Wind Projects Count on Towns Ignorance

The proposed wind project in the towns of Windsor and Sanford is a bad idea and the town boards ought to be drafting zoning regulations that are in the best interest of all of us not just some of us.

This project was originally slated for offshore, near New York City, closer to where the power is actually needed.  Taxpayers on Long Island pushed back so wind developers began seeking softer, easier targets in small, rural community’s upstate, taking advantage of a suffering, depressed local economy and counting on small community leaders that may lack the sophistication and legal understanding to mount any significant challenges.

The truth is that the net economic toll in projects like this are consistent losers for the local economy, local taxpayer and property owners.  Developers and suppliers make the most money up front, courtesy of government subsidies and incentives, paid with our tax dollars!   After calculating the losses in property values, the negative agricultural impact, suffering tourism, the health implications and the awful aesthetics, these projects pose a health, safety and general welfare problem for everyone and truth-be-told, the net losses are in the millions of dollars beyond the short-term gains.

Our Town Boards have a statutory obligation to protect all of the citizens.  Those in leadership positions did just that in Cooperstown, NY, which successfully defeated a wind project in their area.  Ask any community that has gone ahead with a wind project if they would do it again and overwhelmingly the answer is no.

The short-term allure of modest lease payments and the unfulfilled promise of abundant power is not a sufficient rationale for allowing this project anywhere near Broome County.  Accordingly, we are calling on not only the Towns of Windsor and Sanford to step-up and face their statutory obligations; we are calling on every town and village in Broome County to pass a well-written protective wind ordinance, in anticipation of these projects continuing to propagate.

Imagine dozens of these 500 to 700 feet behemoths, visible from everywhere, stretching up into the sky three times higher that the state office building in downtown Binghamton.

for Bob Kingsley (1)

Thank God, we enjoy the concept of home-rule here in New York State, allowing us local control over our own areas.  We need to harness this advantage and refuse to allow downstate interests to control our destiny and literally change our landscape.  We already supply them with our water, take their trash and afford them our natural beauty and peaceful, wonderful countryside as their weekend and vacation escape.

The beauty, serenity, our way of life, lets not let them take that from us too.  We should not and we will not surrender to anyone this place we all call home.

Standard

Climate Chains (Shackling minds not taught to think.)

depositphotos_4628801-stock-photo-chained-hands

Conventional liberal wisdom of the day demeans anyone who has the temerity to split from the herd and challenge the popular mantra of man-made climate change.  The method of public shaming has recently ramped-up in intensity and mean-spiritedness by applying the label of “denier” to skeptics.  This is a deliberate strategy to cast opponents into the same deplorable camp of those that deny the Holocaust.

This is how the Left manipulates language; jungles became rain forests in order to paint nice mental pictures that massage dollars from donors.  Pro-choice sound lots better than Pro-Death, making abortionists seem super-reasonable.  Assault weapons became any firearm that looked scary when the reality is that actual assault weapons have been unavailable to the public for years.

Control the language and you control the agenda.

 

download

What scares the radical Left most are facts.  As Vice-President Joe Biden famously said, “We’ll take truth over facts.”  When their truth can be uncoupled from reality, emotion masks the actual agenda.  The naivety of their foot soldiers is stunning, unknowing cannon fodder in support of a hidden agenda that has nothing to do with the stated goals.  The climate change movement and those who control the bigger strategy are focused not on saving the planet, but controlling it.

Healthy skepticism is essential to the refinement of any idea.  If the plan itself cannot withstand scrutiny, it is likely that the argument is weak.  Only after the idea is tested by skepticism and provocation can it be embraced as credible.

 

iqz1abb0vxsieoj6je34

 

These are the credible facts, for those willing to hear and consider them.

The Sun is more than 100 times the size of the Earth.  The total yearly production of all earthly energy is the equivalent of a single hour of energy produced by the Sun and heating the Earth.  The U.S. produces only 14% of the world’s human-created carbon dioxide.  Over 90% of worldwide production of electricity is generated by fossil fuels and nuclear.  Less than 6% is renewable.

