Systemic Failure

The Zimmerman trial in Florida created a new ‘celebrity’ who outlasted her 15 minutes of fame for several hours. An achievement she did not want. She was the main prosecution witness and the defending attorney tore her apart and brought the entire case into question.

But this post isn’t about the trial. It’s about the woman on the stand and why she is a poster-child of modern education. You see, she’s a senior in high school and barely literate. She supposedly wrote a note to the parents of her friend. It was written in cursive. When she was asked to read a copy of that note while on the stand, she couldn’t. She couldn’t read cursive, she admitted.

At first she said she wrote the note. Later, she admitted she had a friend write the note. Why didn’t she write the note in print instead of cursive? She’s barely literate and not only can she not read, she can’t write either.

She was steadily promoted through school—social promotions, up through high school and has not the reading and writing skills to write a short note by herself. That is one of the tragedies exposed during this trial.

I grew up in a teaching environment. My mother was an elementary teacher. She was my teacher for a couple of grades. My older sister was a high school teacher teaching History and Government (Government was a required course in Illinois high schools at that time.) My father, while not a teacher, was on the school board and later the President of the school board.

Everyone in our family were readers. My father had less than an eighth-grade education but he was literate and was an avid reader. We subscribed to our local daily paper, had numerous magazine subscriptions, a bookcase full of literary classics and mom and dad belonged to the Reader’s Digest book club and the Book of the Month Club. Dad liked westerns, Mom liked mysteries. My sister was married then and out of the house. I don’t know what she liked. Grandma, who did live with us at that time, read the Bible and subscribed to several commentary magazines.

We were all literate. In fact, everyone in my school was literate, even those on “relief” whose parents weren’t.

How was it possible then when it isn’t now? A number of reasons. First, we were taught to read using phonics. I still remember my teacher when I was in the early grades, to tell a struggling reader to “sound it out.” You see, in our reading classes, we ALL read aloud in turn. Each of us had to read a number of paragraphs, no one was skipped and everyone in turn read their parts in class.

Our school was in the country and included a full eight grades. There was a junior high school (seventh and eighth grades) in town. There was no middle school. When we graduated the eighth grade into high school, everyone read and write at the eighth grade level, could do math up through algebra, name every state and state capital, every nation and capitol, name all the US Presidents and Vice-Presidents and their originating states, and describe the structure of our state and federal government. We could also recite the Declaration of Independence and the Preambles to the U.S. and our state Constitutions.

Now, with social promotions, children are graduating high school who would not be able to graduate from my eighth grade…or sixth grade…or third grade. How could those kids from sixty years ago do so much better than the kids today?

They weren’t allowed to fail. Some just weren’t ready to enter school. I remember one boy, one of many from his family. I think at one time he had four sibling all attending our school at the same time. Donnie McP was…well we called him slow. In retrospect, he may have been autistic. Maybe not. Donnie started school two years before me. He was “retained” or held over, twice. When I was started the first grade, Donnie was there, too. He sat at the desk in front of me.

My school had three teachers for the eight grades. Mrs. Williams was my teacher for the first three grades. She would allow no one to leave her class unless they met her expectations. Reading and writing was one of her requirements.

We were taught to print in our first grade. We were taught cursive beginning in the second grade. We were not allowed to print in class thereafter. We were also taught grammar and sentence structure. That included parsing sentences. Sixty years later, I can understand why we were taught that. Such knowledge enables me to write this blog. We were continually taught grammar until I finished my Freshman year of high school. I got more, when I was in college.

Reading, writing, knowledge of grammar is as essential as math and an understanding of basic science to be called educated. Our current schools fail in all aspects compared to sixty years ago.

Sixty years ago, Mrs. Williams allowed no child to pass to the fourth grade without being able to read, write and understand the basics of grammar. Donnie McP had problems. He lived in an old house a couple of hundred yards from the school. After school, Donnie was in the care of his older sibs until his parents came home hours later, usually.

Mrs. Williams kept Donnie after school. She persisted teaching Donnie to read, write and insured he was able to meet all her requirements for being promoted. After an hour or more, she would take him home. I never knew if Donnie’s parents knew of the extra help he received, nor, if they cared. Many didn’t and still don’t.

