text:
Torrington firefighter's online comments about pit bulls led to demotion
Richard Prince, who had been promoted to deputy fire marshal in July 2012, was removed from that job after an internal affairs investigation.
The investigation, obtained by the Republican-American with a Freedom of Information request, found that Price's descriptive, anti-pit bull comments caused the fire department to "lose public trust." The administration also questioned if Prince could be able to deliver "compassionate and professional" service to pit bull owners in the city who might someday need the fire department's help. Additionally, the investigation found, Prince posted the comments on Facebook using a fire department computer and cell phones when he was supposed to be working.
The investigation and subsequent discipline for Prince provide a glimpse into an active subculture surrounding pit bulls, both for and against the breed. Some believe they are uncontrollable and dangerous; others defend them as gentle but able to be led astray by bad handlers.
Prince posted his comments on Facebook group pages and a website that promote the opinion that pit bulls are violent and unsafe.
A former administrator of a Facebook group page where Prince detailed ways to kill pit bulls said he thought Prince's post was satire, and Prince, a regular commenter on the page, had never posted anything like it before.
Prince could not be reached for comment.
Chief Gary Brunoli said Prince did not want to comment.
Prince, a lifelong Torrington resident, has worked for the Torrington Fire Department for 25 years. He worked as a firefighter for 24 years until he was promoted to deputy fire marshal in July 2012.
He was demoted in December. Prince's pay was cut from $69,700 as deputy fire marshal to the top step for a firefighter, $59,500.
"He understands what he did was wrong and he's accepting his punishment," Brunoli said.
The investigation noted that Prince is passionate about his belief that pit bulls are dangerous. "In his initial interview, he stated at the end that there is a 'pit bull movement' and he is trying to deliver a public message," the investigation noted.
While investigators said Prince is entitled to his opinions, it was Prince's graphic comments and his references to his job as a firefighter that prompted concern. Brunoli said firefighters are held to a higher standard.
"Prince has gone against the very beliefs of what we as an organization promote (to) the citizens of the city of Torrington in offering a high level of life and property protection. Some even question Richard's ability to rescue their dogs if in fact there was a fire in their home," the investigation said.
COMMENTS POSTED ON A LOCAL FACEBOOK PAGE, Torrington T-Town Chatter, in a discussion about "pit bulls and how dangerous they are," prompted the initial complaint about Prince, according to the investigation.
The online conversation included a discussion about how to stop pit bull attacks. Prince posted a comment about the importance of having a "break stick," which he defined as a device inserted into the mouth of the pit bull to "facilitate the release of its gripping jaws" from its victim.
The devices are real and sold and marketed to pit bull owners as a way to dislodge a pit bull's grip. Sidney Cross, a pit bull rescuer and animal behaviorist in Albany, N.Y., said the break sticks are not banned. She said she owns one as do most animal shelters that deal with abused dogs.
An investigation by the fire department uncovered numerous posts by Prince and online discussions regarding pit bulls, including comments posted to one Facebook group page called The Pit Bull Propaganda Machine Revealed.
The page was created by two fathers in two different states who felt anguish and frustration after their children were attacked by pit bulls.
The 14-month-old son of Jeff Borchardt of Wisconsin died after a babysitter's two pit bulls attacked the boy last year. The 10-year-old daughter of William Johnson of Philadelphia was attacked by a pit bull belonging to her daughter's friend in December 2012.
The page was created as a way to challenge the position of several animal welfare organizations that aggressive pit bulls are caused by owners and that pit bulls are not genetically aggressive.
Johnson said he never met Prince and doesn't know why Prince joined the group, but he recalls Prince as a frequent commenter.
Johnson said he recalls seeing the lengthy post by Prince that detailed ways to kill a pit bull.
"Because of my own outspokenness, I'm subject to a lot of harassment. I'm not somebody out there talking about killing people's dogs. I'm more of a public safety advocate," Johnson said.
JOHNSON SAW THE POST AND SAID HE CHUCKLED at it because he thought it was satire. Among the ways Price suggested killing pit bulls, which he calls mutants, were putting a screwdriver through its eyes and into its brain; cracking its spine with a sledgehammer; and "a chain saw would be messy but effective."
Johnson said he understands the comment was "violent sounding," he could understand how it came about: an off-the-cuff comment done out of frustration that is regretted the next day. Johnson said he was sorry to hear about Prince's demotion.
The investigations noted Prince's use of sarcasm in a different post in which he suggested applying duct tape around the dog's "snout" until the dog can't breathe and mentions that he carries a roll of duct tape "in my work vehicle" and "he rubs elbows with a couple pits per day." Pits is slang for pit bulls.
PUREBRED PIT BULLS AND PIT BULL MIXES make up a small percentage of the registered dogs in Torrington, according to City Hall records.
There are 2,238 dogs registered in the city and 81 pit bulls and pit bull mixes have been registered over the years, according to city clerk records.
Cross, the pit bull rescuer, has owned For The Pits for the past 20 years and has helped find homes for 6,000 pit bulls across the Northeast, including Connecticut. She rehabilitated two dogs seized from the property of professional football player Michael Vick.
Contact Bruno Matarazzo Jr. at email@example.com or on Twitter @RA_BrunoJr.
Follow Us
leonard buono wrote on Feb 3, 2014 9:11 AM:
some got nothing better to do but to be negative on ever subject !they really got no clue what they are talking about they just like being THE LOUD MOUTH ON THE CORNER! "
jessicamcrowell wrote on Feb 3, 2014 9:25 AM:
cecelia wrote on Feb 3, 2014 11:26 AM:
cecelia wrote on Feb 3, 2014 11:31 AM:
Animallover wrote on Feb 3, 2014 12:19 PM:
Roberta wrote on Feb 3, 2014 12:20 PM:
Pit Bulls have proven time and time again that even after being horribly abused or used for profit in dog fighting they still love humans and are great family pets.
As a Pit Bull owner, homeowner and tax payer in Torrington it disturbs me that someone who has thoughts like this about any living thing holds a position in public service, never mind having to count on them to save my pit bulls god forbid my house was on fire. "
johnv wrote on Feb 3, 2014 12:36 PM:
As for conservative1, you continue to show your ignorance. "
Thomas McCartney wrote on Feb 3, 2014 2:54 PM:
By compiling U.S. and Canadian press accounts between 1982 and 2013, Merritt Clifton, editor of Animal People, shows the breeds most responsible for serious injury and death.
Study highlights
Pit bull type dogs make up only 6% of all dogs in the USA.
The combination of Pit Bulls, rottweilers, their close mixes and wolf hybrids and other Pit Bull Type Dogs:
84% of attacks that induce bodily harm.
75% of attacks to children.
87% of attack to adults.
72% of attacks that result in fatalities.
80% that result in maiming. "
Sally wrote on Feb 3, 2014 2:55 PM:
Thomas McCartney wrote on Feb 3, 2014 2:59 PM:
So you can call them something else to protect them but they are still pit mixes who are what they are and do what they do, who as a result have no right to ever come into human contact.
Pit bull or Pit bull cross, same difference same outcome same reality as to what they are.
And all Pit bulls or restricted dogs including pit bull crosses by law should have leashes and Muzzles which they never have and all to often you seem them running around as such unmuzzled, this is an even greater problem then them being unleashed and that is bad enough.
Certain breeds like Pit bulls etc.are fundamentally evil in nature and action and do not deserve the freedom of action to carry out their DNA.
The point is, other dogs bite, Pit bulls and Pit bull crosses and others like mastiffs, Rotts etc. attack and kill and maim, that is the big difference in the outcome and should result in a completely different attitude towards these dogs and why they should be banned outright. The stats are very clear and accurate and show this reality even if you want to put your head in the sand, it still is what it is.
2/3 of the fatalities by pit bull type dogs in 2013 were the actual family members of the pit bull who had been raised from a pup in optimal conditions, these are facts that are documented. "
Thomas McCartney wrote on Feb 3, 2014 3:00 PM:
Simply put Pit bulls do not attack because they are raised with dog fighters and drug dealers, dog fighters and drug dealers use pit bulls because they attack!
It is their nature, their genetic truth and reality.!!
It is not how you raise them rather it is simply what they are.!!
Just like sled dogs run and pull, it is just their nature.!!
A pit bull type dog is what it is and does what it is.You can no more alter it genetic makeup then you can a collies to herd, a hounds to track, a retriever's to retrieve, a labs to swim, a pointers to point, a sled dog to run and pull.
They do what they are and a pit bull type dog is a mauling violent killer that has been bred to be a land shark, nothing you do can change that, even if you have them from birth.
No matter if you love them, or how you nurture, train, rehabilitate, raise them optimally as normal dogs from birth, you can not change their Genetic reality to Kill, Maul, Maim, Disfigure, Dismember, cause Life Flights or trips to the Intensive Care Unit.
For over 600 years the current pit bull type dog was brought into being through careful selective genetic breeding to create the most violent murderous fighting dog possible. "
Like it is wrote on Feb 3, 2014 3:11 PM:
dog lover wrote on Feb 3, 2014 3:21 PM:
fortunately, he only scratched up the mail mans shoelaces.
they were brooks brothers, so that cost me a pretty penny and an apology. "
SophieCairns wrote on Feb 3, 2014 3:26 PM:
Please tell it to these families.
Stars indicate people killed by a 'family' pit bull – ones that had been raised and cherished as an indoor pet, 'never showed aggression before', and knew the victim.
Child fatalities by pit bull type dog :
Christian Gormanous – 4 yrs old Montgomery County, TX
Isaiah Aguilar – 2 yrs old Sabinal, TX
Ryan Maxwell – 7 yrs old ** Galesburg, IL.
Dax Borchardt – 14 mos old ** Walworth, WI.
Monica Laminack – 21 mos old ** Ellabelle, GA.
Tyler Jett – 7 yrs old Callaway, FL.
Jordyn Arndt – 4 yrs old ** Prairie City, IA.
Beau Rutledge – 2 yrs old ** Fulton County, GA.
Ayden Evans- 5 yrs old ** Jessieville, AR.
Nephi Selu – 6 yrs old ** Union City, CA.
Arianna Jolee Merrbach – 5 yrs old Effingham, SC. Daniel (surname as yet not revealed) – 2 yrs old (Gilbert, Arizona) **
Samuel Eli Zamudio – 2 yrs old** Colton, CA
Jordan Ryan– 5 yrs old Baker city, Oregon Levi Watson-Bradford-4 years old** White County, Arkansas Jah'niyah White - 2 years old ** Chicago, Ill
Adult fatalities by pit bull type :
Betty Todd – 65 yrs old ** Hodges, SC
Elsie Grace – 91 yrs old ** Hemet, CA
Claudia Gallardo – 38 yrs old Stockton, CA.
