Dakota Beacon

Last week another mushy moderate Republican bit the dust.

It would appear that the 2010 Tea Party protest against the moderate Republican establishment (RINOs -- Republicans in name only) continues unabated. Dick Lugar, Indiana senator for 36 years, lost his bid for another six year term. He was defeated by Indiana State Treasurer Richard Mourdock in the state Republican primary with (drum roll, please) Tea Party support.

And why not? At heart, most people are conservative. They may not say so, but that is how they behave and live their lives.

Nay sayers pooh-pooh Mourdock’s landslide win over Lugar (60% to 40%) claiming Mourdock can’t win in November. That may be wishful thinking on the part of Democrats and their media toadies.

This is all reminiscent of long-time Republican Senator Robert F. Bennett’s defeat in Utah’s 2010 primary election. It also brings to mind others who rose or fell in 2010. Florida Republican Governor Charlie Crist was too moderate a Republican for the electorate and he eventually lost to Conservative Marco Rubio.

Voters don’t necessarily elect candidates to “get things done.” “Getting things done” is clichéd rhetoric; it is more of a problem than a solution. Elected officials keep “getting things done” at voters‘ expense. Whether for appearance sake or to buy votes by bringing home the bacon, “getting things done” is one of the reasons we’re in the sorry economic quandary we find ourselves today. Americans are never safer than when congress is in recess.

Lugar was part of a group of Republican politicians who assume too much. The longer they stay in office, the more moderate they become in their drift toward liberalism.

There comes a time when elected officials develop a sense of entitlement, as if the voters owe it to the incumbents’ seniority to re-elect them. At that point, the incumbent supports measures in order to remain popular with peers on the inside rather than the electorate at home.

That’s what happened to Dick Lugar. He voted with Democrats once too often supporting anti-gun laws, higher gas taxes and bigger government. He even spoke in support of Obama during the 2008 campaign. To him, government was the center of the universe and that was his undoing.

Conservatives don’t compete in elections to win and then compromise with the people who lost. People generally, and by nature, are conservative but Lugar was not. That’s how the Tea Party protest was able to sweep him out of office.

Lugar reached across the aisle and voted with the Democrats time and again. Why are Republicans so willing to reach across the aisle in acts of bipartisanship while the Democrats seldom do? When was the last time Senator Harry Reid or Representative Nancy Pelosi led their party into bipartisan compromise with Republicans when Democrats controlled their respective houses?

Three cheers for partisanship. Thank goodness the conservatives who took the House of Representatives in 2010 stood their ground on principle. Winners don’t compromise with losers. That’s not why they were elected. The losers are more than welcome to compromise with the winners in a spirit of bipartisanship.

Only look to Europe to see the results that true conservatives warned about for dozens of years -- ruination brought about by liberal socialist policies. Why would anyone want to compromise with socialists and liberals and progressives and leftists? Socialism and its fellow travelers must force their doctrines on the public. Freedom, on the other hand, does not impose. It is the natural yearning of all human beings.

Unless America changes course, and she surely must, she risks Europe’s fate.

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

I thought it would never happen to me. But it did -- a second time. And a third time.

Perpetrators stole my identity and used it to commit fraud.

My first experience occurred in the spring of 2010. In response to the theft of my identity I opened accounts with the three major credit rating agencies and cleaned up the mess. Afterwards, I froze the three accounts to prevent other attempts to open credit card and banks accounts fraudulently using my identity.

What constitutes an identity? As a minimum a name associated with a social security number and a birth date easily identify a person. An address, place of birth and mother’s maiden name, though not necessary, help seal the deal.

The latest incidents occurred this spring circumventing my credit rating accounts. Here’s how it went down.

On March 8, 2012, I received a legitimate form letter from the Social Security Administration (SSA). The letter confirmed that I had redirected my direct deposit social security check from my legitimate bank to a different bank in another state. Of course, I had not. My stolen identity was used fraudulently to commit a crime. The letter was so low-key it did not perk my interest at first. Then, in a classic double take, it dawned on me. This was a confirmation notice. I immediately contacted the Minot, ND, SSA office and they confirmed my monthly check had indeed been redirected to a different bank.

Within minutes the fraud became evident, the fraudulent redirection of my check was stopped, an “identity theft victim” tag was placed on my file and a password assigned to preclude any further unauthorized changes to my account.

I then filed a local police report. This is highly recommended for a couple of reasons. First, any further action on my part would have to be substantiated and a police report could be included as evidence. Second, the identity theft can be matched against other criteria in law enforcement databases in an attempt to catch the perpetrator.

Finally, I filed a fraud report with the SSA. But, that’s not the end of the story. There is more.

On April 6, 2012, my tax accountant attempted to file my TY 2011 federal tax return electronically only to have it rejected by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). It seems someone had already filed a return using my identity to fraudulently claim my refund. The IRS immediately noted anomalies in the fraudulent return and froze my account without issuing a refund pending resolution of the matter.

When notified by my tax accountant, my wife and I immediately headed to Minot, picked up the hard copy of the unfiled return and took it to the Minot IRS office as instructed. To prove our identity we had to produce two forms of photo identification, our original social security cards and our passports. Once properly identified, the IRS agent was able to unfreeze the account and personally mail copies of our identification together with our tax return to the appropriate IRS center. He then filed a fraud report on our behalf. For enhanced security, he also applied for a personal identification number (PIN) for use with our TY 2012 taxes.

Unfortunately, there is no collaboration between the three credit rating agencies and federal agencies. Consequently, no fraud alert came from the credit agencies.

Through my own initiative and with the help of a certain bank, I have been able to pinpoint a physical address, phone number and e-mail address of the suspected perpetrator. I included that information in my fraud reports to the SSA and the IRS.

How is a person’s identity stolen? In my case I can think of several ways. Theft of computers containing data come to mind. Loss of computers by the Veterans Administration, stolen computers in possession of contractors containing military medical records and successful hacking of federal and civilian databases result in stolen identity. Of course, living in oil country, I wouldn’t be surprised if criminals possessing stolen identities are focusing on zip codes in North Dakota.

I have concluded the following. First, I will never retrieve my original identity. It’s gone forever. Second, my identity is being bought and sold as would any commodity.

At this point I have alerted every institution with which I have critical transactions including the SSA, IRS, Department of Defense, Veterans Administration, financial institutions and the North Dakota Department of Revenue and Attorney General’s Office to the fact that I have been a victim of identity theft and that fraud has been perpetrated using my identity. In other words, I have attempted to close off every avenue of approach through which a perpetrator might gain access to my finances and government records.

The age of innocence has passed and vigilance is key. For safety’s sake, being constantly aware of what is taking place around us is critical.