The sun and active solar flares represent the biggest single factor in what controls the temperature on the Earth.  Solar panels, wind turbines and electric cars are financial failures without government subsidy.  These products net-energy exchange rates are not recoverable in reasonable terms.  Said differently, it takes more energy and resources to create, install, sell and operate these supposed green solutions than they end up saving in terms of energy efficiencies and any reductions of carbon dioxide.

God-Almighty created the heavens and the Earth and all things in it, including humans.  We are as much a part of the food chain as any other living thing and our influence on the planet is negligible in terms of changing anything about the heavenly nature of climate.

If we went back to teaching our kids how to think instead of what to think, far fewer would be hoodwinked by this scheme designed not to control the climate, but to control us.

Standard

How American excess killed the Olympic dream

Now that squash has been bested by Break-Dancing in the 2024 Olympic program, this article I wrote some time ago remains timely.  You get one chance to make a 1st impression…..

By BOB KINGSLEY

SQUASH is feeling sorry for itself after the IOC again rejected the sport’s application for a place on the 2020 Olympic Games programme. The sympathetic responses bear a familiar look.

“Crossing our fingers for 2020”…“So very close for 2016”…“Pretty close in 2012…”“Such an effort in 2008…”,“Bad luck in 2004.”

All emotive stuff, but let’s stop the sympathy and get something straight. Squash is not on the program of the Olympics today, largely because key people in the sport’s US leadership did not want it there 20-plus years ago.

First, a little background.

In 1988, I was hired as the Associate Director of the United States Squash Racquets Association, (USSRA.) My main goal was to pursue US Olympic Committee, (USOC) membership for the USSRA, (now US Squash.)

Leadership in our organisation was so convinced that our initial membership application would be rejected that I was sent alone, with less than six months on the job, to the USOC membership review meeting in Houston.

When I left that meeting, having secured our membership in the first round, (something rarely accomplished), a very senior USOC staff member walked me out of the room, put his arm around my shoulder and whispered to me in a hallway crowded with other applicants, “Where in the hell have you people been?”

From the beginning, it seems we were perceived as being very late to Olympic affiliation from those inside the USOC. Over the next few years, we received monies and services from the USOC that funded elite coaching, elite training and allowed for the free use of the United States Olympic Training Center, (USOTC) in Colorado Springs where we sent coaches and players alike.

We even held one of our Executive Committee meetings at the USOTC where then USOC Executive Director Harvey Schiller (pictured right) addressed our group and encouraged our quick ascent in the organization. The USOTC went so far as to offer us free office space to relocate our national headquarters onto the Colorado Springs campus.

I knew a political problem was brewing when the leadership of the USSRA refused that invitation and I began to realise that my plight, my mission might be a fool’s errand.

A short history lesson will be helpful.

In the late 1980s, squash in the US was struggling to maintain two versions of the game; one that was played only in the States (hardball) and the other, mainstream version played throughout the rest of the world. Many in US squash leadership were firmly ensconced in supporting, preserving and favouring the old and dying US-only version of the game.

The fear was that “the great unwashed” as one of them put it, would take over the mainstream version of the sport and they would over-run and outnumber the traditional ivy league, prep school, blue-blood, country club types and replace them with public-school, blue-collar, beer-drinking hooligans of unverified lineage.

The old-guard leadership sensed that they would not only lose their US-only version of the sport, but their control of it as well because Olympic participation would surely be played using the mainstream version of the game.

When I was handed my resignation, the reality and the magnitude of the level of resistance came clearly into focus.

Simultaneously, a large and vocal segment of the squash community was demanding the switch to the rest-of-the-world version of the game and the leadership of US Squash had to placate that growing voice.

By dispatching one man to do what the entire organisation should have been committed to doing, it created the illusion that US Squash was forward thinking. That was not the case. Some in leadership positions hoped that by under-staffing and under-committing to the Olympic effort, it would end in futility, frustration and failure, thereby preserving their hold on the US-only version of the sport.

The old-guard of squash was counting on the failure of our efforts towards the Olympics. The problem was, nobody clued me and my small band of heretics into this plot and our efforts were making unprecedented progress on a very fast track.

From our initial membership with the USOC in 1988 until my departure in 1991, I spent most of my time on the road and had gathered a groundswell of support from the family of Olympic sports organisations.

During this same time, many more of the “great unwashed”, had also entered the ranks of the US squash community, further rankling the squash elites.