Pamela Devitt – 63 yrs old Littlerock, CA.
Carlton Freeman – 80 yrs old Harleyville, SC. Linda Oliver – 63 yrs old Dayton, TX.
James Harding – 62 yrs old -Baltimore, MD chased into traffic by two attacking pit bulls
Juan Campos – 96 yrs old Katy, Texas.
Terry Douglass 56 years old. **Baltimore, MD Katherine Atkins-25 years old ** Kernersville, NC
Nga Woodhead-65 years old Spanaway, WA.
Joan Kappen, 75 years old Hot Springs Ark
Michal Nelson, 41 years old Valencia County, New Mexico **
Darla Napora of Bad Rap Pit Rescue was killed by the Pit she raised from a puppy... Beau Rutledges's mother went to the bathroom when her 8 year old Pt killed her son.... Pit can live for a long time before they snap but when they DO it's too often lethal. But Pit owners seem to think that this is a good thing and often harass the victims and their families. Pit owners are, on a scale of 1-10, sociopaths who care little or nothing for their fellow humans.... not even within the family circle, much less their neighbors and towns. "
Gladimatexan wrote on Feb 3, 2014 3:40 PM:
Pit bull wrote on Feb 3, 2014 4:13 PM:
Hone Tawaroa wrote on Feb 3, 2014 4:25 PM:
His comments seem to be about protecting one's self from pit attack,last year 33 people were killed,29 by pit bull,also many hundreds of pets and other animals were attacked and killed by pit bulls.
In one night 160+ Alpaca were killed by pits,so don't tell us how sweet these fighting breeds are. "
Below me wrote on Feb 3, 2014 4:26 PM:
William Johnson wrote on Feb 3, 2014 4:29 PM:
Fedup wrote on Feb 3, 2014 4:47 PM:
38 U.S. fatal dog attacks occurred in 2012.2 Despite being regulated in Military Housing areas and over 600 U.S. cities, pit bulls contributed to 61% (23) of these deaths. Pit bulls make up less than 5% of the total U.S. dog population.
.....people wonder why I carry a pistol "
jessicamcrowell wrote on Feb 3, 2014 4:55 PM:
Roberta wrote on Feb 3, 2014 5:55 PM:
@ Thomas McCarthy you got your info from a bias site a dogsbite.org
before posting stuff you should really do your research
this is from the CDC & NCRC
. This is from the CDC Any dog of any breed has the potential to bite. Dog bites are a largely preventable public health problem, see the below suggestions for preventing dog bites. http://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/dog-bites/index.html This is from the NCRC Breed was not one of the factors identified
The authors report that the breed of the dog or dogs could not be reliably identified in more than 80% of cases. News accounts disagreed with each other and/or with animal control reports in a significant number of incidents, casting doubt on the reliability of breed attributions and more generally for using media reports as a primary source of data for scientific studies. In only 45 (18%) of the cases in this study could these researchers make a valid determination that the animal was a member of a distinct, recognized breed. Twenty different breeds, along with two known mixes, were identified in connection with those 45 incidents. here is that link
Statistics are also flawed as to naming pit bulls as the instigators. It appears that in many cases in which pit-bull-type dogs are blamed for fatal attacks, the dogs were few of the recognized pit bull breeds
As to pit bull types, the statistics were: In 1995 of 22 fatalities, 9 were pit bull types; in 1996, of 35, 3 were pit bull types; in 1997, of 30, 6 were pit bull types; in 1998, of 15, 5 were pit bull types; in 1999, of 42, 8 were pit bull types. Some of these pit bull types were roaming in packs, some were unsocialized, in some a child was left unattended, and in some the dogs were chained "
BigSis wrote on Feb 3, 2014 7:23 PM:
al.cap wrote on Feb 3, 2014 7:38 PM:
Thomas McCartney wrote on Feb 3, 2014 7:50 PM:
Council Bluffs, Iowa.
Pit bulls are not only problematic in large cities; they threaten mid-sized cities and small towns as well. Located in the heartland, Council Bluffs, Iowa has about 60,000 citizens.
After a series of devastating attacks, beginning in 2003, Council Bluffs joined over 600 U.S. cities and began regulating pit bulls.
The results of the Council Bluffs pit bull ban, which began January 1, 2005, show the positive effects such legislation can have on public safety in just a few years time:1.
Council Bluffs: Pit Bull Bite Statistics.
Year Pit Bull Bites % of All Bites.
2004 29 23%.
2005 12 10% (year ban enacted).
2006 6 4%.
2007 2 2%.
2008 0 0%.
2009 0 0%.
2010 1 1%.
2011 0 0%. "
Thomas McCartney wrote on Feb 3, 2014 7:51 PM:
"Despite these limitations and concerns
(about identifying the exact 'breed' of pit bull type dog responsible for a
killing), the data indicate that Rottweilers and pit bull-type dogs accounted
for 67% of human DBRF in the United States between 1997 and 1998.
It is extremely unlikely that they accounted for anywhere near 60% of dogs in the
United States during that same period and, thus, there appears to be a
breed-specific problem with fatalities."
Results of mandatory breed-specific S/N in SF: success in San Francisco, where in just eight years there was a 49% decline in the number of pit-bulls impounded, a 23% decline in the number of pit-bulls euthanized, and an 81% decline in the number of pit-bulls involved in fatal and disfiguring attacks.
Ed Boks, Executive director, Yavapai Humane Society (responsible Jan 2004 as director City Center for Animal Care & Control in NYC for trying to rename pit bulls New Yorkies; is pb owner)
Pit bull type dogs represent 3000% the actuarial risk compared to other types of dogs.
Insurance companies will have calculated the risks the other listed breeds represent based on what they've had to pay out through the years.
This isn't 'prejudice', this is cold statistical reality. Actuarial realities don't yield to sentiment or a feeling of entitlement — they just are what they are. "
Thomas McCartney wrote on Feb 3, 2014 7:52 PM:
In 2010, San Bernardino County supervisors passed a similar ordinance for unincorporated areas of the county, such as Mentone. Owners of non-sterilized pit bulls can be fined $100 for the first offense, $200 for the second and $300 for subsequent offenses.
Highland and Yucaipa adopted the same ordinance, according to Brian Cronin, chief of the county's animal control division, which handles animal control in those two cities.
The San Bernardino County ordinance said pit bull breeds account for about 20 percent of the dogs at animal shelters and are put down more often than any other breed.
Cronin emailed figures showing the county's intake of pit bulls has decreased 28 percent since the ordinance took effect and that euthanization rates have dropped by 56 percent.
The ordinance was passed to reduce the number of dogs destroyed at taxpayer expense, Cronin said. "
Thomas McCartney wrote on Feb 3, 2014 7:53 PM:
"Since 1989, when that city instituted a pit bull ban, 'we haven't had one serious pit bull attack,' said Kory Nelson, a Denver assistant city attorney. His city's assertion that 'pit bulls are more dangerous than other breeds of dog' has withstood legal challenges, he said.
'We were able to prove there's a difference between pit bulls and other breeds of dogs that make pit bulls more dangerous,' he said."
Sources: Denver Post
In a November 2011, public health statistics published by Global Toronto showed that pit bull bites dropped dramatically after Ontario adopted the Dog Owners Liability Act in 2005, an act that banned pit bulls:
The number of dog bites reported in Toronto has fallen since a ban on pit bulls took effect in 2005, public health statistics show.
A total of 486 bites were recorded in 2005. That number fell generally in the six years following, to 379 in 2010.
Provincial laws that banned 'pit bulls,' defined as pit bulls, Staffordshire terriers, American Staffordshire terriers, American pit bull terriers and dogs resembling them took effect in August 2005. Existing dogs were required to be sterilized, and leashed and muzzled in public.
Bites in Toronto blamed on the four affected breeds fell sharply, from 71 in 2005 to only six in 2010. This accounts for most of the reduction in total bites.
Salina, KS
Rose Base, director of the Salina Animal Shelter who lobbied for the ordinance, told the Salina Journal:
The ordinance has made a difference, she said. Records at the Salina Animal Shelter indicate there were 24 reported pit bull bites in 2003 and 2004, and only five since -- none from 2009 to present.
Salina has 62 registered pit bulls, Base said. Before the ordinance she guessed there were "close to 300." Since the first of this year three of the registered pit bulls have died of old age.
"We definitely haven't had the severity of bites that we had in the past," Base said. "Our community has been somewhat safer because of the law that was passed
Prince George's County, MD
Prince George's County passed a pit bull ban in 1996. In August 2009, Rodney Taylor, associate director of the county's Animal Management Group, said that the number of pit bull biting incidents has fallen:
"Taylor said that during the first five to seven years of the ban, animal control officials would encounter an average of 1,200 pit bulls a year but that in recent years that figure has dropped by about half. According to county statistics, 36 pit bull bites, out of 619 total dog bites, were recorded in 2008, down from 95 pit bull bites, out of a total of 853, in 1996."
Salina KS (a second article)
Note that they admit that the pit bull ban did not reduce the number of bites, but it did reduce the severity of bites reported by all breeds. Proof that when pit bull deniers find a jurisdiction that banned pit bulls, but reported no decrease in overall bites, is a moot point. Its death and dismemberment we are focusing on, not bite counts.
In the monthly city newsletter, In Touch, published in September 2006, the City of Salina reported that the pit bull ban adopted in 2005 significantly reduced pit bull biting incidents in just a 12 month period.
The number of pit bull bites depicted in the "Salina Pit Bull Bites Reported" graph shows 2002 with 13 pit bull bites, 2003 with 11 pit bull bites, 2004 with 15 pit bull bites and 2005 with only one bite. The newsletter notes that "animal bites reported have remained constant, but the severity of bites have decreased dramatically" since the enactment of the pit bull ban.
Springfield, MO
In April 2008, the Springfield-Greene County Health Department released data to a local TV station - following the City of Springfield's adoption of a 2006 pit bull ban:
"The Springfield-Greene County Health Department reports that dog bites and vicious dog complaints are declining since the implementation of the Pit Bull Ordinance in the City of Springfield two years ago. In 2005 the health department fielded 18 vicious dog complaints, but only eight in 2007. Bites were down from 102 in 2005 to 87 in 2007."