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

Company’s on the way and will be here any moment.

Ready? Oh, yes! We do wish to be good hosts.

Like clockwork our guests drop by this time every year. Their arrival is so regular they need no announcement. Forewarned is forearmed.

North Dakota is on a collision course with millions of migrating birds. Waterfowl and songbirds are about to descend from the skyways into North Dakota.

It won’t be long now. We of the songbird-loving fraternity must prepare for the return of our feathered friends and there is not a minute to lose. Inhospitable we’ll not be.

Recently I thanked my sister-in-law in Mississippi for dispatching one of the earliest arrivals. With our relatively mild winter, the Grackles arrived early this year. You can’t miss them. They are the big black, birds with the blue-black iridescent heads and the raucous voice. I’ve referred to them as the Darth Veders of the bird feeders. Although obnoxious, they are useful for cleaning up the winter tailings on the ground under the feeders.

Darth Veder aside, here’s the plan. Stock up on birdseed. You can never have too much birdseed on hand. As a rule, the greater variety of birdseed offered, the greater the variety of birds will visit the feeders.

Place more than one bird feeder in the yard. Two feeders and a thistle bag should do for starters.

It may still be a bit cool for a bird bath, but make plans to place one just the same. The birds may not bathe at this time of year, but they do need water.

Rake the yard around the feeders. Raking will uncover the seed dropped during the winter. Ground feeding birds will be happy to help the Grackles clean up winter’s tailings.

With the area prepared you’re ready for guests.

To make room for new arrivals, the Redpolls headed north to their summer nesting grounds in the arctic. They left about the second week in March. So long ‘til next winter.

About the same time as the Redpolls departed I saw my first robin. In the mild March weather he looked a bit bewildered at not finding a bug or two. He had to settle for a little suet fallen from one of the feeders.

A pair of Blue Jays announced their arrival at the feeders with their scolding call. They have comfortably settled in for the summer.

The Slate-colored Junco is another seasonal visitor who showed up right on schedule just after the Redpolls left. They, too, winter just south of us and move north at the right time. Juncos are easy to spot with their head, back and chest a uniform slate-gray and a white tummy. They have a relatively tame disposition.

The American Goldfinch loiters in the area throughout the winter. Right about now the male Goldfinch changes from drab plumage to an unmistakable bright yellow with a perky black cap on the forehead. They resemble canaries which, of course, they are not.

Another hanger-on is the Red-breasted Nuthatch. He is black and white like the Chickadee, but the resemblance stops there. He has a slight rosy tinge on his chest. Where as some birds skitter along the ground, this critter skitters up and down tree trunks. To watch him run head first down a tree trunk seems utterly improbable.

Speaking of chickadees, the Black-capped Chickadee, like the Nuthatch, also winters in North Dakota. He gets his name from the cocky black cap perched on top of his head. Although relatively tame, the chickadee flits in to the feeder, takes a morsel, then flits back out again. I’ve had them within arms reach when I am filling the bird feeders.

The Harris Sparrow is the largest of the sparrow family. He is unmistakable by his size and sports a distinctive pink bill and a black bib and crown. You’ll have to catch sight of him in the spring, however, because he passes through North Dakota only in the spring. He typically takes a different route south in the autumn. He should be passing through here anytime now.

I’m still waiting for the White-crowned Sparrow to show up. They, too, are ground feeders. At five to six inches in length they will hop, skip and jump to the nearest seed. They usually show up in North Dakota around May 1 on their flight north. Distinctive markings include a prominently streaked crown, pink or yellowish bill and erect posture.

Sporting with our feathered friends is as much a rite of spring as St. Patrick’s Day or Easter. Their presence heralds the marvelous promise of renewal and encouragement for a wonderful spring.

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

It’s tax time again. A lot of folks don’t like taxes in general, and property taxes in particular. There are more than a few disgruntled souls making noise, but, is there a revolt?

At this point inevitably Measure 2 comes up. Measure 2 proposes to amend the North Dakota Constitution Article X Sections 2, 4, 14, 15 and 16 and repeals Sections 5, 6, 7, 9 and 10. North Dakotans get to vote June 12 yea or nay on this initiated measure. The net effect would eliminate property taxes and acreage taxes.

Is the abolition of property taxes an idea whose time has come, or is it merely an idea? Ideas, after all, are a dime a dozen.

The arguments supporting Measure 2 are laid out in the book “Property Tax Revolution.” This is the magnum opus of Empower the Taxpayer (http://www.empowerthetaxpayer.org). As such, it’s heavy on “wherefore” but light on “how-to.” Underlying documents include The Beacon Hill Institute Report -- Eliminating Property Taxes in North Dakota and the North Dakota Pork Report.

“Property Tax Revolution” makes some good points. Abolishing property taxes certainly protects home and land ownership from state confiscation for unpaid taxes. It makes a really good point in that repealing the property tax would potentially curtail funding of special interest groups. And, it makes a really, really good point in that abolishing property taxes would probably slow the growth of government.

How these advantages would come to pass remain debatable with no guaranteed payoff. Legislative formulation for revenue distribution is complex at best and is centered in Bismarck. Unless I’ve missed something in reading both the proposed measure and “Property Tax Revolution”, central financing of local jurisdictions by the North Dakota legislature is still political in nature when determining and formulating “legally imposed obligations.” The devil is always in the details. (The blinding “success” of the McCain-Feingold bill to get money out of political campaigns comes to mind.)

The argument rests in part on tenuous support of an unspoken assumption. Unquestionably the lion’s share of North Dakota’s financial surplus rests squarely on oil production. Oil in the ground isn’t worth much until it is extracted. The oil industry is dynamic. If any federal agency puts the kibosh on the oil industry, or when the recently opened Texas fields become more lucrative and economical for production than the Bakken and attention turns south, how long will the billion dollar surplus last to fund the North Dakota budget? Nice rhetoric and constitutional amendments will not replenish the treasury.

Overcoming fear of change rests with the advocates of Measure 2. Reticence to change is human nature. Reticence to change, in the case of not supporting Measure 2, should not make John Q public sound like the bad guy if they are uncomfortable with Measure 2.

Measure 2 could have been marketed better by quietly building allies among various centers of influence in the state. Selling an idea is arguably more effective than changing minds through quarrelsome reproach. Even the North Dakota Taxpayers Association, a fiscally conservative voice of the taxpayer, remains neutral on Measure 2.

Without good marketing, who will willingly follow through? The proponent attitude toward the legislature has to be more than “The people passed it; you fix it.” Through good marketing, community and state leaders will help convince the voters to pass the measure because the leaders know how to implement it -- and why.

