as opposed to being a "lurker", so many months ago, but I think I was experiencing some frustration, and probably felt that I could express my opinions, better than anyone else could.  So sorry you will not be attending the upcoming 55th Reunion, but I get it.  However, I am actually more curious about your most recent photo, of you & the kids, with the moustaches.  I had asked you several questions about those moustaches, because, frankly, I had some doubts, about the authenticity of said moustaches.  So, give it up.  I want the whole truth about that facial hair, especially relative to your youngsters.  Janis, thank you for your kind comments; I am assuming that you do not share Steve's misgivings about attending the 55th (and also do not have nearly as far to travel), so I expect to see you there.  I am definitely planning on attending, as it is now a mere 7 months away.  And we all now know how quickly 7 months can slip by.

Ronald I. Zager

Nancy, 

Thank you for recognizing Scott for his extensive contributions to supporting this site--well deserved!  And please, if I've overflooked anyone else be sure to "award" them for their special efforts.  Like Steve and "Jax" for expats-of-the-year?  Be creative! 

Ron

Janis Kliphardt (Emery)

Shooting survivors at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, traveled to Capitol Hill to press on for stricter gun laws and a ban of assault rifles.

In emotional testimony before a House panel on gun violence prevention, 17 year old Aalayah, a senior, described hiding under the body of a slain classmate last Valentine’s Day -

she said she and her peers have been “scarred emotionally for the rest of our lives.  Our stories and voices must be heard on the most important issue facing our generation.”  

Rep. Jerry Nadler, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee said, “We do not need another moment of silence, or more thoughts and prayers. 

"We need a moment of action. Today’s hearing is the first step toward that goal.”

There is bipartisan majority support in the House for Raise the Age Act to increase the minimum age from 18 to 21 to purchase an assault weapon.

The proposed House bill would fall far short of banning assault weapons as the Parkland students advocate

and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told a Bloomberg reporter in November that legislation restricting guns will not find Republican support in the Senate.

Marvin Irving Blusteln

Great SOU speech.  Even Nixon didn't threaten his own countrymen.

Janis Kliphardt (Emery)

Racism, sexual assault, and politics in Virginia

Zero-tolerance culture puts Democrats in a bind.

Is there a “hierarchy of offenses”?

Is it time to consider redemption and restorative justice in America?

Nancy Doyle (Sudlow)

Beverlee Ann Arpan (Marshall)

Ron,

I agree! You have my vote!

Bev

Janis Kliphardt (Emery)

The Mitch McConnell who tweeted:

“As I’ve said time and time again: Mindless obstruction is unacceptable.  The only way this divided Congress will be able to choose greatness and deliver significant legislation is by focusing on -- as President Trump put it -- ‘cooperation, compromise, and the common good.’ ”

is the same Mitch McConnell who said:

“One of my proudest moments was when I looked Barack Obama in the eye and said, ‘Mr. President, you will not fill the Supreme Court vacancy.’ ”

Stewart Myrent

​Just saw that PA Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA), the top Republican on the House's Ways & Means Oversight Subcommittee, said,  if Democrats go after the president's tax returns, "Such an abuse of power would open a Pandora's Box.  It would be tough to get the lid back on, it would set a very dangerous precedent."  Are you kidding me, Mike Kelly?  What "dangerous prededent" would it set?  That presidents are obligated to release their Income Tax Returns?  This has been 'de rigeur' since Gerald Ford.  So, I have no idea what he's talking about, either relative to the Pandora's Box comment, or the "dangerous precedent" comment.  I am hoping that the voters in Mike Kelly's district, are not nearly as ignorant, as he, and are intelligent enough, to see through his obvious BS.  But, these are the people who elected this moron, in the first place.  I really can't take too much more of this bull----.  This is exactly why I wanted to totally skip 2019 & zip ahead right to 2020.  But, no, you couldn't let me just skip this one, lousy year.

Janis Kliphardt (Emery)

Imagine how perilous for the U.S. if the Democrats had not won the House of Representatives in 2018.  It’s frightening.  

We have always distinguished our constitutional form of government from others by saying we are a government of laws not men.  