In 2008, the City of Wapato passed an ordinance that bans new pit bulls, rottweilers and mastiffs. Nine months after its adoption, in March 2009, Wapato Police Chief Richard Sanchez reported successful results:
"Nine months into the ban and police calls about vicious dogs have been cut in half. The Wapato Police tell Action News they've gone from 18 reports in January, February and March of last year to seven so far in '09. "Seven calls in three months... that's nothing," says Chief Richard Sanchez, Wapato Police Department.
Chief Sanchez credits local cooperation for the decline of dangerous dogs."
Rhode Island
When the City of Woonsocket was debating a pit bull ordinance in June 2009, the animal control supervisor in Pawtucket, John Holmes, spoke about the enormous success of Pawtucket's 2003 pit bull ban:
"Holmes says he predicted that it would take two years for Pawtucket to experience the full benefit of the law after it was passed, but the results were actually apparent in half the time.
"It's working absolutely fantastic," said Holmes. "We have not had a pit bull maiming in the city since December of 2004."
Per section 8-55 of Denvers pit bull ban:
A pit bull, is defined as any dog that is an APBT, Am Staf Terrier, Staff Bull Terrier, or any dog displaying the majority of physical traits of anyone (1) or more of the above breeds, or any dog exhibiting those distinguishing characteristics which substantially conform to the standards set by the AKC or UKC for any of the above breed.
Over the course of 22 years, the Denver ban has withstood numerous battles in state and federal courts. It has been used as a model for over 600 USA cities that legislate pit bulls, as well as US Navy, Air Force, Marine and Army bases ( so much for Sgt Stubby).
without it, we'd see just what we see in Miss E's lame replies. Every pit owner would claim their land shark was anything but a pit bull.
Miami Dade county voted 66% to keep their pit bull ban, just as it is worded, last year. "
berry wrote on Feb 3, 2014 8:02 PM:
berry wrote on Feb 3, 2014 8:19 PM:
berry wrote on Feb 3, 2014 8:49 PM:
Thomas McCartney wrote on Feb 3, 2014 8:58 PM:
All dogs must be:
Or all dangerous dogs must be:
Or all dangerous molosser breeds, including pit bulls (Staffordshire bull terriers, American pit bull terriers, and any dog generally recognized as a pit bull or pit bull terrier and includes a dog of mixed breed with predominant pit bull or pit bull terrier characteristics), rottweilers, presa canarios, cane corsos, chow chows, Doberman pinschers, German shepherds, mastiffs, dogo argentinos, fila brasieros, and their mixes must be:
* Licensed
* Micro-chipped with any bite history in database
* Insured: All dogs must be covered by mandatory liability insurance of $100,000 min. generic and $500,000 after a skin breaking bite with insurance companies based on actuarial statistic's determining said rate.
* Spayed/neutered (except for limited approved show dog breeders)
* All breeds involved in any bite incident must be kenneled in a locked five-sided enclosure with concrete bottom.
For all other dog owners language can be written that enclosure such as fences must be capable of containing your dog period, such generic language puts the onus on the owner, have the fines be so onerous that said owner will ensure this they make this so.
1,000 the first time, double the second time and permanent confiscation the third time with a ban on said person from owning any dog within city limits, this will create an effective outcome directly or indirectly.
* All dogs must be on leashes outside of home enclosure
* All molosser breeds must also be muzzled outside of home enclosure
* No transport of declared dangerous dogs for the purpose of re-homing. (Dangerous dogs must be dealt with where their history is known.)
* All of the rules listed above also apply to rescues: rescued dogs must be licensed and subject to inspection.
$1,000 fine for noncompliance
Elimination of the one-bite rule in all of the 50 U.S. states
Manslaughter charges for owner of dog that kills a human
Felony charge for owner of dog that mauls human, dog, or other domestic animal "
Doreen McLouglan wrote on Feb 3, 2014 11:01 PM:
Debbie wrote on Feb 4, 2014 6:06 AM:
This group believes the following:
The National Canine Research Institute - a well respected, nationally recognized as the source for information of dog bites - is ALWAYS WRONG
The American Temperament Test ALWAYS WRONG (because these types of dogs tested well)
Behavorialists - ALWAYS WRONG
Trainers - WRONG
Shelter workers - WRONG
Rescue Groups - WRONG
The media - WRONG, unless they are spreading a negative story about a dog that may, or may not, have been a pit bull. If the story doesn't blame a pitbull, they are always certain the media is hiding something!
Who's Right in their eyes?
Themselves - even tho they have no experience, no training and no knowledge and use "statistics" that are grossly exaggerated.
DogBite - a website that is known by anyone who has a clue about dogs to be so incorrect with their findings that if it weren't important, you would consider the data comical!
and the media - when they are spreading a negative story about a pit bull type dog.
Oh - and of course they believe any muscular dog with a wide dog is a pit bull.
If you spend five minutes on their facebook page, you will see it's insane and not worth a second look. Ignore their outrageous comments - they aren't in this for public safety - they simply hate dogs and have nothing better to do!! Pretty sad. "
Sarah Mangam wrote on Feb 4, 2014 6:57 AM:
Oh wait, when children hurt or kill an animal isn't that the first stage of a serial killer. No remorse seems to be a non issue for this guy.
Here's a burning question the previous fire marshal can't extinguish, WHO THE HELL PUT YOU IN A POSITION OF POWER???
Dear Tom: I'd like to see you post a copy of your MBA on Animal Behavior Specializing in "Pit Bulls", since you can copy and paste every other post out there on the subject. Here are a few tips to keep in mind. 1. Of course the bites from pit bull type dogs have declined since enforcing a ban, the county kills ALL pit bull looking dogs, there aren't that many out there to do anything. 2. "Press" accounts and "Actual" accounts ARE NOT THE SAME. Any human knows most media stories get warped. 3. Here's the punchline, the nickname of these dogs is Pit "Bull" not Pit "Human". They were bred to take down bulls. Along with many other breeds that are not considered pit bull type dogs.
The Rating Game: according to the American Kennel Club this is another bull baiting dog or descendent of and that breeds popularity rating for 2013:
#5 - Bulldogs
#7 - Boxers
#11 - French Bulldogs
#23 - Boston Terriers
I'm going up to #23 only because there are already FOUR. You know Tom let's just ban these ones too, because they have the "potential" to be dangerous due to ancestry.
Ill do the right thing and site where I got this information akc.org/reg/dogreg_stats.cfm
Sent to you from my iPhone - while cuddling with a 65lb blue nosed pit that is maiming my face with wet kisses. "
Lisa wrote on Feb 4, 2014 10:33 AM:
Options for this story
This is what's on my mind: Yesterday on the front page of the Waterbury Republican a story, excuse me, a HORRIFIC story was ran about a Torrington Fire Chief who posted awful things about ways to kill and torture pit bulls. Yes, you heard me right. I am the very LUCKY owner of a 3 year old blue nose pit bull. He has been raised with nothing but love and compassion. Between my fiance and myself, we have 5, yes 5, children. This dog would be lost without our kids. We have a 6 year old tiny cat who is tougher than our dog. This wonderful pillar of our community believes these animals are born "bad" and "vicious". He doesn't believe it has anything do do with how they are handled or raised. Everywhere we go our dog makes friends because that's all he wants. Human contact. Hell, our postman loves him! The elderly people where my son works love this dog and look forward to seeing him once a week. The only time he barks is when someone knocks at the door and then when you're in be prepared to be licked and loved. These poor animals have gotten such a bad reputation from ignorant people that I am putting a challenge out to anyone who feels this way: Come meet Lycan. Be my guest. This dog rescued this entire family. I am pretty sure he could do the same for a few of you out there. "
KaD wrote on Feb 4, 2014 11:51 AM:
KaD wrote on Feb 4, 2014 11:53 AM:
KaD wrote on Feb 4, 2014 11:54 AM:
lu wrote on Feb 4, 2014 12:53 PM:
manifesto wrote on Feb 4, 2014 3:27 PM:
Anna wrote on Feb 4, 2014 4:20 PM:
I agree with Lu -humans are the one responsible for the actions!
Any one intentionally cruel to innocent animals is not far from being cruel to innocent children! "
Jennifer Christian wrote on Feb 4, 2014 5:20 PM:
IgnoranceIsUnbelievable wrote on Feb 4, 2014 8:04 PM:
Renee wrote on Feb 4, 2014 10:23 PM:
Larry wrote on Feb 4, 2014 10:26 PM:
YOUR the ignorant ones. These dogs bite people just for passing by. And unlike German Shepards, they don't just clamp down......they dig in and tear out, causing dangerous and often fatal wounds. \
But of course, your the ignorant ones. Who else would buy a dog that puts everyone else on edge. "
Linda wrote on Feb 5, 2014 7:49 AM:
The people that breed , fight these dogs, and mis- treat them are to blame for the issues. Not the dogs.
I think that the loser from Torrington who wants to creatively kill the pit bulls should just be dropped in a vat of hot acid. How's that for a creative idea? "
Debra Harding wrote on Feb 5, 2014 8:18 AM:
Sami6 wrote on Feb 5, 2014 9:10 AM:
Patrick wrote on Feb 5, 2014 9:36 AM:
Patrick wrote on Feb 5, 2014 9:40 AM:
kim wrote on Feb 5, 2014 10:10 AM:
Larry wrote on Feb 5, 2014 12:36 PM:
EMS people know, Emergency room people know, cops know, firemen know insurance companies know.....pretty much everyone knows except the ragingly inconsiderate pit bull owners themselves. "
KelseyM wrote on Feb 6, 2014 8:09 AM:
But since you're so great at "googling" all of your statistics, I'm surprised you haven't searched for the rate of people who have harmed animals that eventually go on to harm women and/or children.
Once again we have some moron who has CLEARLY stated he wants to harm a pitbull and still they are the ones at fault. You people are ignorant... "
linda wrote on Feb 6, 2014 10:27 AM:
conservative1 wrote on Feb 7, 2014 9:39 AM:
As far as this firefighter..What did he do wrong besides use the city owned computer? Can anybody here say they've NEVER used their employer's computer for personal use??
Because he gave instructions how to survive a pit bull attack?? When did that become a crime? To defend yourself from an attacking animal??
You pit bull owners are overreacting.
If he files a grievance, he will win his job and back pay back. I support him 100% "
conservative1 wrote on Feb 7, 2014 9:55 AM:
This is a danger emergency responders face every day in minority neighborhoods. "
Jessica W wrote on Feb 7, 2014 10:58 PM:
Dana wrote on Feb 9, 2014 9:37 AM:
pitbulls were bred as nanny dogs during the war to protect the women & children while the men were out fighting.
I have a pitbull/American bulldog mix & he was raised around a 7 year old, 3 year old & a chihuahua mix.
