I am grateful that tricky Ricky is running for president. It makes me happy to see him spending his money.

I am hopeful he spends only his money. I remember him on the PA Ag. Committee. He sat there for the first time in 90 years. Oh, how we dairy farmers were hopeful.

I am once again hopeful - that American dairy farmers spread the word that he is running for president, so he never gets the chance to spend "our" money.

The economy needs his money spent in PA too, so let’s all be hopeful he gets a chance to spend the rest of his money in PA.

Sincerely,

Peter A. Seman

Thompson, PA

The privatizing of Social Security is of great concern for most citizens. There are issues of concern.

First, we must guarantee the right to make our "Privatized" Social Security transferable to another living entity if we do not reach our Social Security benefit age. Tax on this transferable money should apply as those pertaining to Social Security benefits. My Aunts Rosie and Helen died before reaching their Social Security benefit ages. This money our Government keeps.

Secondly, our investments cannot be useable to our Government or State without the consent of the person whose money it belongs. If the State or Government offers a better investment proposal then their investment must contain a guarantee to the citizen.

Thirdly, our investments should be transferable and guaranteed. We cannot withdraw our money until we reach our Social Security age. Who determines this age is another issue since the money is privatized. At present, we can obtain Social Security early at age sixty-two and one-half. We can wait until we are sixty-five. It cannot follow the rules of an IRA account, for these accounts are a separate issue.

The final issue is that there are those who commit hideous crimes, such as child molestation, and their Social Security ceases. Neither State nor Government has the right to take it, especially if a family member is at issue. Why punish a family member for a crime of a spouse or his or her parent?

Present Social Security funds and future funds are at risk. One partial solution is to have our citizens "volunteer" to have Social Security weekly payments continue no matter their income. Presently, in Pennsylvania, we use our drivers license to volunteer as organ donors and contribute an additional $1.00 to the Organ Donation Awareness Trust Fund (ODTF).

I urge all of you to talk about these concerns among yourselves, and please write or call your representatives.

Sincerely,

Larry Gary

Gibson, PA

I took a ride in a dump truck over to the stone quarry to look at the material piles for a job my boss was doing.

While on this ride, I noticed a sign that prohibits the "brake retarder" on a state road. I looked at my driver who shook his head and said, "Cyndi, your old man fired guys who didn't use the ‘jake brake.’” I know.

I guess if you don't really know what the jake brake is for, and only protest how the noise effects your sensitive hearing, you might agree to this dumb ordinance. And it is a very dumb ordinance.

It is also very misleading. The noise comes from the engine being "retarded," not the brakes. In the industry it is called an "engine retardant," and is a safety feature. It is designed to slow the truck down in quick situations, such as a child running out into the street, or the driver of the car who pulls in front of a truck driver. Most car drivers I've given the devil to for pulling out in front of my drivers have stated, "I thought with all the wheels, he could stop faster."

I wonder why the Federal Transportation, and the DOT bother to drum up these regulations, to ensure the safety of the driver from the unpredictable driving public, to have a safety feature "out-lawed" by a local municipality who obviously doesn't have an idea of a turkey of what it is all about. In that frame of mind, I wonder if this ordinance is even legal. Can a local municipality over-ride a transportation regulation? Can you say no to a safety feature? I have been around a truck and the drivers a time or two, and I don't know one driver who uses the "jake" to be a nuisance. I only know them to use this feature so they can maintain strict control of the truck, and its cargo.

I would think before one regulates transportation at the local level, one might do some research on the subject before passing it through in a council meeting, because you have aroused the heart, and not engaged the head. Isn't this why local government retains legal counsel? With the coming of truck traffic, which from what I've seen will be heavy, why in the world would you want to "retard" the ability for the driver to control the truck? I always look when I hear the jake, in an odd way it is a comfort, it tells me the driver is paying attention and driving defensively while the "4 wheeler" is daydreaming, or talking on the cell phone.

I have the additional thought of the lawsuit that is a real possibility, if during the investigation of an accident involving a truck, it was found the driver was following local traffic laws. I also entertain the idea if the local ordinance is enforceable? I mean the local people back out of their driveways on the road that is labeled no brake retardant. In my estimation, I want to hear that jake brake on when someone backs out in front of the truck, it gives you a moment to pull back in, quick.