That is the situation that young woman in Florida found herself—in the national spotlight that exposed all her failings. No, not her failings, the failings of a school system who is more interested in maintaining statistics—graduation rates, than in actually teaching their students.

When educators drop phonics in favor of ‘sight reading’, stop teaching grammar, stop teaching cursive writing, they fail their students and should be removed from any educational position.

They have created generations of illiterates and semi-illiterates. In a just world, those so-called educators would be held up for ridicule.


Heard not-good news from a friend. No post today

A good friend, mother of two kids still at home, was just diagnosed with ovarian cancer. She’s only two years older than our daughter. We’ve known this lady, her mother, and her family a long time. I just don’t feel like posting today.


And they’ve upset everyone on one thing or another.

Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton need to watch their blood pressure after SCOTUS annouced their decision on the VRA suit as do all the DOMA supporters. Frankly, I’m not surprised DOMA went down, it was flawed from the beginning and a violation of the 10th Amendment. Many conservatives have overlooked that. What really bothers me is how inconsistent SCOTUS is in determining 10th Amendment violations.

Let’s take a look at three of the cases this week: VRA, DOMA and California’s Ban on same-sex marriage.

A Mississippi county brought suit on the last renewal of VRA. Note, they didn’t sue the original act, just this last renewal. A renewal that was, in effect, a rubber-stamp of the original act. It lost, the DoJ oversight of voting laws for segments of the country, because today’s issues are not the same as was the issues in 1965—nor have they been for 40 years. The criteria used to justify the oversight no longer exist because Congress, in their laziness, used outdated information.

The 5-4 ruling on Tuesday addressed a 1960s-era provision that largely singled out states and districts in the South — those with a history of discrimination — and required them to seek federal permission to change their voting laws.

The court ruled that the formula determining which states are affected was unconstitutional.

In doing so, the court potentially opened the door for certain states to proceed with voter ID laws and other efforts that to date had been held up because of the Voting Rights Act. Prominent among those are voter identification laws in Alabama and Mississippi.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott also put out a lengthy statement vowing to proceed with both a voter ID law and potentially a new set of redistricting maps without federal oversight.

“Today’s ruling ensures that Texas is no longer one of just a few states that must seek approval from the federal government before its election laws can take effect,” he said. “With today’s decision, the state’s voter ID law will take effect immediately. Redistricting maps passed by the Legislature may also take effect without approval from the federal government.” — The Hayride.

That does not mean VRA went down, only the oversight by the DoJ. Jesse and Al, obviously, disregard that. It also ends a revenue stream for them. They can no longer sue and extort money from states and municipalities using that part of VRA as an excuse.

The Texas Voter ID law was being held in limbo by the DoJ. It was nearly identical to the Indiana law that passed SCOTUS review. With the DoJ blockage removed, the Texas AG, rightly in my opinion, moved to enforce the Texas law.

He’s making hay, so to speak, while the sun shines. Why? Because the dems in Congress with immediately attempt to address the 2006 VRA flaw—outmoded data in the 2006 renewal, that was thrown out. There will be massive pressure on ‘Pubs to rollover on it and renew VRA using valid data…just to reinstate federal control over those specific states and counties to correct a situation the democrats created in the years before 1965. The Hayride notes this bit of irony.

Which gives rise to the following thought.

Namely, that the federal government found the management of the electoral system and the protection of voting rights to be so noxious and incompetent in the South in the 1960′s that Congress had to pass, and the courts to enforce, a remedial and corrective regime largely putting that system and protection under the supervision of the federal government.

That was when the South was exclusively run by Democrats.

The South is now more or less exclusively run by Republicans, and the Supreme Court has found there is no discernible reason to continue that supervision because the electoral system and the protection of voting rights in the South are no longer noxious or incompetent.

This is somehow proof that Republicans are racists as accused by the Democrat Party. You’re welcome to explain that one however you like. — The Hayride.

Looking at the SCOTUS decision on DOMA and the California ban on homosexual Marriage, both were decided on 10th Amendment basis. If you read between the lines, SCOTUS said DOMA was inappropriate use of federal power because it treated one segment of the population, those in heterosexual marriages, differently that those who weren’t married and wanted to be, i.e., homosexual marriage. It was an area the FedGov should not be in but since they were, they couldn’t discriminate. Hence, the court said homosexuals had to be treated the same as non-homosexuals.