About a month ago he was attacked by a pack of 4 dogs, none were pitbulls. he did absolutely NOTHING to defend himself & people actually pulled over on the side of the road to help get them off. as soon as the lady grabbed all her dogs, the man that helped grab one of the dogs walked over to mine to see if he was okay & my dog was wagging his tail & licking him right after being attacked.
people need to educate themselves on these dogs instead of discriminate against them. my dog is big enough & strong enough to have been able to take on those dogs & defend himself but I did not TEACH him to be mean or defensive towards anyone. I have made sure that every experience he has with people or dogs was always a positive one & even with this one negative experience, he shrugged it off as if it never happened.
maybe there's things you need to learn from him. just because one dog attacked, doesn't mean they all will. judge each dog individually instead of grouping them together. "
ROY wrote on Feb 9, 2014 2:58 PM:
Hell no, Ban them, kill them, just get rid of them.
These animals do not belong in the civilized world.
Since they are licensed, publish the address of every pit bull dog in the state ....... "
conservative1 wrote on Feb 9, 2014 9:50 PM:
ROY wrote on Feb 10, 2014 9:50 AM:
Who knows, maybe 50% of the pit bulls are not licensed, just guessing....
So, taking your comment a step further, provide some incentive to whistle-blow the locations of known pit bulls to the Animal Control Officers so they can investigate the owner of pit bulls or, look up in their records to see if a pit bull lives at that address.
That ought to P!$$ off illegal owners.
I would be the first one to report any pitbull....... "
Becky Brinka wrote on Feb 11, 2014 8:05 PM:
Melissa W wrote on Feb 12, 2014 4:57 PM:
Stephanie wrote on Feb 12, 2014 11:23 PM:
chrystal wrote on Feb 13, 2014 7:52 AM:
He wrote not only how to kill the animal, but how to torture it and sodomize it. That's not defending yourself. This man is sick. And he didthis using the fire department computers and such- while he was supposed to be working. There is no free speech protection there. You are supposed to keep your ugliness to yourself while on *duty* in a job like this.
I would be terrified to have a creep like this coming in my home to "save" us. Would he let us die? would he let my children die just because we have a pitbull?
You have to maintain the trust of the public in a job like this. He failed to do so. "
Post a reader commentWe encourage your feedback and dialog.
Please be civil and respectful.
If you're witty, to the point and quotable, your reader comments may also be included on the Around the Towns page of The Sunday Republican.
Readers must be registered and logged in to post comments on the site. Registration is free. Click Here to register.
A Subscription is not required to post comments only a Registration.
Log In
|Register / Forgotten Password?
More Local stories
- Winsted church presents Boar's Head Festival
- Several business owners concerned about project
- Evening buses in jeopardy
- So far, Sunday liquor sales not filling state coffers
- Waterbury to mull $1.1M downtown greenway link
- Torrington in transition
- Liquor taxes collected
- Living Here: A lifetime of change
- Revaluation underway
- Historical honors
- Total recall of duty
- Supply business buying parcel as part of expansion
- Community theater, Act 1
- 10 school staff put on leave
- Cheshire gives company tax break on new building
- Metallic eagle sculptures stop traffic in Bethlehem
- Decker eyes 2nd run for Larson's seat
- Town workers OK contract
- Town ends fiscal year with increase in fund balance
- Unsolvable mystery
- Tax breaks are carving into state revenues
- State aims to make traveling safe in this week's frigid conditions
- Waste costs to be examined in New Hartford
- Getting every possible mile out of Southbury's vehicles
- Pomperaug grad stars on college team
- Portraits from then and now in Sharon
- Kent may borrow land fund idea from Goshen
- Full-day kindergarten considered in Cheshire
- Comments sought on proposals in Kent
- Winsted looking to get a handle on financial woes


text:
What are your best David Hasselhoff puns?
With this big ole witchhunt over the true identity of our new celebrity user, I figured we all could use a hoff or two of fresh air with a good-old punfest-- a punhoff, if you will-- just to you know, goof hoff a bit. All in fun, it's not a hoffularity contest and I don't want to tick anyone hoff too much, but I'm pretty sure these puns are nothing to schoff at.
9 Answers answer
Hoff puns are Hoff-ful.
Coming up with puns is a hofful hassel.
Don't hoffle the hass.
Anyone get anything good in the WootHoff?
Another recent addition, are you? This scenario is starting to seem hoff-fully familiar.....I have also seen you comment on other questions today, so I am curious....
I think the "Hoff Soap Dispenser" is great visual gag to inspire more puns:
I'm more concerned with the OP's username...
But only Hoff of me is genuinely worried about it
I went to the doctor because the pills he gave me were too strong so he prescribed me a Hoff dose.
There's been an Hofful lot of sock puppets around here lately.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Jonesville man charged with assault and battery
Published: Friday, November 16, 2012 at 10:29 p.m.
Last Modified: Friday, November 16, 2012 at 10:29 p.m.
Quenterious Dominique Jeter, 17, of 517 Forest St. in Jonesville, has been charged with assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature.
Jeter is accused of striking a male several times with a baseball bat, allowing several other people to assault the victim, on Nov. 9. The victim had to receive medical treatment at Wallace Thomson Hospital, according to an arrest warrant.
Reader comments posted to this article may be published in our print edition. All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not be re-published without permission. Links are encouraged.


text:
I'm reading the seminal "Monitors" paper by Hoare. On page 4 he proceeds with a logical proof using syntax I've never seen before, and neither know what it's called or how to properly read it.
... This gives the proof rule for waits:
g {b.wait} g & B
... Thus the proof rule for a signal is:
g & B{b.signal}g
How does one interpret this syntax? When I think of proofs I think of quantifiers and implications, of which I see none here.


text:
What are the risk factors that we need to consider while planning for a software project.
Sign up
- Anybody can ask a question
- Anybody can answer
- The best answers are voted up and rise to the top
I would add to @Graham's list:
I'd add the following:
Steve McConnell's Rapid Development contains a chapter on risk management, with a usefully long list of potential risks. I've used it as a starting point more than once.
Do you have the right mix of people? Are all your developers application developers in a data-centric project? Do you need a database designer, a QA person or a UI specialist instead of only hiring people with the same skill mix?
Do you have adequate hardware to support the project? This is especially true if you are creating a high volume system or if you are too cheap to buy development servers in addition to production servers.
Have you set up backups of your databases? Just having the code to recreate a database is not enough, you need to be keeping the data as well even on dev.
Are your developers working with a small data set instead of one the size that production will be? This almost guarantees production performance issues because queries that work well on a small data set often do not on a large set. I've seen a lot of failed production updates that had to be immediately rolled back due to this particular problem.
Are you defining what to do in edge cases and are you testing them? For instance, I've seen projects where nobody ever defined what happens what an approval is required and the approver says no.
Will you be forced into making bad design choices in order to meet unreasonable deadlines?
In your planning for the project did you consider that people take vacation and sick days, get jury duty, take bereavement leave etc? You need to plan not just for people leaving the project but for the day-to-day time off people get.


text:
Saint Pontius Pilate?
A few years ago I visited a wonderful little museum of Russian icons in Clinton, Massachusetts. One detail that caught my eye and intrigued me was a depiction of Pontius Pilate with a halo! This came back to me recently when I ran across a reference to Pilate as an accidental prophet. With his "Ecce Homo," he presented a mocked king, crowned with thorns, covered with welts and spittle, to a crowd clamoring for his crucifixion. "Behold the human condition," says Pilate, "this is what fallen man is—a pitiful caricature of the divine image." This is the king of the Jews.
Early Christianity went easy on Pilate. He was a protégé of Lucius Aelius Sejanus, a Roman noble who had by then practically become co-ruler with the emperor Tiberius. It was Sejanus who had Pilate named prefect of Judea in the year 26. Just a few years later, in October of the year 31, Sejanus was convicted of treason and executed. Pilate was recalled to Rome in 36 following the suppression of a Samaritan pilgrimage. Nothing certain is known of his subsequent career. Popular imagination filled in the gap. One tradition has Pilate committing suicide in his disgrace. Another has him testifying to Jesus before Tiberius (cf. the apocryphal Acts of Pilate) and eventually suffering martyrdom because of his testimony. The Gospel accounts are, in general, sympathetic to Pilate. He tries to save Jesus but is bullied by the priests and scribes and finally acquiesces. He does, however, proclaim Jesus the King of the Jews in the inscription on the Cross and refuses to backtrack. When Joseph of Arimathea asks for the body of Jesus, Pilate grants his request.
Tertullian invokes Pilate as a witness to the death and resurrection of Christ and of the truth of Christianity—and explains that this is why he is mentioned in the Nicean Creed. St. Augustine saw Pilate as a prophet of the Kingdom of God (cf. sermon 201). Hippolytus draws a parallel between Pilate and Daniel—in so far as both proclaim themselves absolved from the shedding of innocent blood (Daniel 14:40). Other Church Fathers likened Pilate to the Magi, who also recognized Jesus as King of the Jews. Pilate's wife is honored by the Greek Church on October 27. The Ethiopian Church venerates both Pilate and his wife on June 19.
What to make of all of this? Modern biblical scholars generally reject the patristic vindication of Pilate as a pious legend. They may be right. But perhaps the wisdom of the Church Fathers and the intuitions of popular piety see things on another level. All of our acts are mysteriously symbolic and interlinked in ways we cannot yet know but which will one day be made manifest. In Pilate, we seem to have a functionary who sympathizes with Jesus but has to operate within the limits of his responsibilities, who is uncertain of a truth that would complicate his duties and allegiances. He pulls out all the stops to save Jesus, whom he did not, of course, recognize as God. But who did? Not the Apostles, who had fled. Nor Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemas, who were simply trying to do the right and decent thing. Nor the good thief (cf. Peter Steinfels's Commonweal article on the Good Thief), nor the myrrh-bearing women. It may have been enough to have mercy on a dead and humiliated God, even if one is unaware of the hidden transcendence of this mercy.
About the Author
Jerry Ryan joined the Little Brothers of Jesus in 1959. He lived and worked with them for more than two decades in Europe and South America. He and his family now live in Massachusetts.
49 comments
- All
- Editor Featured
Well, one dimension of rescuing Pilate from total infamy (if not outright exonerating him) is that it redirects blame for jesus' execution from Rome and onto Jews.
To follow on Abe's point, one of the problematic aspects of this line of exegesis around Pilate's role in salvation history, is that is may not be historically accurate. Jewish scholarship from the time indicates that Pilate was notorius for executing Jewish criminals. So much in fact, that I have read where there is actual evidence that the emperor, Tiberius, had concerns over his governance of the area. Ironically, this fact is alluded to in Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ. Notwithstanding the fact that Gibson follows the intimation of the gospels in painting PIlate in a favourable light.