Finding revolutionaries to create a revolt is not the same as leading revolutionaries passionate about their cause. The first requires conveying and instilling passion to make a revolution happen. The second recognizes that many people have the passion but need direction. The frog in the water may be getting hot but is not yet passionate enough to jump out of the pot.

Measure 2 will take one of two paths. Either it will pass on June 12. Or, it will be defeated. If defeated, proponents should try, try again. This is often only the beginning of the life cycle for a significant measure. Next time, market it better.

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

How do wars end? They usually end the same way they always have. One side wins.

Will the US win the war against al-Qaeda and the Taliban? Probably, but not soon.

So many Americans have succumbed to political correctness that they are divorced from reality. In their thinking, America encounters cultural challenges accruing no ill effects.

Consider the “sensitive” issue of radical, extremist, jihadist Islam.

Giving “radical” and “extremist” some context, in 2010 the estimated world Islamic population was 1.6 billion, or about 23% of the world’s population. That said, if only a tiny fraction of the Islamic world population, say 1%, were “radicalized” that would result in about 1.6 million radicals worldwide. That’s a lot of fanatics prepared to commit murder and mayhem.

More context is revealed when reflecting on events over the past four decades. When connecting the dots reality begins to form a picture.

Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed (1968) by a Muslim extremist.

Eleven Israeli Olympic athletes (1972) were kidnapped and murdered by Muslim extremists.

The US embassy in Tehran, Iran, was stormed in 1979 and 52 American hostages were held 444 days by Muslim extremists.

Throughout the 1980s several Americans were kidnapped and killed in Lebanon by Muslim extremists. These same Muslim extremists laid waste to a previously beautiful country.

In 1983 the Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, was blown up by Muslim extremists using two truck bombs killing 241 Americans.

The cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked by Muslim extremists in 1985. American Leon Klinghoffer, 69, was murdered in his wheel chair and his body thrown overboard.

TWA flight 847 was hijacked in Athens, Greece, by Muslim extremists. Navy diver Robert Stethem was tortured and murdered and his body was thrown on the tarmac. The other 153 passengers were held hostage on board for two weeks.

Pan Am flight 103 was blown up in flight over Scotland in 1988 by Muslim extremists killing all 243 on board.

The World Trade Center was bombed the first time in 1993 by Muslim extremists

The US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were attacked with truck bombs in 1998 by Muslim extremists killing hundreds.

We’ll never forget what happened September 11, 2001, when Muslim extremists killed thousands in New York City and the Pentagon by flying jets into their targets.

In 2002, reporter Daniel Pearl was publicly beheaded by Muslim extremists.

These are a few of the incidents, the ones that made the headlines. This was just the beginning of the long war.

In Islam, as in the West, minorities sometimes dictate to the majority especially through threat and intimidation. The long war is more than an assault on the West. Throughout the Muslim world population Sunni, Shia and Sufi fight one another. Different versions of Islam held by various clerics lead to unbelievable violence. Saudi Arabia persecutes Shiites. Iran persecutes Sunnis and Sufis. Egypt persecutes Shiites. And so it goes.

Charges brought by Muslim against Muslim are no different than charges against Western infidels. They include, “fighting against God,” blasphemy, “hurting religious feelings,” “publishing untruths and disturbing public minds,” “dissension from religious dogma,” “insulting Islam,” “promoting pluralism,” and “propagating spiritual liberalism.” Punishments range from imprisonment to torture to beheading and are common from Indonesia to Africa.

Muslim reformers in the West are routinely threatened with death. Even non-Muslims in the US face intimidation. Random House refused to publish a romance novel about Mohammed’s wife, “Jewel of Medina,” to protect the safety of the author, Random House employees and booksellers.

Under intimidation, Yale University Press has removed illustrations of Mohammed from some forthcoming publications.

Molly Norris previously with the Seattle Weekly suggested people participate in “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day.” After death threats the FBI recommended she go into hiding where she remains and has reverted to a new identity.

Moral sensibilities have nothing to do with these self-imposed restraints. It has to do with fear. Nevertheless, political correctness demands that Americans be blind to events such as these.

Meanwhile, the long, slow war boils on even within our borders.

We may eventually wear down the extremists through force and ideological appeal. Al-Qaeda and fellow zealots will not gain their beloved transnational Caliphate. They will not destroy Western influence.

This prolonged war will come to an end the way all wars do. And, the victor will not be the Islamic extremists.

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

On January 26, 2012, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Army General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, delivered to congress a defense spending plan that many see as unwittingly creating a hollow force.

Historically speaking, and shoddy journalism notwithstanding, the federal government spends only a small portion on defense. The current defense budget is 3.5% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). By comparison, the peak of President Reagan’s military build-up amounted to 6.3% of GDP. Cold War spending was 7.5% of GDP. Purported bloated defense spending is a myth. Nevertheless, big defense cuts are coming.

Congress and President Obama’s administration must realize that defense spending is not the cause of our economic problems. To proceed on such a premise places the United States, our freedom and our interests around the world at risk.

The most controversial cuts in defense spending include proposed cuts in health care, cuts in force structure and major reductions in Army and Marine manpower.

Health care for active duty military, retirees, National Guard and reservists will take the largest hit. Generations of young people were induced into decades of arduous service with the promise that this would earn them the current health care package. The promise acknowledged their sacrifices as an up-front premium that few Americans are willing to pay. Defense cut proposals now renege on those promises and the fact that retirees have earned their promised health care. Many now count on promised health care to maintain their quality of life.

The defense cuts disproportionately shift health care costs to TRICARE and TRICARE for Life recipients. Prior to the early 1990s military personnel were promised health care delivered by the military upon retirement. In the 1990s retirees were expelled from the military health care system and were required to use TRICARE, followed later by Medicare coupled with TRICARE for life. Now, military retirees are expected to pay for what was once guaranteed compensation.

Especially disturbing is the fact that military retirees are the only group of government retirees that will face means-testing in a tiered approach to paying for their own health care, something that grossly violates the decades-long promise.

Unlike the civilian community, the military community, and especially the professional corps, is at a disadvantage. While civilians established themselves in trades, professions and other careers, military personnel had no such advantage. Only a few chose to serve whereas many more chose not too. Societies for millennia have recognized the sacrifice of military service and have compensated their military personnel accordingly.

In jeopardy is the highly successful recruitment and retention programs of an all-volunteer military.

An excellent case may be made for retaining health care for military retirees using historical experience. When the US cuts military compensation so that serving years of rigorous service is no longer worth the sacrifice, retention and recruitment suffer. That is what happened in the 1990s after constant pay, retirement and health care reductions.