As much as I don’t like the decision, I can understand it. If you combine that decision to the one concerning the California ban on homosexual marriage, you’ll notice the Court is saying that the definition of marriage is a state issue, not that of the FedGov.

The California ban was a Prop 8 issue. The state government refused to support their citizens in supporting the popular vote. In fact, the California state government actively opposed the Prop 8 vote. Gay advocates sued and the State courts agreed, that the Prop 8 vote was illegal. The Prop 8 supporters sued in Federal Court to overthrow the state court decision. When the state failed to support the ban, other outside agents stepped in to fill the gap—out-of-state agents. SCOTUS said those agents had no standing since they were not California agent. Therefore the Appellate decision overturning the ban was upheld.

The state government did not support the Prop 8 decision and it was the state’s position the ban was illegal so said the California Supreme Court. The proponents of the Prop 8 ban sued in Federal Court. The Appellate court affirmed the state decision. That was appealed to SCOTUS.

SCOTUS said that the FedGov and Federal courts had no business deciding purely state issues. In this case, it was homosexual marriage. Since the state failed to support the suit of the Prop 8 backers, the federal courts had no jurisdiction. Again supporting California’s 10th Amendment rights.

I strongly suspect if the opponents of the ban were California based, and if the state had supported the Prop 8 vote, the ban via the Prop 8 vote. So SCOTUS left the ban in place. That didn’t happen.

One limitation of the SCOTUS decision is that California homosexual marriages are ONLY valid inside California. Other states have no obligation to accept those marriages.

The Court rules that the petitioners did not have standing – the Circuit Court  should not have been able to hear the appeal, because the state of California had declined to pursue it.  This clears the way for gay marriages to resume in California, but it does not affect the other 49 states. From the opinion: “We have never before upheld the standing of a private party to defend the constitutionality of a state statute when state officials have chosen not to. We decline to do so for the first time here.” — WNYC.

Now, each state can make their own definition of marriage, but that definition is valid only within the boundaries of the state. In a sense, the suits against DOMA and California was a win for State’s Rights, State Sovereignty, and the 10th Amendment. However, I suspect many of my conservative and libertarian readers will not see the SCOTUS decision in that same light.

If you can’t beat’em, be them

That appears to be the state of the republican party today. Fifteen ‘pub senators joined dems to pass the immigration amnesty bill. Oh, they’ll claim there’s no amnesty and the border will be secure, etc., etc., etc.

They lie.

Here are the 15 Republican senators who voted in favor of invoking cloture on the amendment, according to the Weekly Standard:

  • Lamar Alexander (R-TN)
  • Kelly Ayotte (R-NH)
  • Jeffrey Chiesa (RINO-NJ)
  • Susan Collins (R-ME)
  • Bob Corker (R-TN)
  • Jeff Flake (R-AZ)
  • Lindsey Graham (RINO-SC)
  • Orrin Hatch (R-UT)
  • Dean Heller (R-NV)
  • John Hoeven (R-ND)
  • Mark Kirk (R-IL)
  • John McCain (RINO-AZ)
  • Lisa Murkowski (R-AK)
  • Marco Rubio (R-FL)
  • Roger Wicker (R-MS)

Some of the senators above will be up for re-election in 2014. Let’s not forget them. We don’t need more democrats in the Senate.


Yesterday I wrote about the political technique called Logrolling. It’s a tactic where pols exchange votes to pass their favorite piece of pork. John Boehner’s and Vicky Hartzler’s votes to pass the Food Stamp Bill are prime example. The problem with this tactic is that democrats lie and when they are expected to reciprocate, they don’t. Repeated use of this tactic fits the definition of insanity—doing the same time after time while expecting different results.

Tactics like this one serves no one. It doesn’t gain the pols any political advantage and alienates their constituents. But the ‘pub establishment continues as before—acting insanely.

Cal Thomas, a writer whom I once admired, says we’re now entering a new era, of those looking backward and those looking forward. He even cites passages from Newt Gringrich’s upcoming book to support his premis. His premis is that we, who revere the past—the Constitution as it was originally written and intended, are losers locked into the past. What Cal Thomas fails to prove is whether this forward looking stance provides any benefits to our personal liberty and security.