I attended USOC, International Olympic Committee, (IOC) and International Squash Rackets Federation, (ISRF) functions representing the interests of Olympic participation for squash.

We formed the Associacion Pan Americana de Squash and began organizing international competitions throughout the Americas in support of the Pan American games having squash on their program. Unfortunately those interests were at odds with the old guard of US squash because we were, again, continuing to be unexpectedly successful.

Our efforts proved to be 20 some years too early. The elitist relics, born in the age of antiquity that controlled US squash in the late 80’s and into the 90’s could see clearly into the future, and what they saw was their relevance waning.

In 1991, I met personally with then IOC President, Juan Antonio Samaranch (pictured below) at the Pan American games in Havana and he was extremely supportive. At last, all of the political, social, formal and informal relationships were in place for squash to be accepted into the inner circle of the Olympic movement.

As Samaranch said: “The USOC is the flagship of all (national Olympic committees)”, and at that moment in time, we were very much in favour with the IOC and the USOC.

However, the political power of an old guard of squash elitists spanning nearly 100 years out-ranked and out-weighed a naive group of pro-Olympic squash advocates with a single vision that blinded them to the political reality that was far stronger and more ruthless than imagined.

When I was handed my resignation, the reality and the magnitude of the level of resistance came clearly into focus.

Shortly after my departure, other key players in the movement were summarily dismissed as well. Once that momentum, that intricate framework of personal, professional, probable and improbable relationships were left unattended, the situation would crumble and the winding road so painstakingly built would revert but to a faded path.

The conditions of that era are gone. The momentum and impact of a strong first impression has but a single shot. The opportunities we enjoyed in the 80s and 90s are not able to be recreated. The perfect storm for squash had, I fear, but one chance. The deal-making and networking we plied and perfected to make our inroads are opportunities forever lost.

Our efforts proved to be 20 some years too early. The elitist relics, born in the age of antiquity that controlled US squash in the late 80’s and into the 90’s could see clearly into the future, and what they saw was their relevance waning.

I am saddened to say that we failed to have squash included into the family of contested sports in an Olympic program not because the game wasn’t worthy of such status, but because of a culture of small mindedness that would sink a sport in order to protect a pedigree.

Bob Kingsley is the former Associate Director of the USSRA, (now US Squash) from 1988 until 1991. Nowadays, he owns a business called King Enterprises in upstate, NY. They provide “back office” services to attorneys, municipalities and insurance carriers with investigative support and trial preparation. Bob is also the teaching professional at the Pennsylvania Avenue Squash Club in Binghamton, NY.

© 2012 All Rights Reserved, Robert T. Kingsley

Standard

Civil War Looming…

Little has been written about the second amendment to the US Constitution that has not been previously expressed or debated in one way or the other.  As we progress from a currently “cold” civil war towards one that grows significantly hotter, I believe that the following interpretations and understandings are both insightful and timely.

 

James Madison wrote the Bill of Rights and his first draft consisted of 17 amendments, eventually becoming ten.  This is what his original draft of what would become the 2nd Amendment said:

 

“A well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, being the best security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, but no one being religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person.”

 

Madison himself answers the question that the anti-gun Left has always pondered regarding the impact and meaning of the word “militia.”  He says, “A well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people…”  In other words, everyone and anyone who is so inclined is a de facto militia member by virtue of being a citizen of the United State.  Madison states that the best security of a free state are her armed citizens.

 

Of the 7807 words that makeup the Constitution, the word “infringed” appears only once, in the second amendment.  The Latin root of the word “infringe”, means to break or weaken.  The single largest collective fear the founders shared was the eventual expansion and over-reach of a federal government.  States rights were by design to be stronger than the collective federal power.  Combine this concept with the God-given right of self-defense and you can see why the word “infringed” was used exclusively in the context of the 2nd amendment.  Just as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are by God inalienable, the “infringement” of a right to self-defense via firearms undercuts those freedoms.

Kav3

It was generally and unanimously understood that the citizens are the final arbiter of freedom, self-defense, self-reliance, and self-governance.  Not only were the founders supportive of the peoples natural rights to self-defense through the tools of firearms, it was an expectation that the collective community would, by way of being adequately armed, insure their own safety and security and provide the check against the tyranny of the government by virtue of the preparedness of an armed citizenry.