In other words, the historical Pilate did not have any panges of conscience or problems with executing someone who he thought might be innocent. That he causes trouble is good enough reason. And he hardly required prompting/manipulation from a Jewish mob.
Now maybe, just maybe, his wife became a convert, maybe she had doubts, and maybe Pilate changed his view in time. But even if we allow some truth to that tradition, that does not mean that the gospel account is historically accurate.Nor does it mean that the hagigoraphy of Pilate is justified from either a historical or theological point of view.
And, yes, the question of who is responsible for the death of Jesus is an important historical question. Paula Fredriksen wrote a good book on this. There is no doubt that the Jewish leadership was involved but the Romans were not blameless and PIlate in particular was hardly this waffling leader who washed his hands of the whole affair (an action by the way which only occurs in one gospel).
Years ago when I was in grammar school I heard about Pontius Pilate. I developed an instant empathy for him. I asked my sixth grade nun if she thought that he was in Purgatory. She told me that she did not know. I thought he must be in Purgatory, so I started to offer up indulgences for his soul.
When I approach the pearly gates I am hoping that he remembers me and tells S. Peter: "Let her in. One good turn deserves another."
Even though the execution was carried out by foreign occupiers, is it really redirecting blame to emphasize that Jesus was killed by his own people? That seems like an important part of the story.
Dante puts Pontius Pilate on the outskirts of hell, I think.
I have much sympathy for his question: "What is truth?"
Irene, I think it is an important part of the story, but the point is in recognizing the rhetorical dimensions of the story, as well as their potential consequences. When the story is collapsed into and equated with history, then there is a tendency to withdraw from critically engaging with the narrative as something with its own agendas. So let's say that the story emphasizes that Rome (freaking Rome!) is somehow reluctantly cowed into doing the dirty work of its colonized people, and let's say that this story's representation is made even more extreme in later readings (Pilate as saint or quasi-saint)--well, what is strategy behind that kind of representation? And what is the fallout?
I think that the latter element (later readings and subsequent fallout) is key. The story's agenda, if it's even accessible, won't necessarily be the agenda of later readings and retellings. A narrative may be engaged in some complex negotiations of power dynamics within a culture (e.g., 1st Century Judaism), or between cultures (e.g., between the early Jesus movement and Rome), or it may incorporate some pretty nuanced engagements with theological traditions (e.g., Matthew 27:25)--and yet, all of that complexity and nuance can get hammered into something pretty thin subsequently (deicidal Jews and saintly imperial agents). You don't have to do much reading in Commonweal's comments before you encounter some sledgehammer remark about group X being Pharisees, if you're looking for a nice example of uncritical appropriation of a complicated trope in the gospel narrative.
In Inferno III, there is a character who made the "great refusal" through cowardice and an unwillingness to take sides, and is therefore among those rejected not only by Heaven, but by Hell itself. But though some have thought this to be Pilate, I think the general opinion is that it's Celestine V, whose resignation from the papacy opened the way to Boniface VIII, Dante's bête noire. Somewhere in Purgatorio, Philip IV of France is likened to Pilate in his arrest of Boniface -- not, of course, that Boniface was a great guy in Dante's book, but the poet nevertheless revered the office.
(Agree (as usual), Abe. Calling people Pharisees reveals more about the caller than about the callee.)
As to "St." Pontius Pilate? I don't think there's much danger of his cultus attracting many Roman Catholics. Too many other saints we're required to venerate, and many of them make it hard to summon up the requisite latria.
(Today's the feast of St. Ursula. The Company named for her by St. Angela became the Order of St. Ursula. They've educated and rescued women and girls for nearly five centuries. The Ursulines were the first nuns to come to North America. A good day to send some thanks heavenward and to ask for their powerful intercession.)
(Sorry, I meant dulia, not latria.)
Maybe I was privileged to grow up in the post-conciliar environment, but the question of whether the Jews or the Romans were accountable never held much interest for me. The question of the Passion narrative that we read in the voice of both Romans and Jews every year asks what witness we would've given had we been there. Who killed Jesus? Potentially, any of us. Even the First among the Apostles could deny Him. So, why bully the Jews or Pilate because they had the misfortune to be put on the spot (and, while we've been let off the hook comparatively easily)? Other criticisms notwithstanding, something I love about The Last Temptation of Christ is the portrayal of Pilate (wonderfullly brought to life on film, I think, by David Bowie) as a bored Roman bureaucrat who has no inkling he's caught up in the climactic moment of salvation history. Isn't that any of us? Grace sits before us, but our whinnying horse in the distance calls us to something we think is more important. Neither necessarily saint nor sinner, Pilate is us.
I don't know--I'm pretty suspicious of reading ancient texts through a "this is about me/us" lens. I guess that that sort of reading may have its place and time (for devotional or meditational purposes?), but it probably shouldn't be let out of its cage very often.
The "it was we who killed Jesus" take is a line that in one form or another gets trotted out pretty predictably when the discussion of guilt for the crucifixion is at hand. I think it's a bit of a dodge—and at that, it's a dodge unavailable to the group most often blamed (and punished) for the crucifixion, for Jews do not buy into the notion that Jesus' death was the consequence of some sort of shared sin.
This 'Pilate was actually a good guy' stuff is a bit creepy as well as historically incorrect, and I think part of letting Pilate off the hook has had to do with blaming the Jews for Jesus' death. Here's a quote from Adolf Hitler that can be found in an article by JD Crossan ("Who Killed Jesus?" ... http://www.beliefnet.com/Faiths/Christianity/2003/04/Who-Killed-Jesus.as... ) ....
It is vital that the Passion Play be continued at Oberammergau; for never has the menace of Jewry been so convincingly portrayed as in this presentation of what happened in the times of the Romans. There one sees in Pontius Pilate a Roman racially and intellectually so superior, that he stands out like a firm, clean rock in the middle of the whole muck and mire of Jewry."
Adolf Hitler (July 5, 1942)
Isn't the Catholic (and, in general, the Christian) view that it was all part of a divine plan for Jesus to be killed? Certainly according to the Gospels (especially John) it was "the Jews" who wanted Jesus killed, but they delivered him to the Romans, and the Romans killed him.
The events don't truly get set in motion until after Jesus prays, "Father, if you are willing, take this cup away from me; still, not my will but yours be done." So what is going to happen, no matter the roles played by the Jews and the Romans, is what "the Father" wants to happen. It is all foreordained. It has been foreordained (according to the Christian view) throughout Old Testament times, as attested to by numerous verses that the authors of the Gospels claim are "fulfilled."
If he hadn't had Jesus crucified, Pilate would have thrown off the entire plan. Did Pilate even have a choice?
Here's a bit more about Pilate from Ctossan's book, "Who is Jesus?", in which he mentions the bad stuff that Jewish writers Philo and Josephys said about Pilate ... http://www.amazon.com/Who-Jesus-Answers-Questions-Historical/dp/0664258425 ...
In the New Testament accounts ... Pilate is portrayed as being completely just and fair, desiring to acquit Jesus but forced reluctantly and against his will to crucify him because of the insistence of Jewish authorities and the Jerusalem crowd. But what we have learned about Pontius Pilate from other records is totally at variance with that benign picture. We know quite a bit about the historical Pilate. We have archaeological as well as literary evidence for Pilate ...
[A]fter the disaster of the first Roman-Jewish War, Christians were becoming more and more marginalized as a force within Judaism and were becoming less and less likely to attain the leadership of their own people. The future would lie with Rabbinic Judaism and not Christian Judaism. As described by Mark in the 70s, Jesus' enemies at the crucifixion are "the crowd" from Jerusalem. By Matthew in the 80s, that crowd has grown to "all the people." And by John in the 90s, it has become, quite simply, "the Jews" ....
None of that process, even in its nastiest name-calling, made much difference in the second or the third centuries when Christianity, though by then a religion distinct from Judaism, had no power of reprisal. But in the fourth century, when the Roman empire became officially Christian, those very same crucifixion stories took on the meaning of Christians accusing Jews, and began the long and lethal process that prepared Europe for the Holocaust in the terrible fullness of time.
Sotty - that last paragraph should have been in italics.
I struggle to understand what reasoning allows a person to seriously consider a person, a group, an event or a series of events could have altered the course of Christ's life. If God and Christ were not in charge during Christ's life on earth the bulk of Christianity hardly makes much sense. IMHO, at its core Christianity did and does represent a significant break with notions suggestive of a remarkably unmerciful and all too often revengeful God. Christ's life and death were not in anyway a call to reversing that break. Blame whom you like. The point is not to repeat the event.
Pilate is portrayed as being completely just and fair
I don't see that at all. In the New Testament, he is the one who refuses to do what is right in spite of knowing that it is right and of having the power to do it. What good does it do him to know what is just, if he does not act upon it in spite of having power? He is not righteous. I don't see that as "begnin" at all.
If Pilate were to make it as a saint he would have been better off living in the third or fourth century. At that time people were good at making up stories and claiming fame by possessing their saint. The relics of the true cross multiplied a million fold and Martin of Tour's body was unabashedly venerated in at least ten locations. And Paulinus of Nola would have built him a basilica that would have been for the ages. Even Abe's Pharisees would have had a chance.
If you remove the theological considerations, it really is a puzzle as to why Jesus was killed in the first place. Certainly, the fact that his death was by crucifixion clearly points to the fact that he was viewed as an insurrectionist and a threat to Roman power. But there really is nothing in his teaching that is actually seditious.
But the puzzlement is that if you take the political revolutionary lead, why was he the only one that was killed? Why not go all the way and clean house and take all of his closest followers.
And if you take the real reason was because of inter-religious squabbling between he and Jewish leaders, why would Pilate have even cared?
But nothing can change the central fact that Pilate had to have give the order.
I just don't know, given his history, why the authors of the gospel treated him quasi-sympathetically.
In any case, it is the Orthodox who seem to push for this whole canonization thing. I am close to much of Orthodox spirituality but on some things, I just think they go off the rails. This is one example and their tendency to canonize Old Testament figures in another. They are great on allegory and the spiritual sense but this is a bit much.
It seems to me that there was a collusion of events. If the religious leaders had not plotted against him, if the crowd sentiment had shifted, or if Pilate had done the right thing, the crucifixion would not have happened at that time. Things needed to come together in just the right way, or rather, in just the wrong way, and all parties share responsibility. It's the kind of unlucky alignment that makes one think of Satan.