Breakout from politics of the past

By CAL THOMAS | JUNE 24, 2013 AT 1:30 PM

The “Faith and Freedom” Coalition held a gathering last week in Washington, D.C. It resembled many similar conservative assemblies: mostly white male speakers, a mostly white, middle-age audience and mostly full of attacks on President Obama, liberals, Democrats and Washington.

That is not a winning strategy for political victory. Neither are appeals to a bygone era that is unlikely to return. The social, financial and governmental dysfunction we are experiencing are symptoms of something far deeper. The foundations that built and have sustained America are being destroyed. Too many Republicans and conservatives mistakenly believe what’s needed is a paint job, like those false storefronts painted on closed-down businesses in some Northern Ireland towns to hide its struggling economy during the G-8 summit.

Instead of more navel gazing, Republicans and conservatives (they are not always the same) must seize the future rather than hold on to the past.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich believes America may be on the verge of another major breakthrough on several levels, but he warns in a book titled “Breakout,” to be published this fall (Regnery Publishing, Inc.), about powerful forces opposed to the advance. “Prison guards of the past,” he calls them, versus “pioneers of the future.” If the future has publicists, he says, the past has lobbyists.

Gingrich believes, and polls reflect this, that people are weary of the left-right, Republican vs. Democrat repetitive drama. He thinks the next decade will be more future vs. past.

What is needed, he says, “is a movement dedicated to identifying and encouraging the pioneers of the future,” while fighting for the policies and structural changes that will hasten its arrival. He labels it the “Breakout Party,” though he thinks this shift can still be achieved within the GOP.

Gingrich says a breakout occurs when “so many different new scientific and technological capabilities are emerging and being translated into usable products by entrepreneurs in a dynamic consumer-led market that the very capacity of life, for the individual, for society, for business, and for government, are changing.”

Neither party has a clear vision or understanding of what this can mean for the country. Neither, says Gingrich, does either party have a strategy for knitting together a coalition of these pioneers who are already creating the future, but largely under the media’s radar. The media could be said to be one of the “prison guards,” because they mostly focus on the old arguments, rather than on solutions.

Thomas’ next statement is where he diverges from conservative philosophy.

House leadership last Tuesday brought a bill to the floor that would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. The bill has zero chance of passing the Senate. It has less chance of being signed by the President. Instead, Republicans should place themselves on the side of giving more information to women, empowering them by making it law that they view a sonogram of their baby before they have an abortion.

Yes, Cal, let’s just give up on the whole anti-abortion thing and give in to the libs. That’s a real winning solution…for them.

“The opportunity for Republicans to play the lead role in developing a breakout system is historic,” says Gingrich, “and will both reward the party with victory and reward the country with vast new opportunities for jobs, economic growth, long-term prosperity, greater learning, better health and greater security.”

In this last statement, Gingrich is correct. But Cal Thomas completely misses the point. Conservatives must understand the new technologies and how they will affect society for our benefit and detriment. It is the conventional party structure who is locked into the past, not the political and philosophical views that govern our purpose as we enter this new era.

A review of the failed farm bill

I was reading about the under-the-table tactics used to pass the House farm bill. Why, specifically, the usual tactic of ‘logrolling’ didn’t work as it has before. The best explanation comes from this quote.

The failure of the farm-bill charade, even if a temporary setback for the big spenders, is encouraging. Some 62 Republicans were willing to buck their leadership and reject business as usual, which must change. House leaders can start by coming back with two bills to be considered individually on their own merits. — The Washington Times.

Another problem is that some members of the House Agriculture committee have conflicts of interest. Some of those committee members, like our own Vicky Hartzler (R, MO-4), have family farms that would directly benefit from the crop subsidies. In any other endeavor, such a conflict would bar her from being a member on the committee.  But…we’re talking government, here, where peonage and corruption afflicts both parties equally.

The Washington Times article does point out one interesting facet of the maneuvering to pass the bill. Old, well used and familiar tactics failed.

The blame for out-of-control federal spending belongs mostly on logrolling, the practice of congressmen trading positions on controversial issues to pass a bill. Sometimes it doesn’t work. The farm bill crashed Thursday in the House by 195 votes for, 234 against.