Military personnel watch the way their predecessors are treated. Retirees are the best recruiters for the next generation of military personnel. Too often during the 1980s and 1990s the perception of treatment of retirees was “...and don’t let the door hit you in butt on the way out.” The nation’s defense paid a price in retention and personnel readiness.

At least 34 military organizations totaling over 5 million active, Guard, reserve and retired military oppose the president and congress in their plans to cut promised compensation. Anyone who knows of or has a family member connected to the military might consider reinforcing the 5 million voices by adding their own voice in support of our servicemen and women.

Senator Jim Webb spoke plainly at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on March 8. “All of this boils down to what a soldier or Marine or sailor or someone in the Air Force can see what happened to the people who went before them -- how they were treated after they left the uniform. I grew up in the Marine Corps tradition and no Marine is ever left behind, and I feel just as strongly about the commitment that we have made to lifetime medical care for the people who have served....How we take care of these people is one of the great litmus tests that people who are serving right now are going to be looking at.”

Plenty of waste, fraud and abuse in the Defense Department and federal government overall must and should be cut first. Cutting the federal budget on the backs of military personnel, past and present, is a risky move our country can ill afford.

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

My son-in-law wears a classic T-shirt depicting Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Castro and Mao at a drunken soiree. Implication? The Party is over!

 Well, nice sentiment, but not quite true. Under the Obama regime the Party lives on. Glimmers of Marxism should be evident to any moderate who lived during the 1930s through the 1980s.

Lieutenant General William G. Boykin (Ret.), former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, and a no-nonsense soldier, holds clear views on America’s leftward tilt and is not shy to say so.

He observes that we hear a lot about “socialism” and “Marxism” with the mainstream media urging Americans to tone down the rhetoric because we are not moving in that direction. General Boykin disagrees. As an anti-terrorism specialist, he knows Marxism when he sees it and he sees the emergence of the model within America. A rose by any other name is still a rose.is 36 year military career tempers his views. General Boykin served with the original Delta Force. Later, he served as Delta Force commander that fought the infamous Battle of Mogadishu. The movie “Black Hawk Down” depicting that battle gratuitously omitted the fact that Boykin was the mission commander. Much later he served as Commanding General of the US Army Special Forces Command and then as CG of the Army’s John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center.

Boykin is also known as a Christian gentleman of the highest order. As such, he holds what used to be common Christian views of the world and of America. Today his comments referring to the War on Terror in Biblical terms are cast as extremist. This is political correctness gone awry. Attacks on Boykin’s Christianity intentionally mask a deliberate shift in traditional ideology, beliefs and values that made America great.

Boykin views the following points as an emerging pattern after the Marxist model.

            1. Nationalize major sectors of the economy. That was the effect, if not the intent, of the auto and bank bailouts to solve the “crisis” of the US economy. (“Never let a serious crisis go to waste.” -- Rahm Emanuel, former White House Chief of Staff)

            2. Redistribute the wealth. Obama’s several administration appointees reflect his thoughts and intents. On July 7, 2010 he nominated Donald Berwick in a recess appointment to head CMS (Medicare and Medicaid). On December 2, 2011 Berwick left the position because the US Senate would not confirm him. Speaking in the UK he specifically cited health care reform as the best vehicle for wealth redistribution.

Obama proceeded to establish 45 “czars” without Senate confirmation to administer his vision for change and wealth redistribution.

For example, self-proclaimed communist Anthony “Van” Jones was appointed by Obama in March 2009 to a newly created position of Special Advisor for Green Jobs. He advocated redistributing wealth for Obama‘s climate and energy initiatives. We all know now how that went.

           3. Discredit the opposition. Example: A Department of Homeland Security Memo (http://bit.ly/homelandsecuritymemo) sent to law enforcement agencies nation-wide identified the greatest threat to America as “rightwing” Christian groups, pro-life groups, 2d Amendment groups and returning Veterans. The intent was to discredit that portion of the population most likely to resist coerced change. Strangely, the memo said nothing about Islamic terrorists.

           4. Censorship. Preponderant elements of the mainstream media are unabashedly supportive of the Obama regime’s leftward tilt. Censorship of the MSM is not the issue. Silencing alternative voices is. Example: Hate crimes legislation suppresses and censors pastors and churches. This, too, is part of the Marxist model. Hate crimes legislation (H.R. 2647), signed by Obama on October 28, 2009, could not pass congress on its own merit. It was attached as an amendment to the “must pass” 2010 defense appropriations bill. This legislation stifles opposition to homosexuality, same sex marriage, abortion, the realities of Islam and the danger Islam presents.

           5. Gun control. The United Nations Small Arms Treaty currently before the UN will come to the US Senate for approval. If approved, Obama said he will sign the treaty. If signed into law, this treaty becomes the law of the land trumping the 2d Amendment. This treaty will determine how Americans can buy, sell, posses and position weapons. Marxists have always feared an armed populace.

           6. Establish a constabulary force. Then-Senator Obama stated he would establish a national civilian security force that would be as large as, and as well equipped as, the US military. Is this possible? Yes. Part of his health care legislation (H.R. 3590.as Section 5210 -- which congress didn’t read) authorizes a ready reserve corps, subject to the president, in a national crisis. (There’s that word “crisis” again.)

The Party is not over. It just assumed a new façade. Many see America as General Boykin sees America. He knows something about political correctness and the danger it poses. With a leftward tilt, no wonder so many sense a true crisis of confidence in government.

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

I’ve met a few unforgettable individuals in my time.

 I first met Barry McCaffrey as a classmate at the US Army Command and General Staff College where I was a Captain and he was a Lieutenant Colonel McCaffrey served in the US Army for 32 years before retiring as a four-star General. When he retired he was the most highly decorated General serving on active duty. His awards included three Purple Heart medals (wounded three times in combat), two Distinguished Service Crosses (second highest award for valor) and two Silver Stars for valor. After retiring he served eight years as Professor of International Security Studies at West Point.

General McCaffrey is now a consultant based in Northern Virginia. As such he is free to express his personal opinions, and does so. On January 12, 2012 he presented a seminar to NBC news executives and producers on the situation and possible consequences of a Persian Gulf confrontation in concert with other dangerous national security challenges.

His presentation comprised material from unclassified sources including the CIA 2010 World Fact Book. He tempered his seminar with his decades-long training and experience gleaned from involvement in international security affairs.

The US is ordering three Navy carrier battle groups into the Gulf region. McCaffrey questions this action. In his judgment the US should not place a carrier in the narrow Gulf waters if, in fact, combat operations ensue. Contrary to popular impressions, the Iranian military has the capability to sink a carrier in the constrained Gulf waters. That would herald all-out war.