When the story is collapsed into and equated with history, then there is a tendency to withdraw from critically engaging with the narrative as something with its own agendas.
Quite so, but what to do? So the historical Pilate had a very different personality from the one portrayed in the Gospels. But when we read them, are we not engaging in the text in such a way that it is hard to distantiate ourselves from it? It's easy to beware of the writer's perspective when we are merely reading a text for information, but when we try to live it, to let it speak to us, isn't it, in a way, counterproductive to be critical?
Maybe it is a bit like listening to a friend telling us about his problems at work. We listen sympathetically, and there is a small voice in the back of our head warning us that what we're hearing is his side of the story, but as we are giving him our full attention and sympathy, yes, there is a tendency to "withdraw from critically engaging with his narrative", but I'm not sure I know how to hold both views at once (what I'm hearing from him, and what I suspect may have happened) and at the same time be in full empathy.
So I recognize that tendency, but am not sure what to make of it. If we step up from the narrative to consider the writer's biases and try to account for them, then where does that lead us in terms of prayerful reading?
It's one thing I enjoy, when I read a paragraph, every now and then, by the fathers of the Church: the freedom with which they embrace the texts and let them lead them to new ideas. They are not afraid of reading what is not there, interpreting according to their own lights, and I find it very rich and colorful, very lively; I also trust that, because they are immersed in biblical texts, their sometimes seemingly whimsical thinking will be essentially correct, most of the time. I think that there is value in their reflections; even when they ignore historical facts, they still give us insights. But I don't know how to do a lively reading that is constrained by historical facts.
" isn't it, in a way, counterproductive to be critical?"
The bottom line about our religious life should be 'truth' I'd think. Otherwise all we're doing is participating in a fantasy.
Recently I was presenting a mathematical result to some friends. I gave a proof that was intuitive but incorrect; exhibited the subtle hidden flaw; and showed the corrected proof, that was more technical. One friend commented: "I prefer the incorrect proof", meaning that it conveyed more intuition about the mathematical structure. In that way, paradoxically the incorrect proof revealed more truth than the less transparent correct proof.
That is, our own reaction to the text is also part of what 'truth' is.
If truth is defined as anything but an accurate representation of facts, it becomes "truthiness" ;) Wikipedia ...
"Truthiness is a quality characterizing a "truth" that a person making an argument or assertion claims to know intuitively "from the gut" or because it "feels right" without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts."
Something not factual can sometimes actually have more meaning for us than what's factual, but that isn't the same as saying it's true.
Claire, I would hate to fly in an airplane designed with your intuitive but incorrect truth.
To the bigger point: Our church has the Stations of the Cross in painted glass where other churches have scenes from the life of Jesus and/or Mary or abstract art. Because of the architecture of the building, the first and last stations are the tallest windows. So I have Pilate constantly in front of me, washing his hands with his sleeves rolled up, a slave holding the water jug, a scowling soldier standing behind him, and Jesus, with hands bound and a crown of thorns, standing before him. Pilate's expression is more troubled than angry. I have spent a lot of time trying to figure out what he is thinking, and I have arrived at a conclusion:
I'll never know.
Claire, I just do not think that it is ethically possible to engage with the Bible and Scripture without allowing for the tension that must arise between the text's claims, its context, and its consequences. I suspect that that probably does reduce its spiritual potential, at least at first blush--but, like I said, I'm not sure of an ethical alternative. We allow the needs of others to impinge upon our own convenience in so many other areas, because to do otherwise would be selfish--I do not think that spiritual practice, including Bible-reading, is any different. It is convenient, to use my earlier example, to be able to use "pharisee" as shorthand for "hypocrite" and so forth, but it is not ethical.
I don't think I'm talking about anything that requires much more than awareness: this text teaches this, BUT..." Being aware of the BUT doesn't necessarily mean that you can't let the text teach you, but it will affect how you integrate its lesson into your understanding of things.
(above, first line: * engage with the the Bible as Scripture...")
Crystal: I, too, hate "truthiness".
Tom: fortunately for everyone, I am not an engineer.
Abe: thanks. Food for thought.
I once told my Jewish boss about the nuns in parochial school who told their pupils that every sin they committed increased Jesus's agony on the cross. My boss was appalled--and being Jewish, she's not exactly unfamiliar with adults who lay guilt trips on children.
Once again, don't Christians believe that the death of Jesus by crucifixion was planned?
Also, the day Jesus was crucified is known as Good Friday.
The horror of the crucifixion proceeds because "the Father" wants it to go forward. Jesus prays that, if possible, it should not happen, but then says, "Not my will, but yours." It seems to me that the idea that "the Father" wanted Jesus to be crucified is one of the fundamental beliefs of Christianity.
Comic Relief:
One day in Sunday School the children were asked to draw a picture of what they had learned. The teacher looked at one of the results: it was a passenger jet with a pilot and what was obviously the Holy Family in the back. The teacher exclaimed: "That's not in the Bible!" The child answered: "Yes, it is! That's Pontius the Pilot and this is the flight to Egypt!
But I don't know how to do a lively reading that is constrained by historical facts.
Well you can. But, I think it is a far too lively reading to canonize Pilate and this is the point of the thread. That his position is ambiguous, as is the postion many Jewish leaders.
It seems to me that Rabbi Gamaliel due to his stance towards the burgeoning Christian community is more worthy of veneration that Pilate.
George, I agree.
Welocme to the world of post-modernism, folks. We just can't get away from ambiguity, can we.
Ambiguity does not require or indicate post-modernism.
Certainly a central question for our time, and all time. I have heard alternative translations, "What truth?", and "Which truth?", all of which resonate with me. Recently, while I am pondering John Haught and remembering Teilhard, I learned that my 16 year old grandson, a student in a Catholic high school, has a copy of a recent Dawkins book, gifted by his parents. So maybe we should see Pilate in the context of our both/and traditions, perhaps as the iconographers and evangelists.
Abe --
Post-modernism recognizes that the ambiguity of language implies that meanings are never sure -- the meanings we find in texts are our own meanings and not necessarily those of the writer or speaker. Further, it isn't possible to know whether our interpretations of texts of other speakers in other contexts have any degree of accuracy. It's why the post-modernists laugh scornfully the New Critics and all their talk of "close readings of the text". There is no necessary relationship between word and meaning, there is no "the meaning" of a text because all texts are ambiguous.
Well, that's a pretty handy digest, Ann. Mind if I use it in a powerpoint some day? I was not denying the place of ambiguity in post-modernism, only that that was a lens anyone had explicitly called for in this particular discussion of how to read the Bible; in fact, if anything, I suspect there has been a call for a basic, preliminary, and thoroughly modern application of historical and rhetorical study.
But the "text" (and everything we encounter is text that we have to read and interpret) does exist. It is a tangible thing and it is the data upon which we base our meanings. The debate then is really a debate around meanings of texts and there certainly can be alternate meanings of "texts" and those meanings have real world implications.
Take the Pilate episode as recounted in the gospels. Even the gospel writers disagree or find alternatives representations of the figure of Pilate and his role.
At any rate 2000 years later we are discussing this after layers of history and mythologies.
All of that said, there has to be by necessity, a relationship between the reader(s) and the text. Afterall it is the same text so there is at least a common referent.
George D. --
I think you're looking for a sort of necessary relationship among the words in a texts (physical marks) that a doesn't exist.
When we have reason to think we're speaking a common language, there are at least several things involved: 1) individual words, 2) mental meanings of individual words, 3) meanings conveyed by the sequence of words/marks, which sequence itself conveys meaning besides the mental meanings of individual words, and 4) rules for sequencing the individual words. 3. and 4. are illustrated clearly by the difference between the headlines "Dog Bites Man" and "Man Bites Dog". In the latter headline the position/sequence of the nouns has changed according to a pre-established rule concerning subjects, and the meaning of the two sentences becomes quite different because of the sequence.
The only necessary element involved is the *rules* of the language being spoken, but the rules can be changed and, obviously syntactical rules differ from language to language. The point is that the "necessity" of linguistic rules is only a matter of what we agree to -- that, e.g., in English subjects come first (usually) and the subject position itself *show* what the subject is. But that is a weak sort of necessity which depends only on our wills -- our choice that that will be the rule. There is no necessary relationship between "dog" or "man" and their positions in a sentence. (The scholastics had a phrase for this sort of necessity -- "consequent necessity".)
Because the rules can change, even the rules we decide to use can change, yielding an ambiguous statement unless you tell the other person that you have decided to use a different rule. (But *that* statement would also be intrinsically ambiguous, so we can get into an infinite regress.).
Yes, there is usually (we hope, but only hope) a common set of rules for interpreting the syntactical position of words (the marks), but that happens only when and if we have already agreed on those rules. Once agreed upon we can then go on to interpret with a bit of confidence, but never complete confidence.
Pragmatically, language systems do work, but there is always the possibility that a given sentence is not being interpreted as the speaker would wish it to be. (Including the last sentence before this non-sentence :-)
Most interesting as usual.
However, very theoretical. In the "real" world, the rules of language and meaning are imposed upon us and we have to work within those rules and we judge those who do not mentally ill or it is a symptom of a mental illness. We really do not have the power, even if we want to, to change that.
Let me give you a concrete example and link it back to an earlier thread around schizophrenia. When I first got into the field of mental health I worked In a kind of drop in centre so very close to the people we served. It was not really a clinical service but more of a grass roots kind of housing and support place. It was not, at that time, part of the professional "system".
When I started I knew very little about mental illness but I met one guy who frequently spoke in what would be described as word salad. But here is the kicker, once you got to know him, he was actually quite coherent. Those seemingly random phrases were allusions to feelings or situations and were code about what was happening or how he was feeling. And you could have a conversation and get what he was saying. It was not just me, anybody who spent any length of time with him, could pic up. His code.
Now, this guy commited no crime, was not a threat or danger to anybody including himself. But he was medicated to manage his sympoms which didn't work at caused wicked side effects (tardive dyskinesia).
i also read that James Joyce had a daughter who was psychotic and only he could understand her. He wrote finnegans wake to her one theory goes.
The point is that language and the use of language is not completely free, it has it's own rules and we are required to operate within those rules in order to exist in society. If we do not, we are literally segregated and "cured". In reality, people do not have the right to negotiate their own meanings.