 

Today, the founder’s fears are largely realized.  The linkage of the State’s legislatures and the US Senate have been traded for direct elections, severely weakening the federalism concept.  Fear mongering foments cries for disarming citizens under the canard of insuring their own safety when nothing could be further from the truth.

 

The second amendment will underwrite the second civil war that this country has already commenced.  We are still in the talking stages of this conflict however, the re-election of Donald J. Trump will sound the bell for the second round, and the time for talk will be over.

Standard

The Looney Left

 

 

 

Mr. Knight:

Your recent guest viewpoint article made me laugh out loud.  You begin by describing what you see as qualities and qualifications for being the President, unintentionally described Donald J. Trump perfectly!  After all he is a successful businessman, a non-lawyer and is giving back to the country by making it great once again, (also doing this without taking a salary.)  You can’t argue with a roaring economy, near zero unemployment, a record-setting stock market and a strong and ready military, so instead, you take the usual liberal low road and make it all emotionally based, facts be damned.

You go on to state that no laws have to be broken in order to bring impeachment charges, accusing naysayers as wrong, dumb as hell or liars.  Mr. Knight, you have hit the trifecta of intellectual inadequacy by demonstrating to the reader that you are indeed all three of these things.  Do you not read your own words sir?  Impeachment requires “Treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”  Treason is a crime, (punishable by death,) bribery is a crime; “other high crimes” are obviously Mr. Knight “crimes”, and finally misdemeanors, which again are crimes.  That’s it, there is no other basis or rationale for impeachment so, yes indeed, a crime is REQUIRED by the words in the Constitution.  You are obviously a Trump hater, so you cling to impeachment as a way to disenfranchise the voters.  If you’re so right about Trump, and your self-righteousness is indeed shared by the majority of voters, then his re-election should be impossible.  Why not let the voters decide his fate instead of people like yourself that can’t even manage a clear understanding of the simple language in our Constitution?

I’ll tell you why Mr. Knight, because you’re a small-mined partisan hack driven by a hatful vitriol that has clouded what little intellect you started with.  I state this in stronger than usual terms only because your hateful rhetoric so set the tone, so if you want to dish out that sort of simple-minded, insult based garbage, expect it back in your face.

No Mr. Knight, you distrust your fellow voters and you’re reading the tea leaves, scared to death that Trump will be re-elected.  Well, I think you’re right, he will be re-elected, thanks to partisan, low intellect verbal vomit spewers like yourself that bare their hatefulness to the world and in doing so convince all of us that the crazy leftist people of this country can’t be trusted to govern and really hate America and her ideals.

Trump will continue his quest to make America great once again and you Mr. Knight, will be along for the ride, inadvertently serving the very purpose you so despise by your crazy rhetoric.  Thank you for that.

 

Standard

Hope

My first meeting with “Tony” was in the parking lot of a Super-8 motel.  I thought it odd he listing a post office box as his address, and he was adamant about meeting somewhere other than his home.  It took me about 2 minutes to realize that the SUV Tony was driving was his home.  I saw the Marine decal on his side window and he wore a black hat that spelled out “Vietnam Veteran” in bold, capital yellow letters.  As he leaned out of the truck, his walking stick assisted him and I could see the hospital ID bracelet still on his thin left wrist.  Tony was frail and almost toppled over twice in the 10 minutes we spent together.

 

I was sent there by the insurance company to assess collision damages to his SUV.  Because we are about the same age, I felt at ease talking to Tony, a connection that came comfortably.  I asked him about his situation.  He explained that the bank had foreclosed on his house and that he was homeless.  He admitted to having a brother on Long Island, but seemed dismissive of contacting him.  We didn’t get into his medical details but clearly, Tony was in rough shape, but a battle-toughened Marine, far from giving up.  I asked Tony if he had a relationship with God.  He told me that he had lost his faith over the years.  I told Tony that even if he had given up on God, God had not given up on him.  I encouraged him to find a good, local church.  I shed a few tears as I left, at the same time grateful for my life but frustrated that I couldn’t do something more for Tony.