Unwise congressional action drove this confrontation forcing the Obama administration to impose economic sanctions on Iran thus blocking Iran’s ability to export oil. McCaffrey’s point is that diplomacy falls in the realm of the executive and not the legislative branch. Congress tied the hands of the Secretary of State.

Even if Iran implodes from economic sanctions and internal pressures, Iran will not forsake its nuclear ambitions. She will achieve an initial nuclear capability within 36 months. Within 60 months Iran will have a dozen weapons with missile and fighter delivery systems capable of striking Israel, Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states and regional US forces. With few US diplomatic options left, Iranian military options escalate.

McCaffrey believes the slightest Iranian miscalculation will result in a major military confrontation in the next 12 months. The US would require a large military air and naval campaign of several months duration to eliminate the threat and make the Gulf safe for shipping.

The US does not live in a vacuum; we do live in a dangerous world fraught with risk. Here are the primary risks facing the US today in relative order of priority but not necessarily in order of occurrence. Multiple scenarios could evolve. Keep in mind, the military does not decide which engagements to pursue. That is a political decision. The question is -- can we address any of these risks adequately given President Obama’s massive reduction in US military capability?

-- First: Withdrawal from Afghanistan. US and NATO forces are 870 miles from the open sea. This requires retrograde through an uncooperative Pakistan. A 2014 withdrawal date alerts the Taliban in both Afghanistan and Pakistan as to our intensions and beckons their resurgence.

-- Second: The implosion of Iraq coupled with aggression by Iran provokes war in the Gulf region.

-- Third: The North Korean leadership transition fails followed by a military confrontation with South Korea and possible nuclear confrontation throughout the western Pacific.

-- Fourth: Pakistan collapses and the military looses control of 90 to 110 nuclear weapons.

-- Five: Hugo Chavez dies in Venezuela and / or Fidel Castro dies in Cuba precipitating violent regime changes replacing the current regimes with more radical governments unfriendly to the US but cooperative with Islamic extremists or drug cartels.

--Six: Mexico’s summer elections produce a new government reaching an accord with the seven major drug cartels in country. Mexican rule of law collapses further threatening our southern boarder.

US security environment is dynamic. America still serves as the world’s economic powerhouse for now, but the American people face a crisis of confidence in their institutions. Based on recent Gallup polling, the US military and police forces are held in highest regard. Alternatively, the President ranks at 35% with congress ranking at 12%. Television news, newspapers, banks and public schools rank between the President and congress.

With US elections pending in November, Americans have a lot of soul-searching to do. Who as president and who in congress will lead us in these perilous times?

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

Had enough of the latest religious liberty controversy, that scandalous announcement made by President Obama’s Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius making people of conscience subordinate to the state?

 Stand by. Here is my two cents worth.

The issue centers on a January 20 announcement by Secretary Sebelius that all health care providers who receive federal money must provide contraception and other birth control treatments such as the morning-after pill -- free. Not only must health care providers offer contraception, abortions and sterilization -- they must pay for it as well. That is the edict. No other considerations matter. The president rules. Period.

In November 2011 the highest Catholic prelate in America, Archbishop Timothy Dolan (soon to be Cardinal Dolan), was assured by President Obama that the Catholic Church would not be forced to adopt any policy that would violate her principles. The January 20 HHS announcement sandbagged the archbishop.

The Obama health care legislation of March 2011 set up this issue to foist a major policy change in contravention of the US Constitution’s First Amendment. Bishop James McFadden from Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, addressed the issue bluntly January 24 on an ABC News affiliate, “In a totalitarian government, they would love our system. This is what Hitler and Mussolini and all of them tried to establish: A monolith, so all the children will be educated in one set of beliefs and one way of doing things.”

It is not just Catholic sensibilities that are offended. Many diverse groups see this as an assault on religion, on people of faith and their convictions. Disparate groups including the National Association of Evangelicals, the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, Lutheran Church Missouri Synod and the Assembly of Canonical Orthodox Bishops of North and Central America see their goose slowly roasted. Even American Muslim clerics object.

This transcends the Catholic issue; it is more than a religious or even a social issue. It should be clear to anyone with a fundamental understanding of civics that the issue centers on conscience and Constitution.

Obama’s pronouncement derives from the health care legislation (Obamacare) designed to expand government to instruct citizens, including churches, church institutions and schools what they can and cannot do. This reflects the totalitarian thinking of the Obama administration and underscores his promise to change America -- with or without the consent of the governed.

As the Heritage Foundation succinctly puts it, “The Obamacare statute has concentrated in the hands of the federal government broad power over the one-sixth of the American economy that is health care.” That broad legislation, in part, allows the HHS secretary to make rules transcending religious institutions requiring them to provide health care insurance for abortion and sterilization against their beliefs. Likewise, Obamacare forces individuals to buy health insurance. This part of Obamacare has been contested and is now before the US Supreme Court to determine the law’s constitutionality.

It is wrong to think that Obama caved in to political pressure when he announced an “accommodation” at midday on February 10. In fact, he has no authority to either mandate or compromise. In reality, he is hacking away at our First Amendment liberties to promote the “change” he envisions.

Some see Obama’s decision as a blooper, a mistake, a goof. I don’t buy it. What Secretary Sebelius ruled was intentional, premeditated and approved by President Obama. I do not believe for a nanosecond that the Obama administration overplayed its hand or that they “guessed” wrong on his policy change. The president, his cabinet and his “czars” are too politically astute to make a blunder of this magnitude.

Late on February 10, Obama’s “accommodation” was rejected by the Catholic bishops.

Since when does a president have the power to rule unilaterally gutting religious liberty and then claim the power to make a compromise on that same ruling? He doesn’t. This is how we lose our Constitution and our liberty.

The policy change was intentional. Obama said from his campaign forward that he intended to change America. He is doing exactly that and will not allow the Constitution to stand in the way.

In the end, the entire issue revolves around freedom. Will we keep our freedom, or lose it?

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

The political season is upon us and North Dakota is not exempt. As conventions and primaries approach one of the items stirring up sentiment is Measure 2.

 We haven’t reached the February midpoint, yet emotions run high over Measure 2. To wit, proponents of the measure are accusing opponents of deliberately lying in their objections to the measure. Tsk, tsk.

 Measure 2 is a proposal to amend the North Dakota Constitution to prohibit political subdivisions from levying taxes on the assessed value of property. Political subdivisions include cities, counties, school districts, townships, water districts, fire protection districts and soil conservation districts. Measure 2 will be on the primary election ballot June 12.