George D ==
Fascinating. You obviously picked up certain patterns in the man's speech. Wonder what they were. Did he mainly leave out the "is" words? Did he mainly express emotions? Lots of emotionl language doesn't follow some of the simplest forms of patterns (S is P, S x-es Q) . Tell me exactly what "Wow!" says! It's not a narrative, that's for sure. But logic isn't about that sort of language use, It's about assertions and denials. Schizophrenics run into trouble with that sort of speech -- they characteristically don't/can't follow the rule that says you can't both affirm and deny the same thing, In fact, doing that is a clear sign of psychosis -- saying that, e.g., Jack is Jill (i.e., Jack is and isn't himself).
What is fascinating, to me at any rate, is how language indicates thought process. Now we can, and do, clinically label th thought process as loosening of associations, flight of ideas, tangentiality, etc. ( I have included a link I provide to students that shows really good examples of actresses illustrating what these sound and look like (just click on the thought process button and the list is below.):
The problem is simply because somebody has thought processes and loosely associated language patterns and/or tangential ones, that does not meant the person has a mental "illness". Check out this video of the poet, Saul Williams, reciting his poem "Coded Language". If you were to see him talking like this on the street with the affect that he is showing at the def poetry jam he would without question resemble any street person you might encounter in any number of shelters. And yet when you listen to the whole poem, there is clearly a logic and coherence and vision. But it is expressed in a way that is reminiscent of loose associations, flight of ideas, tangent. But it is beautiful and not ill.
Killed by his own people? No, sentenced and executed by the Romans, and it's right there in the Gospels, who were infamous for crucifixion as a terrot tactic. As for the blanket "rejected by the Jews" or "killed by the Jews," who were the thousands of people following him around, reverencing him, aching to hear what he had to say, celebrating his entrance into Jerusalem?
George D. =
Thanks for the sites, but I can't read the first one because my computer refuses to enlarge it, and I can't hear the second one. Sigh.
From what you say, the word salads of your friends seem to be language problems only -- mis-associations of sign and signified. But some schizophrenic thinking is not simply a matter of switching the meanings of words. It's a failure to grasp logical/real relationships. Very, very sad. I went into the subject when I started a paper on the logical errors in Nijinsky's Diaries (never finished it). He makes the errors in classification which are typical of schizophrenics, but he also makes some other ones. His grasp of metaphysical principles (e.g., a thing is not other than itself) also breaks down. He was REALLY crazy, poor man. What a tragedy.
Here is the text of his poem. His recital has a kind of rapid fire approach and his affect drives home the point. The allusions and connections are remote but taken as a whole and in the entire context, the meaning is clear. Where is the boundary point between schizophrenia, poetry. And what do you think of the post-structuralist and their play of language and meaning?
Whereas break beats have been the missing link
Connecting the Diasporic community to its drum woven past
Whereas the quantized drum has allowed the whirling
Mathematicians to calculate the ever changing distance
Between rock and stardom
Whereas the velocity of the spinning vinyl
Cross faded, spun backwards and re-released
At the same given moment of recorded history
Yet at a different moment in times continuum
Has allowed history, to catch up with the present
We do hereby declare reality unkempt by the changing
Standards of dialog, statements such as 'Keep it real'
Especially when punctuating or anticipating modes
Of ultra-violence inflicted psychologically or physically or depicting
An unchanging rule of events will hence forth be seen as retro-active
And not representative of the individually determined is
Furthermore, as determined by the collective consciousness
Of this state of being and the lessened distance
Between thought patterns and their secular manifestations
The role of men as listening receptacles is to be increased by a number
No less than 70 percent of the current enlisted as vocal aggressors
Motherfuckers better realize now is the time to self-actualize
We have found evidence that Hip Hops standard 85 RPM
When increased by a number as least half the rate of it's standard
Or decreased at three quarters of it's speed
May be a determining factor in heightening consciousness
Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face
Of the unchanging the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth
Equate rhyme with reason, sun with season, our cyclical relationship
To phenomenon has encouraged scholars
To erase the centers of periods thus symbolizing the non-linear
Character of 'cause and effect reject mediocrity
Your current frequencies of understanding outweigh that
Which as been given for you to understand
The current standard is the equivalent
Of an adolescent restricted to the diet of an infant
The rapidly changing body would acquire dysfunctional
And deformative symptoms and could not properly mature
On a diet of apple sauce and crushed pears
Light years are interchangeable with years of living in darkness
The role of darkness is not to be seen as or equated with ignorance
But with the unknown and the mysteries of the unseen
Thus, in the name of
Robeson, God's Son, Hurston, Ahkenaton
Hathsheput, Blackfoot, Helen, Lennon, Khalo
Kali, The Three Maria's, Tara, Lilithe, Lourde
Whitman, Baldwin, Ginsberg, Kaufman, Lumumba
Ghandi, Gibran, Shabazz, Shabazz, Siddhartha
Medusa, Guevara, Gurdsieff, Rand, Wright, Banneker
Tubman, Hamer, Holiday, Davis, Coltrane
Morrison, Joplin, Dubois, Clarke, Shakespeare
Rachmninov, Ellington, Carter, Gaye, Hathoway
Hendrix, Kutl, Dickerson, Ripperton, Mary, Isis
Theresa, Hensbury, Justlove, Plath, Rumi, Fellini
Michaux, Nostradamus, Nefertiti, La Rock, Shiva
Ganesha, Yemaja, Oshun, Obatala, Ogun, Kennedy
King, Four Little Girls, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Keller
Biko, Perone, Marley, Magalin, Cosby, Shakur
Those who burnt, those still aflamed and the countless unnamed
We claim the present as the pre-sent, as the hereafter
We are unraveling our navels so that we may ingest the sun
We are not afraid of the darkness, we trust that the moon shall guide us
We are determining the future at this very moment
We now know that the heart is the philosophers' stone
Our music is our alchemy, we stand as the manifested
Equivalent of three buckets of water and a hand full of minerals
Thus realizing that those very buckets turned upside down
Supply the percussion factor of forever, if you must count
To keep the beat then count
Find you mantra and awaken your subconscious
Curve you circles counterclockwise, use your cipher to decipher
Coded Language, man made laws, climb waterfalls and trees
Commune with nature, snakes and bees let your children
Name themselves and claim themselves as the new day, for today
We are determined to be the channelers of these changing
Frequencies into songs, paintings, writings, dance, drama
Photography, carpentry, crafts, love and love, we enlist every instrument
Acoustic, electronic every so called race, gender and sexual preference
Every person as beings of sound to acknowledge their responsibility
To uplift the consciousness of the entire fucking world
Any utterance unaimed will be disclaimed
Will be named Two Rappers Slain
Any utterance unaimed will be disclaimed
Will be named Two Rappers Slain
George D. ==
I read the poem fast, and I"m not sure what Williams meant by all of this, but a lot of it makes perfectly good sense as it contrasts different metaphors of how the world is organized. Some of it, however, doesn't make sense, and ISTM there is no way to tell from the work itself just what Williams was intending by these parts, except that the title, "Coded Language" might mean (it's ambiguous) that it is purposely presenting a riddle in contradictory form of some sort or hidden inexplicable point or maybe just the ramblings of his imagination.
How do you tell poetry from other language uses? Well, there are any number of definitions or descriptions. We can describe the classical kind of Western poetry as rhythmic and or rhymed speech which conveys messages and uses a lot of expressive sounds as well as many metaphors and similes to convey meaning. The meanings themselves are not intended to break any of the common rules o grammar and thought, though some poets do stretch the rules sometimes (putting a subject last, for instance).
But a great deal of modern poetry is different. It isn't always meant to convey messages or descriptions. Some of it is the presentation of images that might or might not *say* anything, but rather are simply meant to *cause a particular experience in the reader*. Or at least that's how I understand what the Symbolists and Imagists and those who derive from them are trying to do. Specifically, one of the so-called "objective correlative" theories holds that it is the function of poetry to cause the reader to experience *the feeling(s) of the poet" by presenting images and sounds and rhythms, etc. . Such poems don't need to make any sense at all because they're not trying to say what is so or not so, they're just trying to make us feel something, and feelings aren't true or false, they're only pleasant or unpleasant.
I must admit, however, that some of the stuff that is called poetry these days is just thoroughly incoherent to me without causing any feeling in me except maybe wondering at why the "poet" thought he/she could communicate anything at all by the "poem". Too often they're just collections of odd images or juxtapositions of words and phrases which are connected somehow in the poet's mind but which have no connection to other people's lives at all. On the other hand, it's quite possible that these poets who seem to be uttering gibberish to me are conveying something to other people who have shared their lives somehow and can find the meaning or feeling the poet means to convey. In that sense, poetry is indeed subjective and can be successful at what it's meant to do..
Think of, "Oh, they're playing *our song*, where the memory/image of that song will inspire some very pleasant feelings when the other person remembers the song. That's an essentially poetic use of the song -- it's the song causing shared feeling in two people, so it's a poetic experience in that sense of "poetry".
An interesting New Testament passage that is often overlooked regarding Pontius Pliate is as follows:
There were present at that season some that told him (Jesus) of the Galilaeans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. (Luke 13:1)
Add to this the fact that Jesus was considered Galilean because he grew up and lived in Galilee mostly. This is interesting as the only NT passage that actually shows Pilate's bloodthirsty cruelty.
Also note: When Pilate heard of Galilee, he asked whether the man (Jesus) were a Galilaean. (Luke 23:6)
And the same day Pilate and Herod were made friends together: for before they were at enmity between themselves. (Luke 23:12).


text:
Kent Town children benefit from clothing drive
Leah Pullaro, Social Services Director
On behalf of the town of Kent, I would like to thank Kathy Thomas and the United Way of Western Connecticut for coordinating the Back to School Clothes for Kids campaign again this year. Kathy's hard work and commitment to this program is exemplary. Thirty-five Kent children received beautiful school clothing, shoes, winter coats and backpacks filled with school supplies. I would like to express our appreciation to all the individuals, groups and businesses who sponsored a child. Our community, children and parents wish to thank each of you for all your efforts to make the first day of school such a positive experience.
Read more of this story and more!
7-Day Subscribers have FREE access to everything on rep-am.com and our E-Edition.
CLICK HERE to register and activate your access,.
Not a subscriber?
You can purchase a single-day subscription for only $0.75 to read this and access all of our content and our E-Edition.
CLICK HERE purchase a single day subscription.
Become an electronic subscriber to the Republican-American for only $8 a month. CLICK HERE.
Follow Us
Post a reader commentWe encourage your feedback and dialog.
Please be civil and respectful.
If you're witty, to the point and quotable, your reader comments may also be included on the Around the Towns page of The Sunday Republican.
Readers must be registered and logged in to post comments on the site. Registration is free. Click Here to register.
A Subscription is not required to post comments only a Registration.
Log In
|Register / Forgotten Password?