Other than the fact that farmers grow food, it doesn’t make sense to have food stamps and related welfare programs lumped in with, for example, dairy subsidies. Rep. Marlin Stutzman, Indiana Republican and a fourth-generation farmer, tried unsuccessfully to sever the two components into separate bills, where each could get the legislative scrutiny it deserves.

Mr. Stutzman made his case to the House Rules Committee on Tuesday. “The American people deserve an open and honest debate about farm and nutrition policy in this country,” said the congressman. “The only way that will happen is if we separate farm policy from nutrition policy.”

The panel decided not to let the House vote whether to divide the bill, as the pairing of the farm and food stamp bills was thought to be the key to final passage. Republicans from rural districts would vote for the farm subsidies to benefit their constituents, and liberal Democrats would vote for more food stamps. Logrolling requires maintaining spending high to keep both sides happy, which is a very bad thing for the taxpayers who pay for the compromise, usually through the nose. — The Washington Times.

So the Ag Committee relied on ‘business-as-usual’ to pass the bloated monstrosity. They failed to consider the opposition of the real ‘Pub conservatives and of the rabid “Spend! Spend! Spend!” dems who want to bribe constituents to continue to vote for their party. Whether the committee members passed a bill that would line their own pockets or if they voted to pass a bill to continue and expand welfare dependency, none of the committee members had the best interest of the country in mind.

We can thank those 62 ‘Pub conservatives who were willing to buck their party leadership for the failure of this piece of legislative trash.

Good on ya!

Friday Follies for June 21, 2013

I was going to make a FB post yesterday and was distracted. It’s a little thing, personal only to me and my sister. Yesterday was my father’s birthday. If he were still alive, he would be 111.

Happy birthday, Dad.


An item was disclosed this week about the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that appears to violate the Constitution’s 4th Amendment.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. — 4th Amendment to the US Constitution.

It now appears that FISA modified part of the 4th Amendment.

Authorized by Section 702 of the amended Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the program did away with the traditional individual warrant for each foreign suspect whose communications would be collected in the United States. In its place, the FISA court, which oversees domestic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes and whose proceedings are secret, would certify the government’s procedures to target people overseas and ensure citizens’ privacy. — The Washington Post.

Instead of individual warrants as required by the 4th Amendment, NSA was given a blanket certificate—a hunting and fishing license, so to speak, that allowed them to search anyone, everyone, whether hard evidence for probable cause existed, or not.

A comment posted on the Washington Post article above said, “I’m beginning to think the FISA court was set-up by the executive branch to rubber stamp all executive branch demands. The world’s most secret self-licking ice cream cone.” (Panhandle Willy, 6/20/2013 8:03 PM CDT)



Today is the anniversary of the ratification of the US Constitution. It received its 9th approving vote 225 years ago today by New Hampshire.

On June 21, 1788, New Hampshire became the ninth state to ratify the document, and it was subsequently agreed that government under the U.S. Constitution would begin on March 4, 1789. —

Virginia and New York followed New Hampshire later in June but New Hampshire’s vote was sufficient to actually getting the new government running.


The Tea Party was out in force, yesterday, with a rally in Washington DC to protest the actions of the IRS. A number of Congressmen attended as well, Sens. Mike Lee (Utah), Rand Paul (Ky.), Ted Cruz (Texas), Reps. Michele Bachmann (Minn.) and Dave Camp (Mich.). The question now is whether any of our Missouri Senators and Representatives were there?

I’ve not seen any of the Missouri delegation post about their presence at the rally. I’ve asked Vicky Hartzler and Jason Smith that question but I’ve received no answers yet.

We must remember those absences when the primaries come next year and candidates want Tea Party endorsements.


Unsatisfied with the bureaucrats in your state and federal government? That makes you a terrorist says a Tennessee bureaucrat.

Unsatisfied with the quality of your water and eager to let the government know about it?

You might be a terrorist, according to the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation.

“We take water quality very seriously. Very, very seriously,” deputy director of TDEC’s Division of Water Resources Sherwin Smith told a baffled and outraged audience in Maury County, Tennessee. “But you need to make sure that when you make water quality complaints you have a basis, because federally, if there’s no water quality issues, that can be considered under Homeland Security an act of terrorism.”

Audience members saw the official’s answer as a means of deterring complaints from the public, according to a report in The Tennessean. — The Daily Caller.