 

I knew he and I weren’t finished even before I said good-bye to him after our first encounter.  Sure enough, a month later, I was assigned to meet with him once again.

 

When I called to make the appointment, Tony said, “I’ve been thinking about something you said to me and I want to talk to you more about it.”  Encouraged, I called the local social services clearing house for some information about homeless vets and whatever other services might be available.  Before meeting Tony in that same parking lot as last time, I met with the staff people at the clearinghouse and they loaded me up with brochures, information and applications for a variety of assistance.

 

After exchanging greetings and some small talk, I asked Tony what he wanted to talk about.  I was curious as to what I might have said to him the last time that had stuck with him.  Tony told me that he had lost his faith when his 37-year-old wife died of cancer.  I told him that the lack of an explanation about such things shakes everyone’s faith.  I told Tony that I had no idea what God was doing nor could I offer any explanation, except to say to him again that even if he had given up on God, I was sure that God had not given up on him.  I told Tony that he and I were put together like this for a reason.

 

I handed over the paperwork and put it into Tony’s SUV.  I told him that I thought that there was lots of help around him; he just needed to reach out and accept it.  As I shook Tony’s hand, I pressed a 20-dollar bill into it and I told him that God was watching over us all and to work on rebuilding his faith by finding a good church.

 

I left the parking lot once again with tears in my eyes, but this time, with a glint of hope.

 

Standard

Citizens, not Subjects

It seems that the less one knows about firearms, the stronger their positions concerning them.

Miss1

 

“AK-47”, “AR-15”, “cop-killer bullets”, “undetectable plastic guns”, “assault weapons”, “weapons of war”, “automatic weapons”, “machine guns”, “gun-violence”, terms all tossed about carelessly by those most likely to have zero understanding of that which they speak.  This happens when the intellectually lazy find the talking points that match their own misconceptions and blindly absorb the narrative as their own.  Never mind that they can’t even define the terms they use or know one end of the gun from the other, they take solace knowing that their friends all feel the same way, facts be damned.

Presidential candidate and former Vice President Joe Biden summed it up best when he said the following in a speech at the Iowa State fair.  “We choose truth over facts.”  Apparently, this refutes the adage that one is entitled to their own opinions but not their own facts by simply relegating those pesky facts to the intellectual scrap heap.

 

A gun, like Joe Biden is a tool.  Fortunately, the gun can’t fire itself but Biden sure can.

Joe1

The black “scary-looking” guns available to the public are no different from the guns of 1885; the year semi-automatic firearms were invented.  The term “assault weapon” was fabricated by a gun-hating media to mislead the public into believing actual weapons of war can be owned by private citizens when they cannot.  The black, scary-looking guns are no different than the brown, wooden stocked guns used for hunting.  Like a tee shirt printed to look like a tuxedo is still a tee shirt, black, scary-looking guns only mimic the cosmetics of actual assault weapons.

A11

The less one knows about guns the more they fear them.  When you combine that feeling of fear with a lack of knowledge, no one so charged can be expected to form accurate assessments about the subject.  Fear prevents one from becoming knowledgeable and the lack of knowledge results in ignorance.  When your fear is stronger than your intellectual curiosity, you lack understanding and when you lack understanding; your fear has made you a pawn to those who have conquered their fear and now count on yours in order to control you.

 

Those powerful forces shaping the anti-gun narrative gin up the fear factor in order to form the base of their operation.  If you’re scared to death of guns and know nothing about them and want to know nothing about them, you’re being used and exploited as cannon fodder in a dishonest and twisted debate about ultimately disarming America.

 

In the frontier west of the formation of this country in the 19th century, “the great equalizer” was the gun.  Later in the 20th century, Horace Mann called education “the great equalizer.”  Ironically, both of these positions are as true today as they were back then.  People in positions of power seek it exclusively.  They perceive others with power as a threat.  This is why those who lust for power are so afraid of ordinary people possessing anything that challenges them.  Firearms in the hands of a free people make the difference between being subjects or  citizens.

John Lennon was insightful when he wrote the famous Beatle’s song, Power to the People.  What else stands between the ordinary citizen and true tyranny should it come our way, but the power of ordinary people?

Firearms haven’t changed a lot in 134 years, but society sure has.