 Empower the Taxpayer supports Measure 2. North Dakota League of Cities, North Dakota County Commissioners Association, AARP and others, opposes it. (Note: Opposition entities for the most part are recipients of government largess.) By the time the North Dakota Republican Convention kicks off on March 31 the proponents and the opposition will be at it tooth and nail.

 So, what does Measure 2 do?

  -- Measure 2 abolishes property taxes effective January 1, 2012.

  -- Services now funded by property tax would be funded by North Dakota oil revenue.

  -- All local operations would not necessarily be funded. Only “legally imposed obligations”   must be funded. “Legally imposed obligations” is not defined by Measure 2 or by law.

  -- Police and fire protection may or may not be considered a “legally imposed obligation.” The obligation might be determined by “first impression,” or the legislature may define it.

  -- Local officials would still have “sole discretion” over expenditure of their budgets. How each jurisdiction would be administered their share of funding would be determined by the legislature -- unless the legislature chose to defer the decision-making authority to some bureaucratic agency. As a template from the federal level, we’ve already seen legislation granting Health and Human Services and other departments the regulation and decision-making authority affecting funding.

 It is easy to fall for the emotional appeal of “no more taxes” and “You won’t lose your home if you can’t pay your taxes.” Given a prevalent welfare mentality, it is also easy to buy into the notion to let someone else pay the bills. Emotion must be tempered with rational judgment.

 Authors of Measure 2 are not necessarily advocating their position altruistically out of the goodness of their heart. Hard questions to ask are “What’s in it for them?” and “What’s going on behind the scenes to motivate the writing of Measure 2?”

 A single major source of revenue for towns and counties such as oil might be placed in jeopardy given an adverse political environment. Certainly oil-rich North Dakota is a wonder to behold. But, converting oil to revenue for equitable distribution is another matter. We have witnessed onerous political decisions at the national level halting the flow of oil from Anwar in Alaska, the Gulf of Mexico and Canada via the Keystone Pipeline. Capricious political decisions generated this travesty. Bad political decisions via federal agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Fish and Wildlife Service or other federal agencies could very easily put the kibosh on North Dakota’s source of revenue proposed by Measure 2. It might be safer to sustain a diversified and decentralized revenue stream with many people having a vested interest.

 Be careful what you wish for. Ask questions until you are satisfied with the answers. Think beyond “stage one” of Measure 2, that is, beyond the promises and the immediate gratification. What are the potential political and economic unintended consequences once Measure 2 is adopted? If you are not comfortable with the answers, trust your instincts.

 An old adage is a spin-off of the Golden Rule and it goes like this: He who has the gold makes the rules. Towns and counties relying upon one major source of revenue to be distributed by a legislative committee or, worse yet, by a state agency implementing a sterile and impersonal formula drawn up by another legislative committee is something each voter should think through very carefully before voting for or against Measure 2.

 Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

Call them the establishment or call them what you will, but for the sake of brevity I call professional politicians the PPs. They are distinguished principally by their arrogance and condescension. Mostly Democrats comprise the PPs along with some Republican “wannabes.” They are reinforced and supported by mainstream media sycophants.

With regard to the rest of America, PPs are by far a minority. Not surprisingly, America is ruled, not governed, by PPs.

If the political elite are known as PPs, then it is only natural that the rest of us be known as the AOAs, all other Americans. We are also known as the folks in fly-over country -- or simply as hicks.

Every issue divides the country into partisan battlefields on which two very different Americas fight. Probably no more than fifteen percent of the AOAs agree with the thinking, the goals and the philosophy of the PPs. The rest of AOAs believe and think very differently. The truth is that America is seriously split between the few who hold the ruling power and the rest who are forced by fiat law and regulation into submission.

This situation has been developing for a long time. The slow capitulation of the AOAs into a subservient class resembles the proverbial frog in water slowly boiled without the frog realizing what is happening.

PPs hold odd beliefs. PPs believe AOAs are not smart enough to know what is best for themselves. PPs think they must decide for the rest of us. They believe that, by virtue of their long experience in office, they should continue to rule over us.

PPs cry for bipartisanship and compromise as a plea for business as usual. They believe this emotional plea plays on the heartstrings of the AOA sympathy for fairness. They believe it aids them in their re-election bid to remain in office.

We AOAs believe in merit as the way to get ahead in life. Performing well in class and on the job is the way to advance our lot. PPs look down on merit. PPs prefer to count and segregate by race and gender and class in order to bestow advancement.

PPs have the gall and temerity to think of themselves as better than the rest of us and more qualified to determine what is best for us. Therefore, they believe the AOAs need them to be in charge of our health care, what we eat, how much water we should use to flush a toilet, what kind of light bulbs we should use, what we will do about obesity, what cars we will drive and how they will be powered. The list goes on.

All of these measures require increased regulation and control over AOAs because we the people would never stand for this under our concept of freedom and liberty. The PPs who impose their will on the rest of America know their time is short. Eventually the AOAs will get smart and rise up.

The PPs reside mainly in Washington, DC, the epicenter of world political power. Washington is dominated by Democrats and the left. Republicans are the way they are in recent decades because they tried to emulate Democrats in order to succeed.

It is human nature for people to want to be liked. People want to belong. Everybody wants to get along.

For forty years, until the revolution inspired by House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Democrats controlled the US House of Representatives. In 1994 the Republicans took control of the House as well as the Senate. During their time in the wilderness it was natural for Republicans to go along to get along. They took the political scraps thrown to them by the Democrats. Republicans came to believe they had to adopt the same government growth and spending priorities as Democrats just to hold their seats, to remain on the inside. They aligned themselves as PPs.

People want to believe the best in their elected officials. But, when does that belief morph into emotional gullibility to be toyed with by the PPs?

Government must no longer be the business of professionals. That was V. I. Lenin’s concept of government. We all know where that led.

What to do about the situation? A third party is not the answer. That would be a recipe for disaster. The Tea Party is responsible for the takeover of the House of Representatives in 2010. But, the Tea Party needs a political vehicle.

Removing the Democrat Party from positions of power is in the best interests of the AOAs. As repugnant as it may seem, the best way for AOAs to accomplish this is to focus energy through the Republican Party in the near term. The objective is to achieve non-Democrat Party majorities in congress and the state houses.

In the end, AOAs do not want partisan government. They want self-government. AOAs do not want to exchange Democrat control for Republican control if it means more of the same.

A revolt is brewing. Vote responsibly in November.

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

God’s world never ceases to amaze. One of the tiniest creatures in His creation is designed to thrive despite the harshest conditions in a messed up world.

I speak of the birds in winter. These critters must be the toughest of beasts.