For Parker…

I’m going to do something I seldom do—give advice. In fact, I try to never give unsolicited advice, it will be ignored. However, I am making an exception this time.

Parker is a young man who just graduated from high school. We, his friends and church family, have watched him and his brother and sisters grow up. Parker is the youngest of the four.

He has made a significant decision for his life, one I approve. He will has enlisted in the Navy. His boot camp will be at Great Lakes Naval Training Center starting next month. He has been preparing for boot camp for a year. I believe he will do fine.

But that is not what I will be giving advice…no not advice, that’s only worth what you pay for it, let’s call them ‘suggestions.’ My suggestions will be focused at that time when boot camp is over, when A-school and further training is over and he is at his first duty assignment.

Parker, until you have reached this point, you’re going to be busy—very busy. Doing well in training is important. It can make all the difference in your later naval life.  The most important thing to learn…is how to learn, how to be a self-starter, how to be a self-trainer, how to teach yourself. It is a skill all too many never acquire.

Boot camp is to be endured. My initial Air Force training was over forty years ago. I was unprepared even with years of AFROTC training. I just kept my head down and finished training as quickly as I could. I believe you, now, are in a much better position that I was. Endure boot camp, excel in A-school and in B-school if there is one.

Now, you’ve finished training and you are at your first assignment. What is the worse thing of being at a duty assignment, ashore or on board ship? Boredom.Even with a routine of eat-work-eat-sleep-eat-work, you will still have hours of time to pass. Ashore, you’ll have friends who will want to party every liberty, every weekend. Who are they? They are the ones who get written up come Monday morning, who will appear before Captain’s Mast, who gather at the ship’s store after duty hours…doing nothing. And being bored, looking for something to do.

Don’t be one of those sailors.

Instead, do something productive. Training doesn’t end, now it is OJT, On-the-Job-Training. Excel there, too. Take extra OJT training if it is available, always be working on one, it matters not if it is for your current grade, or the next one. Unless things have changed radically since I was in, your can’t be promoted until you have completed OJT requirements for your current grade. Always be working on ones for your next promotion and on the ones after that.

Still have time on your hands? Learn a new skill. I don’t know how well you did in school, nor how well they taught grammar (if they did.) Learn to read well, and just as importantly, learn to write well. You will always be writing and knowing how to do that and make what you write be understood easily, is another skill that will do you well throughout your life. If you need help, sign up for a class through the base or ship’s education office. There are many, many classes available by correspondence. If you have a shore assignment, there are classes available, through the base, in nearby civilian organizations.

If you have a long-term plan for life after the Navy, take courses that support your plan. The Navy will help pay for outside training. There is a lot available for little or no cost if you look for it.

Money—don’t waste it. There are credit unions on every military base. Set up an account and have payroll make an automatic deposit every payday. Tithe as you can, and remember to tithe to your self. When you leave the Navy, whenever that may be, you should have a sizable sum to help you shift to civilian life. (And don’t, ever, buy a brand new car as soon as you complete training. If you need a car for a weekend, rent one. When I was in the Air Force it was common to have a couple of car-rental agencies on base.)

Learn how to handle your money. The Navy will cover most of your cost of living. Make a budget and never go into debt. There will be many who will try to sell you stuff, stuff that puts you in debt, a lot of debt. Don’t do that. If you can’t pay in cash, you don’t really need it. Look at your friends. Which of them are always broke, which ones aren’t. Pay attention to those who aren’t and watch how they handle their money. Don’t be a sailor who runs out of cash four days before payday.

My primary suggestion for you is to never be or get bored. Always have something to do, whether it is directly for your rating or for something else. You never know when some isolated bit of knowledge suddenly becomes pertinent.

I’m sure a number of my readers have been in the military much more recently than me. Some, I know, were in the Navy and others in the other branches. I would ask they comment and contribute their suggestions as well.

What I do not want for you, is for you to complete your enlistment and leave the Navy with nothing more than completing an obligation of citizenship. Military life can be very beneficial. It can provide you with a number of opportunities. It can also be very hazardous. Life isn’t safe. But, you have an opportunity to make life better with a few appropriate decisions made at the right time.

Do well, Parker. Keep in touch as you can.