More stories from Yourpage
- Union victory at Baton Rouge!
- Derby Scouts from Ireland thank host families
- Waterbury Quilts being given to cancer patients
- Contributed Bank backs St. Vincent DePaul
- Thomaston Electric scoreboard a welcome addition
- Washington, Conn. World-class classical music returns
- Kent Town children benefit from clothing drive
- Waterbury Friends of Saint Anne renew fundraising for Shrine's restoration
- Transplant finds Connecticut has much to be proud of
- A week of continuous battles.


text:
Benghazi Disinformation Points
Jay Carney seems to have forgotten the meaning of the word 'edit.'
Friday's revelation that the Obama Administration's talking points on Benghazi were revised a dozen times adds another reason not to trust the official story line. It also gives Congress new cause to keep digging.
Jonathan Karl of ABC News disclosed that the talking points evolved over time to exclude references to terrorists who might have participated in the attacks that killed four Americans last September in Libya. The first iteration on Friday September 14 prepared by the CIA said that "we do know that Islamic extremists with ties to al-Qa'ida participated in the attack."
After the twelfth edit a day later, the report merely said that "there are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations." This change had the effect of underplaying potential terror involvement and made it easier for U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice to pitch the line that the attacks resulted from reaction to a YouTube video.
Related Video
Mr. Karl also reported that the editing included substantial input from the State Department and others in government. This certainly contradicts the assurance from White House spokesman Jay Carney on November 28, 2012 that, "Those talking points originated from the intelligence community. They reflect the IC's best assessments of what they thought had happened."
Mr. Carney added that, "The White House and the State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two, of these two institutions were changing the word 'consulate' to 'diplomatic facility' because 'consulate' was inaccurate."
Strangely, Mr. Carney is sticking with that story, claiming now that everyone knows that talking points always get routine interagency scrutiny and editing. A former journalist, Mr. Carney may have been in politics so long that he has forgotten when public officials begin to sound ridiculous.
The upshot is that the Benghazi story has new legs, despite the best efforts of White House allies in the media to dismiss it. House intelligence committee Chairman Mike Rogers said on Fox News Sunday that more "whistleblowers" with knowledge of what happened may come forward.
One issue worth more examination is which U.S. and NATO military assets were available in the region to respond to the attack, and why they didn't. The White House and Pentagon insist there was nothing within range that would have made a difference, but we also know that military officers respond to the political tone that civilian officials set at the top.
Did the well-known White House desire to retreat from Libya influence the ability and willingness of military officials to respond in real time? The lives of Americans around the world could hang on the answer.


text:
GOP: Grow up about taxes
Republicans are flailing about these days, trying to rebrand themselves before the next election cycle. A certain amount of introspection and internecine debate are inevitable after suffering a stinging loss against an opponent with a dismal record. One thing the GOP needs to do to gain greater acceptance among voters is to improve its credibility by outgrowing a tiresome, unthinking opposition to any and all tax increases.
This is anything but a recommendation that Republicans "go moderate" and tack for the political center. Being to the right of 99.9 percent of Republicans on taxation, I agree Americans are overtaxed. For decades, I have favored zero capital-gains tax; advocated zero taxes on corporate profits; and called for a low, flat, income tax.
Read more of this story and more!
7-Day Subscribers have FREE access to everything on rep-am.com and our E-Edition.
CLICK HERE to register and activate your access,.
Not a subscriber?
You can purchase a single-day subscription for only $0.75 to read this and access all of our content and our E-Edition.
CLICK HERE purchase a single day subscription.
Become an electronic subscriber to the Republican-American for only $8 a month. CLICK HERE.
Follow Us
FREEPRESS wrote on Apr 3, 2013 7:06 AM:
" Any way you cut it, everyone will pay for the taxes to improve/repair roads and bridges, either directly or indirectly (passed on through higher prices for goods and services). That is only right, since all benefit from the highways and byway one way or another, directly or indirectly. "
mathlady wrote on Apr 3, 2013 7:47 AM:
" People might not be so concerned if any state anywhere actually used tax revenue for the specific purpose for which it is collected. However, whenever there is a designated tax, the govt manages to find a way to get it into the general fund and to use it for all kinds of things not at all connected to the original purpose. "
Sandy Socks wrote on Apr 7, 2013 10:11 AM:
" Yes Mathlady, you are exactly right. And a good example of that would be the admission to state parks. In the past that fee would go into the park's account and be used for repairs and maintenance and upgrades.
Now the admission fees go into the general fund and when park's need money they have to go begging to the general assembly. "
Now the admission fees go into the general fund and when park's need money they have to go begging to the general assembly. "
Post a reader commentWe encourage your feedback and dialog.
Please be civil and respectful.
If you're witty, to the point and quotable, your reader comments may also be included on the Around the Towns page of The Sunday Republican.
Readers must be registered and logged in to post comments on the site. Registration is free. Click Here to register.
A Subscription is not required to post comments only a Registration.
Log In
|Register / Forgotten Password?
More stories from Commentary
- Sequester fiasco breeds public disapproval
- Gun-control measures won't be a solution
- Opportunities being denied to minorities
- Concept of social justice misunderstood
- Save Torrington's music program
- Malloy budget: fact or fiction?
- Marriage, truth and outcomes
- Scouting should not exclude gays
- Did you really pay for Medicare?
- Mystery of the Russian art


text:
Being Good Parents
By Rebecca Teti
Monday: Parenting
(Join each day's Coffee Talk discussion: Mon: Parenting; Tues: Open Forum; Wed: NFP; Thu: Marriage; Fri: Education; Sat/Sun: Changing Roles)
Terrible toddlers? Trying teens? Something in between? This weekly forum is the spot to share your questions and struggles about all things related to parenthood.
Please join us!
I am struggling with jealousy this morning. I've been observing other families that we know. These families do are similar in size, ages, structure as ours. We have very similar values and beliefs. The children in these families "seem" much happier , much more respectful, and much more in tune with their faith. I do realize that I am on the outside looking in. We have 3 daughters. Eldest is strong in her faith & evengilization, but has moved in with her boyfriend. The 2 HS daughters, one is defiant, disrespectful, has depression & refuses to use the medication prescribed for her; the other has become the silent child, locks herself in her room to be on her computer, this ones likes going to Mass & youth group (of which I am very glad!). I've spoken, at length, with my priest concerning this feeling. St. Monica is my go to saint for this, I judge we are sisters in the same fight. Oh, the number of tears & prayers said for these children! Please pray for me to stay strong and to fight the good fight for my children's souls. Continued Christmas Blessing & Abundant New Year Blessings on all of you.
I'm so sorry for what you're going through. Prayers that your children will find their way. For what it's worth, I think the struggles your daughters are experiencing are very common, especially given their age, and hopefully will resolve in time.
I have a question about potties... specifically, how to clean them after they've been, um, pooped in. Generally, I just dump the poop in the toilet, rinse the potty in the sink, and call it good. But my daughter is recovering from a stomach bug so I've been dealing with poop in alllllllllllll its many colors, textures, and shapes. There are many kinds of poop that stick to the potty and I am not sure how to clean them up. Wash in the sink with soap?? Wipe with wipes like a diaper, then disinfect with lysol?? I've even tried swabbing everything up with a diaper and then wiping with wipes after that. Nothing has gone 100% smoothly, though. What have you veteren moms done?!
Who's got an idea for a 16-year-old boy's birthday party? He's nerdy, with interests advances in technology, coding and music.
Jen- (I'm not a veteran mom but my son has mostly been wanting to use the potty instead of the toilet since july) my son has never had a stomach bug, but I'm concerned maybe she got sick from the sink! I always use toilet paper to get any remaining poop out and into the toilet, then spray with lysol antibacterial and then wipe again with toilet paper. If I were ever to put a poopy potty in the sink then I'd sanitize that sink with lysol immediately after.
MMH - thanks. :) Why did I not think of using toilet paper and then flushing it?! And I love the concept of using a blast of lysol on the potty every time. I will start incorporating that as well!
I LOVE my diaper sprayer for cleaning out the potty. It is worth it to have for this reason alone, IMO, even if you don't use cloth diapers!


text:
Study: Shots Provide Short-Term Relief but Inferior in Long Term
Oct. 21, 2010 -- Corticosteroid injections, better known as cortisone shots, provide short-term pain relief for tendon problems such as tennis elbow but may be worse than other treatments later on, according to a new analysis.
"We have shown strong evidence that corticosteroid injection is beneficial in the short term for treatment of tendinopathy, but is worse than other treatment options in the intermediate and long terms," says researcher Bill Vicenzino, PhD, professor of sports physiotherapy at the University of Queensland in St. Lucia, Australia.
''The strong immediate effects [of pain relief] in a high proportion of patients have led to the notion that they are the miracle treatment," Vicenzino tells WebMD.
But he suspected otherwise, since the treatment is sometimes accompanied by poor long-term outcomes. Some experts had begun to question the use of corticosteroids, which reduce inflammation, for overuse disorders of the tendon, which are not accompanied by inflammation.
Tendons are tough, fibrous tissues that connect muscles to bones; in tendinopathy, the tendon becomes painful or torn.
To get some answers, Vicenzino and his colleagues reviewed the results of 41 previously published studies, including 2,672 patients with various tendon problems.
Corticosteroid Injections for Tendinopathy: A Closer Look
In the 41 published studies, the tendinopathy sites primarily included the elbow and the rotator cuff in the shoulder.
Some studies used corticosteroids for injections, while others used non-steroid-based treatments such as Botox, platelet-rich plasma, sodium hyaluronate, and other substances.
The researchers looked at pain reduction in the short term (about four weeks), intermediate term (about 26 weeks), and long term (one year).
Benefits differed by site, the researchers found.
For tennis elbow, corticosteroid injections provided relief at eight weeks but had negative outcomes at six months and one year.
For rotator cuff tendinopathy, corticosteroid injections provided inconsistent effects, but some of the studies showed a medium beneficial effect compared to placebo.
All studies using non-corticosteroid injections reported adverse events, but only 82% of the 28 using corticosteroids did.
And the adverse effects were generally minor, such as pain and loss of pigment. "We could not find much evidence to indicate that there are many adverse effects of a serious nature," he tells WebMD, speaking of the corticosteroid injections. However, he adds, "the caveat on this is that it is unknown to what extent adverse events are reported or not."


text:
Phone (415) 927-1630
Email us
Pull ups were brutal after the drag
This entry was posted on Tuesday, July 23rd, 2013 at 4:32 pm and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Name (required)
Mail (will not be published) (required)