Birds, like other wildlife and livestock, will survive the North Dakota winter if they have food and shelter to escape the wind. Nighttime temperatures may fall below zero and the wind-chill drop to minus twenty or thirty degrees, but the next morning at sunrise the birds are busy at the feeding stations stoking their little furnaces. To witness this feat of survival is truly impressive.

I’ve spent many amusing moments observing the birds feeding at the array of stations I’ve set for them outside my kitchen window. I wonder if they regard me with equal interest from the other side of the glass.

Now they’re back!

One of my favorite winter birds is the Common Redpoll, a diminutive member of the finch family. Their most popular feeding station is an eight inch nylon bag loosely woven and filled with Nyjer thistle seed. Thistle is most favored especially among Redpolls.

The pattern is always the same. First one, then another, then another Redpoll darts onto the feed bag. They fly toward the thistle bag hitting it feet first sticking to it like Velcro. Nice trick for a “thistle missile.”

The Common Redpoll typically nests in the tundra of far northern Canada. Then, in late autumn, their idea of seeking a more hospitable climate is to wander south to southern Canada -- or North Dakota -- where they spend the winter. This gives a whole new meaning to the term “snowbird.”

About five inches long, slightly smaller than a House Sparrow, the Common Redpoll (red “head”) takes its name from the jaunty dark red cap pushed forward on its forehead. Other identifying markings include a rosy breast, two narrow wing bars, a black chin and a streaked rump.

Its close cousin, the Hoary Redpoll, is more frosty appearing with little or no streaking on the rump. Nevertheless, telling the two species apart cam be tricky. Although the Hoary Redpoll nests even farther north along the Arctic Ocean, it may be found together with the Common Redpoll in its southern range during the winter.

Redpolls are neither aggressive nor territorial, just gregarious. I’ve seen numbers ranging from ten to thirty in a group at my feeders. At times their numbers intimidate others of my favorite winter birds, the chickadees and nuthatches.

The distance the Redpolls travel south into southern Canada and the northern US depends upon how early the winter settles over the Arctic as well as the availability of food. Last year I don’t recall seeing many Redpolls. This year they seem more numerous.

Like the chickadee, the Redpoll is a rather tame bird not at all shy of humans especially at feeding time. I’ve heard of Redpolls sitting on a person’s shoulder or feeding from the hand, but I’ve never experienced this. Still, they do come within arms reach when I’m replenishing the feeding stations.

Although thistle seed is by far the Redpolls’ favorite food, they take other seed as well including sunflower and millet. They feed equally well at the stations, on the ground or upside-down hanging under a seed bag.

I’ve read that Redpolls really enjoy pecking at a salt block and taking fresh water during the winter. I’ve offered water without any takers. I’ve considered offering salt and water together.

Redpoll antics are as enjoyable as any other of the several winter birds visiting our yard. I’ll delight in their presence until they once again head north in the spring. Then they’ll be on the leading edge of the great avian migration to settle in their nesting grounds in the far northern Canadian tundra.

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

How fast things change. Take, for example, the beneficiaries of North Dakota’s fledgling oil boom. Six years wrought immense monetary transformation across Mountrail County.

Today it is easy to spot many of the newly rich from their classic behavior. The underlying attitudes are a dead giveaway.

 -- Many people tend to spend their new found wealth fast and frivolously. Tangible evidence of their affluence announces to the world “I’ve arrived.” The accumulation of pelf takes on the appearance of a consummate flea market.

  -- Handling their financial assets intelligently and discreetly is not their strong suit. They may or may not know how to preserve and shelter their good fortune much less make it work for them. What would they know about investment instruments of below average risk. Why would they know how the “old moneyed class” goes about investing sums in a variety of tax-free municipal bonds living off the untaxed proceeds rather than squandering their capital? How would they know about involved techniques of trusts that direct their assets according to their wishes?

  -- Invariably their conversation revolves around their money. Central to the discussion is what they have, what they’ll get and how they plan to spend it. Old money, on the other hand, has divergent interests to occupy their discussion.

  -- The truly wealthy old moneyed folks may still acquire items that only they can afford. The newly wealthy folks, on the other hand, can now acquire what was once reserved for only the truly wealthy. Oil boom beneficiaries now afford exclusive vacations, properties and cars that were once available to only a few. The most recent mark of opulence that the truly wealthy can enjoy is philanthropy. Giving away vast sums of money may now be the final status symbol.

But do they? What about a simple tithe? What a novel idea. Perish the thought! That’s a five letter word to be avoided at all costs (no pun intended).

The newly rich, or as the French say, “nouveau riche,” have a lot to learn about living with wealth. A related term, “noblesse oblige” (literally “nobility obligates”), implies an honorable or benevolent behavior considered to be the responsibility of persons of high rank or birth -- or new found wealth. Noblesse oblige implies that privilege must be balanced with duty toward those less fortunate. That is a lesson not easily learned.

New found wealth does not automatically confer dignity and honor. Acquiring wealth does not necessarily translate into noble character. Like it or not, newly acquired money may well produce tawdry and vulgar behavior in the beneficiary. The flaunting of opulence begets the acquisition of “things.” Who would have guessed?

People with oil money jingling in their pockets are about to discover what it means to live in the rarefied atmosphere of wealth. With affluence comes the burden of a new station in life.

“Have nots” will always portray the moneyed class as “greedy.” The new oil magnates once lived as “have nots;” they used to point to the “haves” and scoff at the wealthy as “greedy” recipients of ill-gotten gain. They now find themselves on the receiving end of disapprobation.

Then there are the new friends. New friends, unwanted at best, may soon come a-calling. Inevitably, those with their hands out offer any excuse to meet the inexperienced affluent. Maybe not classified as “friends,” nevertheless the IRS would like to make their acquaintance.

A change in tax brackets necessarily draws the attention of the IRS. Suddenly, the old “soak the rich” mantra takes on a whole new and unwelcome meaning. Ah yes, the newly affluent must learn their place in the pecking order.

Money may be wonderful and a fist full of dollars a heady thing, especially for those who once lived without. But, let’s face it. Being rich is tough.

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

Cancer. Such a powerful word. The very mention of cancer raises concern and alarm. The emotional power of this single word conjures thoughts of deadly malignancies and interminable suffering.

            Knowledge, too, is powerful. Knowing something about the type of cancer helps us deal with it rationally. This is particularly true of skin cancer. Unlike internal cancers, skin cancer can be touched and seen and, in doing so, the mystery of the unknown diminishes.

            I speak from experience. My first bout with skin cancer culminated with surgery in 1977. I wish I knew then what I know now. I wish my physicians knew then what they know now.

            Spring foreshadows summer days in the sun. Now is a good time to recount my own experiences with skin cancer as words of encouragement.