I would think with all the potential things that can happen in a small town, why is a engine retardant even anything a local government would want to regulate? While this ordinance is in effect, does that mean that the DOT/PUC men back off on their inspections of trucks? I mean engines are looked at too, not to mention all the engineering that is developed to make trucks safer. I would vote that ordinance off the books, and I would also talk to those that are truck drivers, truck manufacturers, and even the enforcement portion before I would ever entertain the idea, that a short burst of engine retardant noise, which is designed to get your attention, would be the reason a safety feature was out lawed in a bucolic little town that will know heavy truck traffic. That or educate the drivers of cars, and the walking pedestrian, to look twice, and forget about how many tires are on that truck. It’s the engine retardant that slows you down quick, not the brakes. I would also know what it is I'm outlawing by its true name, and not just what I heard it called, by someone who doesn't know either... just saying.

Sincerely,

Cynthia Allen

Summersville, PA

You “pro-choice” people and voters are alive (thank God!) because your parents were pro-life! Thank you, God! Your parents did not decide to “choose.” They wanted you to live! The only choice should be to live for unborn babies!

If you are or know someone who is pregnant, it is your duty to defend life - born or unborn! Pregnant girls and women have great pregnancy help to guide, comfort and support them along the way to the birth of their child. See “Silent No More,” “Abortion Alternatives,” “Adoption Agency 5!” For women and girls who have had an abortion - see the “Rachel’s Vineyard” website. Great help to overcome your grief and forgiveness for you!

Do not believe in “Planned Parenthood” lies, they are the number one abortion provider. They brutishly terminated nearly 400,000 unborn babies last year in the US. Worldwide, in the millions - every year.

Each year “Planned Parenthood” receives millions of our tax dollars from our government - federal, state and cities. Shame on our politicians! Our government has and is still destroying the right for our unborn citizens - a right that is guaranteed in our found father’s law - the right to live!

What does God say in the 10 Commandments - No. 5, “Thou Shall Not Kill!”

Please vote out the “pro-choice” politicians that want to deny the right to life for the unborn. Yes, many of the so called Catholics, Protestants, Jews and others are voting for these politicians. They are so wrong! The 39th March for Life is to be held again in Washington D.C. on January 23. We have to end all types of abortion!

Sincerely,

Bruce Moorhead

Susquehanna, PA

For the past 38 years the U.S. Supreme Court has played God with innocent human life. They have invented laws that have condemned to painful deaths, without trial, 56 million babies for the crime of being inconvenient. In 1973, the Supreme Court in Roe vs. Wade rejected the personhood of the unborn defined in the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution as “endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. Among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” The 14th Amendment also says “no state shall deprive any person of life, liberty of property without due process of law.” It further states “Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.” That’s exactly what a “Life at Conception Act” would do.

In Roe vs. Wade the Supreme Court admitted, “if personhood for the unborn is established, the appellants case, of course, for the fetus’ right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the 14th Amendment.” Science has proven that the life of a human person begins at conception. The restoration of the 14th Amendment by Congress is overdue!

“We the People” should ask ourselves honestly, what should be the results of a congressional, Life and Conception Act. First of all, we must anticipate a violent response from the abortion industry and their sponsors. It took them 38 years to create a billion dollar industry, so it will take some time to retool, become birthing centers, where abstinent based education is given and natural family planning is taught. This would send a clear message that the reign of iniquity and horror is over. So instead of killing babies they can help prepare a better life for them.

The 14th Amendment is the hallmark of and center of the Constitution. It defines and declares that the power and authority of the U.S. of America resides with the governed. Who in the image and likeness of their creator, female and male cooperate through the bonds of holy matrimony to cultivate and transmit with unconditional love the qualities and virtues so needed for children to achieve eternal happiness, now and forever. The future of humanity depends on the unity of each family. What the creator has joined together let no man put asunder. The vail of iniquity caused by Roe vs. Wade has cost us dearly. It has caused us to think and act in ways contrary to charity, truthfulness, right judgment, faithfulness, etc.