The last two years with one party rule gives lie to our statement of constitutional government -- we seem less a government of law and more a government of corrupt people than we had reason to expect.  

Stewart Myrent

Just got home from work.  ​Janis, I agree whole-heartedly with your comments about the U.S. being a country of laws, not men, however, what stunned me, was that I had NOT considered where our country would be right now, if the Democrats had not won back the House of Representatives, if the Republicans still controlled both houses of Congress.  It's kind of scary to consider where we would be, if the Republicans still controlled the House.  (I am shocked, that the Republican Congress has been so pliable & agreeable to Trump - when Alan Alop wrote earlier this week that his Republican friends {if any} should jump off the Trump bandwagon as soon as possible, I totally agreed that now is the time.)  As sure as I am, that the Democrats have the legal ability to delve into all of Trump's illegitimate activities, including looking at his Federal Tax returns, I am, frankly, a little concerned that, knowing Trump, this whole mess could wind up being resolved by the U.S. Supreme Court.  And that court has been recently re-constituted with 2 members selected by Trump.  So, I'm not sure that the Supremes can be counted on to do the right thing (Ruth Bader Ginsburg - hang in there another couple of years, please!), but I have this sneaky suspicion that John Roberts, the Chief Justice, will make sure they do the right thing.  He has surprised me several times already & he may well be the deciding vote to make sure the Court does the right thing.

Marvin Irving Blusteln

Stewart you are an optimist.

Janis Kliphardt (Emery)

Can we agree that the electoral college system is not a fair system?  Is there a system that would effectively balance power between small and large population states?  

 California's                   Wyoming’s

Population is                Population is 

  39,776,830                     573,720 (and shrinking)

2019 population figures

California has               Wyoming has

  55                           3  

Electoral Votes•         Electoral Votes•

    723,215                      191,240

 Californians               Wyomingites

   =           =

1 Electoral Vote        1 Electoral Vote 

It is up to us to reestablish government of, by, for the People.

Janis Kliphardt (Emery)

“A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.”  

 -- Edward R. Murrow.

Trump threatens those who question,

                                              fact check,

                               and exercise their voice.

“When the power of love

    overcomes

the love of power

the world will know peace.”  

 -- Jimi Hendrix

Stewart Myrent

​Janis, thank you for clearly displaying why the Electoral College is such a farce & why it gives the smaller states unequal (and outsized) representation in the Electoral College.  Back in November of last year, Paul tried to peddle this idea that, "...the Electoral College gives the states proportional representation...It was never about the direct election of a president."  So, I'm pretty sure the info you supplied, pretty much puts the lie to that idea.  Marv, I might not disagree that I am an optimist, in hoping that the Supreme Court will do the right thing, but can we, at least, say that I am a hopeful optimist?  Gotta go to work. 

Janis Kliphardt (Emery)

Only in America:

the guns used in mass shootings are a constitutional right but health care for the survivors is a privilege.

Paul Richard Hain

Janis and Stewart,

The Electoral College is made up of the same number of senators and representatives to which each state is entitled.  Janis, the formula you presented is not how it is calculated.  Each state gets one delegate for each senator and each representative the state has.  Washington DC gets 3 delegates per the 23rd Amendment.  Thus, the Electoral College representation of the States is equal to how they are represented in Congress with a total of 538 delegates.  The president is the president of the states.  The vote of the people is to determine whom the state delegates will vote for when the College convenes in Washington on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December.  Stewart, I didn’t “peddle” anything to you.  These are facts.

Janis Kliphardt (Emery)

Yes, Paul, these are all facts established in laws created by white men now dead who wanted to preserve slavery and white (male) privilege.  “My calculation” does not dispute the facts - just demonstrates the disparity of the value of a vote for a (presidential elector) delegate voting for president in California and Wyoming.  

Are you comfortable having a president of the states (some of which are sparsely populated with shrinking populations) rather than a president of the people?

It wasn’t until June 1960 that Congress passed the 23rd amendment which was ratified in March 1961 and finally granted DC residents the right to vote for presidential electors in the electoral college.  

(To this day residents of DC are taxed without representation.)