            As a young adult, I first noticed a red spot on my left temple but promptly ignored it. In about a year’s time the spot changed in texture and appearance becoming scaly and somewhat larger.

            In the months that followed the spot grew more scaly and began to “weep.” It never healed completely, a telltale sign that should have alerted me. In retrospect, I was witnessing the slow transformation of sun-damaged skin (actinic keratosis) into what became basal cell carcinoma. Various keratoses are pre-cancerous but, if allowed to continue untreated, the keratoses may become cancerous. My case was a textbook example.

            During a routine exam I discussed the spot with my physician. He referred me to a dermatologist and a week later I was in surgery. The surgeon excised a rather large basal cell and then repaired the wound using a skin graft with skin taken from the area of my collar bone. That was my first, but by no means my last, encounter with skin cancer.

            Three types of skin cancer may result from exposure to the sun’s ultraviolet rays. Basal cell carcinoma is the most common skin cancer. Prompt removal of a basal cell in its early stage is key to minimizing damage. Removal may include excision, as in my case, with the resulting scar. Alternative procedures may involve electrodesiccation, micrographic surgery or laser surgery.

            Squamous cell carcinoma is the second most common skin cancer. In addition to sun damage, squamous cells can also result from burns, scars, X-rays or chemicals. Treatment is essentially the same as for basal cells. Squamous cells rarely spread to vital organs, but if they do, the results can be serious.

            Melanoma, the least common skin cancer but also the most serious, can be deadly. Initially, melanoma may resemble a mole but differs in that it may be asymmetrical, have an irregular border, have non-uniform colors and may increase rapidly in diameter. As with any suspicious skin blemish, a dermatologist should be consulted immediately. If allowed to progress, colonies of melanoma cells may spread to internal organs. Typically, melanoma is removed surgically.

            In my most recent case, state-of-the-art Mohs procedure was performed to remove an early stage melanoma. Developed by Dr. Frederic Mohs, this procedure was refined over the past seventy years. As the most exact and precise method of tumor removal it minimizes the chance of cancer regrowth while reducing potential scarring. It relies on microscopic identification and removal of cancerous growth layer by layer while leaving healthy tissue untouched.

            Given my skin cancer history, regular dermatology visits are a must. Treatment focuses on identifying and eliminating the damaged skin cells before they become cancerous. Freezing the evident keratoses with liquid nitrogen is routine. A series of prescribed treatments using topical ointment containing fluorouracil may follow. The active ingredient isolates and kills the less obvious damaged skin cells before developing into visible keratoses.

            People with fair skin, blue or green eyes and red or blond hair run the highest risk of sun damage. Dark skinned, non-Hispanic people are not exempt from skin damage. A serious sunburn incurred by a young person may manifest itself as damaged skin in later years.

            Preventing sun-damaged skin is a year-round task. The Skin Cancer Foundation and the American Cancer Society recommend the following sun safety tips:

            * Limit sunbathing.

            * Avoid unnecessary sun exposure between 10:00 AM and 3:00 PM.

            * Use sunscreens rated with a sun protection factor (SPF) of 30 or higher that protects from both UVA and UVB radiation. I use sunscreen with an SPF 45.

            * Wear protective clothing, especially a broad-brimmed hat.

            * Examine skin regularly for changes in blemishes.

            Experience is a great teacher and understanding skin cancer makes prevention a whole lot easier.

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

Time for a time out.

            News, as entertainment, sells. News stories stir and excite emotions of sadness, grief and terror as the 24-hour news cycles of the cable news stations and the world wide web roll on. Fast paced news bombards us with triumph and tragedy hour by hour.

            Floods, fires, earthquakes, unemployment, poor economy, war, assassinations, murders -- all this gripping information pummels us relentlessly. Reporting these dreadful occurrences could drive a sane man mad.

            I consume as much news as anybody, but enough is enough. So much buzzing, booming confusion arrives through the media each day that there comes a time to withdraw, heal and rejuvenate. I’m not a recluse by nature, but I do have my ways of retreating from the incessant assault of world events.

            One way is to retreat into the world of books, into literature and poetry. Some of the finest writing percolated to the top over the centuries and survives today. But, there is an even more fruitful way to evade.

            Music, classical music, the great pieces, offer solace in the midst of a troubled world. It soothes mind and soul with a full array of emotions especially calm and happiness. It is a beautiful interlude from the volatile array of emotions produced by the world of news. Even notes of sadness in a healthy sense, if there is such a thing, may inspire something beautiful.

            How little I know about music, yet I know what I like. A talented composer communicates the universal appeal of music to the soul. I find a sense of reasonableness in the classical music of the 1700s, 1800s and early 1900s. It seems so rational while at the same time touching the heart. J. S. Bach’s Brandenburg Concertos 2 and 3, Handel’s Water Music, Vivaldi’s Four Seasons, Respighi’s Ancient Airs and Dances and Pachelbel’s Canon in D comprise a few of my many favorites.

            I listen for the different instruments.

            I listen for variation produced by different conductors and orchestras.

            I listen for the theme repeated in different forms until the “far out point” or FOP is reached.

            Great music isn’t here to make us smarter, it’s here to give us pleasure. There is an endless variety of great music to encourage the soul, to cultivate the love of the beautiful.

            My purpose in listening to great music is to explore, cherish and savor something I enjoy and not be distracted from that pleasure with detail or disruption.

            In my experience there is nothing wrong with liking one piece and disliking another. For instance, I do not particularly care for the discordant classical “music” of the late 20th century. If I don’t enjoy a certain piece, I move on. There is plenty of other music available.

            I really don’t care if I understand the mysteries of Gregorian chant or the intricacies of Renaissance counterpoint. Knowing something of the composer and when and why he wrote his music makes the pieces more personal. These things may help my understanding, but not necessarily enhance my listening enjoyment. Other optional items would include historical anecdotes, how music is written, orchestration and acoustics. They all provide insight, but they are optional if they get in the way of my listening enjoyment. It’s better to use whatever information I have to enhance my listening pleasure rather than collect a bunch of unrelated factoids to clutter my mind. Information can always be acquired. I ignore whatever distracts and focus on the enjoyment.

            This is another way of saying that I need not be an expert. I take comfort in realizing I don’t have to earn a Ph.D. to enjoy great music. No previous experience is necessary. It’s a matter of exploring the art and enjoying it for its beauty and power.

            If I sometimes choose to exchange this world for the world of great classical music, it is because I wish to withdraw to renew and regenerate my soul.

            A vast and beautiful world of sound awaits me in solitude.

Dennis M. Patrick can be contacted at P. O. Box 337, Stanley, ND 58784 or (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).