The National Pro-Life Alliance prints and distributes “Life at Conception Act” petitions so when Congress takes session after elections it is on their conscience and their agenda. 90% of all women who have had an abortion say they were wrong. There are over one million abortions per year in America. When we include parents, siblings and grandparents, that pushes the total up to 6 million victims. It’s a national disgrace, it’s the worst kind of poverty.

If you would like to find out more about this ongoing crisis and how you can help restore the sovereignty of our nation, tune in January 23 to E.W.T.N. for full live coverage and re-airing of the National March for Life in Washington D.C., Los Angeles, CA and participating countries around the world.

Sincerely,

John Mann

Susquehanna, PA

Slavery. It's been practiced on every continent and in every civilization. In its most basic form, the labor of one man is confiscated by another man. Or as institutionalized by a nation, the labor of thousands farming crops, weaving cloth, turning trees into lumber, mining, constructing roads, building palaces and monuments, is transferred to a few. It is the only way an individual or a nation can accumulate wealth.

Yet the greatest slave-based societies were not the Babylonian, or the Grecian, or the Roman empire. It is only in the 20th and 21st century, that slavery has burgeoned to make possible unimagined riches not for the few but for the many.

And what is this slave - this servant that peaceably submits to any task, never tires, and requires neither food nor sleep? It is oil.

For those nations that have harnessed oil's power, it has raised the standard of living higher than that enjoyed by ancient kings. Two-story houses with double-wide garages, closets full of clothes, a bounteous supply of food from worldwide markets, entertainment but a click away on a high definition TV, and leisure; once luxuries of the wealthy are now commonplace.

The world, principally the U.S., China, Japan, and India, have an insatiable thirst for this turbid ooze. Worldwide almost 90 million barrels are consumed every day. How much is 90 million barrels? It would take 420,000 high-volume tanker trucks stretching across 4,000 miles to carry just one day's supply for the world.

And it's running out.

The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) is a union of 12 oil-producing nations. It produces 44 percent of the world's oil and collectively holds 79 percent of the world's reserve crude.

OPEC controls the price of oil by limiting the amount member nations are permitted to sell. This amount is determined by the reserves of oil a nation has; the greater the reserves, the more it can sell. It's an open secret that OPEC nations consistently overestimate their reserves.

The key questions is by how much? OPEC estimates its reserve at 18 trillion barrels. But the Cambridge Energy Associates calculates it at 3.75 trillion barrels deflating OPEC's reserve by 80 percent.

However, a reserve of 3.75 trillion barrels still seems like a lot. At the present rate of consumption that's enough to last for 94 years. In reality, it's close to the bottom of the barrel.

But how can so much be so little?

First, even with advanced extraction technology roughly 40 percent of the reserve is unrecoverable. Second, three quarters of the world's 800 oilfields are in decline and falling twice as fast as was predicted only two years ago, according to Dr. Fatih Birol, chief economist of the International Energy Agency. And third, chronic under-investment in oil exploration, refining, and infrastructure, limit production capacity.

As oil becomes increasingly more difficult to find, the requirement of an exploding population and global industrialization will soon reach an unmeetable demand. Dr. Birol predicts an “oil crunch” in the next five years.

Sometime between 2015 and 2020, the “crunch” will become a crisis. The subterranean seas of oil have dwindled to lakes and the lakes have shrunk to ponds. In the next few years, demand is predicted to exceed production. The price of oil could quadruple.

But the world has become dependent not just on oil but on cheap oil. The green revolution was made possible by inexpensive fuel and fertilizer, both petroleum products. Raise the price of oil and the cost of food increases beyond the reach of millions.

Oil, our once indefatigable slave, has become old and feeble. Soon it will no longer be able to power the machinery of production or make low-cost food possible.

The world as we know it is coming to a predictable end. Industrialized civilization, the Age of Oil, is closing. It is the end of a lavishly unparalleled way of life. But, like all civilizations, it has run its course. Its demise is unique only in that it is foreseeable.

Sincerely,

Bob Scroggins

New Milford, PA