Murderous maniacs are the problem, not their methods.  Societal choices bear a price.  Dismantle, disregard and dismiss the traditional family structure and face those consequences.  Downgrade, denigrate and deny the existence of God and face that outcome.  Celebrate abortion as a civil right and convince yourself that all is right in the world.  Clearly all is not right.

Edmund Burke reminds us that evil prevails when good people do nothing.  Divine leadership happens in the kingdom of God that blesses families through His grace and our faith.  Human leadership starts in the family unit, lead by fathers on Earth, instructed by God in heaven.  Anything less gets us what we’ve got.  Reality is a harsh teacher.  Look hard at the world in which we live today.  We are choosing evil over righteousness, the easy over the difficult, the soft over the hard, the less over the many; we need a reawakening if we are to survive as the great nation of our founding.

Flag4

If we can get back to nourishing healthy families in the spirit of God, we will solve a thousand problems at once and the grace of God will again shine His light upon the exceptional nation of the United State of America.

Standard

Equality?

Members of the US Woman’s National Soccer Team are suing their governing body for gender discrimination regarding compensation levels they view as unfairly low, compared with their male counterparts.

 

In the every-day world of business, figures of between 18 and 22% are commonly bantered about as the pay differential between men and woman.

 

Assuming that all of the above is true, the question becomes, so what?

 

Men and woman aren’t properly measured in groups; we are all individuals, not interchangeable monolithic commodities.  If there is one defining factor unique about America, it is the importance of the individual over the concept of groups.

 

As for wage disparity, anyone can bargain for higher pay.  If athletes, or anyone else, feel they are under-paid, they are free to perform for another organization that agrees on their value and will pay more for it.  If folks can’t or won’t do that, their perceived value is less than the marketplace is willing to pay, and it is the marketplace that ultimately determines value.

 

Each of the 28 named plaintiffs are individuals.  Each of these individuals signed a contract agreeing to the salary and benefits package they are currently enjoying.  None of these woman are claiming they signed under duress, so what is the problem?  Signing that contract was undoubtedly one of the highlights of their careers, so what changed?

 

Perhaps it is jealously of the men’s ability to apparently better negotiate?  Maybe it is embarrassment for failing to be a good negotiators on their own behaves?  Could it be that the marketplace of consumers doesn’t value the woman’s program of soccer as highly as they do the men’s?

 

None of the 28 named plaintiffs would enjoy any notoriety if not for their membership and affiliation with the US Soccer Federation.  It is on this national platform from which they gained access to the wider world audience, a privilege afforded to them courtesy of the United State of American.  That world stage was created by each nation’s national governing body, culminating with the World Cup, sponsored by the international governing body of the sport, FIFA, (International Federation of Association Football.)

 

The 211 member nations governing bodies have built the international platform that the athletes stand upon.  Those nations own that space, the athlete’s job is to perform upon it, not use it as their own bully pulpit.  They are free to do that on their own time, their own dime, and to make perfectly clear, they are expressing their own opinions as individuals,  the terminally disgruntled Primadonna athlete with a chip on her shoulder, not as members of a national team that represents all of America.

 

 

Thanks ladies, for demonstrating the concept of the Ugly American while grossly over-celebrating the shellacking of Thailand, or carelessly dragging the US flag on the ground while hamming for the camera.

BD2

Before the girls get too excited about direct comparisons between male and female competition, let’s have a reality check on performances.  Let’s give credit where due, to the FC-Dallas, boy’s under 15 team who put a thumping to that same US Woman’s team back in 2017 in their preparation for international competition.

 

The US Soccer Federation has been in existence for over 100 years, and 4 years from now, when the next World Cup is played, today’s whining poor sports will be as unrecognizable as the 2015 team, not a single player from which 99% of fans can name.

 

The 2019 World Cup belongs to the United States of America.  Not a single athletes name is engraved on that trophy, not even the country; it simply says FIFA Woman’s World Cup and thank goodness for that.  No one wants to be associated with militant poor sports throwing the F-bomb in public comments.  Good grief these woman had many cheering for the Netherlands!

BD3

And on behalf of the millions of decent, hard-working proud American who play by the rules and enjoy a healthy rivalry, to the rest of the world watching this, I’m sorry; these women don’t accurately represent who we are.

 

Standard