Category Archives: JEmail

Hi John,

I’d just like to invite my fellow Jaspers to mosey on over to my website, which has a lot of information about my current novel, Something Red; the novel’s sequel, The Wicked; and four books of poetry.

Here’s the link:

http://scribe5.wix.com/something-red

More news: Simon and Schuster wants two more books from me–that would be the third book of what will be a trilogy, and a fourth book, as yet undecided.

Regards,

Douglas

# – # – #  

Nicholas, Douglas (MC1964) 

[JR: Congrats. Jaspers don't "mosey"; stride forthrightly with courage or stagger during or after a hard night, but never "mosey". LAFF. Glad your doing well with these projects. So when will you pass Paterson?]  

# – # – # – # – #  2013-May-19 @ 14:49  

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/may/17/pope-francis-attacks-cult-money

# – # – #  

[JR: Guess he want's me to react to it. OK. We don't have "honest money"; we have ever devaluing Gooferment IOUs. Honest commodity money would be fair to the pensioner, the saver, the poor, and the "little guy". Crony Capitalism does things like price controls to support the "friends" of the political class. Otherwise, how do you explain things like diary price supports, sugar parity, and -- my favorite -- pay "farmers" for not growing stuff. Funny how those "farmers" are big political contributors or politicians and bureaucrats themselves. I'd like to see a more honest society with much lower taxes so I could be even more charitable. Unfortunately, the Gooferment steals from all of us.]

[JR: Enough a reaction?]

# – # – # – # – #  2013-May-19 @ 10:30  

Hi Folks,

Still working on it, but it’s up and running!

http://scribe5.wix.com/something-red

Regards,

Douglas

Nicholas, Douglas (MC1964)

# – # – # – # – #  2013-May-07 @ 21:11  

“The Knights of Columbus, by their very nature, is a men’s organization in which only Catholics may participate via membership,” reads a letter written by Sue Weitz…

Somebody needs to remind Ms Weitz that the Society of Jesus limits membership to Roman Catholic males. If it was good enough for Aloysius Gonzaga, it should be good enough for them.

Gerard

Gerard Delaney ’75

# – # – # – # – #   

[JR: Now you have to remember that these are different times. Those dusty old rules are just anachronisms. (pretty big word for fat old white guy injineer). Did you know that the KofC originated Life Insurance? Interesting? Wonder if women could buy insurance? Laff!  ]

# – # – # – # – #  2013-Apr-21 @ 10:14  

Dear CIC,

I’d venture a guess that this is about funding or official recognition as a student organization, not simply allowing students to gather on their own. And I’d bet that an organization called, Catholics for Women’s
Ordination that only allowed Catholic men or women or an organization called Liberal Women Chess Players that only admitted liberal women would also be denied the same official recognition or funding.

I’ll bet that the bar for this recognition or funding is that anyone who is a student or pays a student activity fee must be allowed to join. Seems fair as long as it is evenly applied.

We have (thankfully) left our Catholic ghettos some time ago.

Though I didn’t know him during our time at Alma Mater – RIP my classmate, Bob Gregory.

As always, thanks for your wonderful efforts as CIC and Jottings publisher!!

mike toner
bee ’72
buffalo, ny

# – # – # – # – #   

[JR: Mike, you're much more understanding than I. Maybe I'm just an anti- but I wager that "Catholics for Women's Ordination" would be acceptable under the banner of "inclusion", "political correctness", or "women are immune to criticism". Or, "we just like their cause". Unfortunately "catholic" as a brand is very confused. Something I blame on the Hierarchy and the Laity. We should be asking "How can you call yourself Catholic and … …". Not that I'm any great saint, but I least I don't pretend to be forming young souls. Argh!]

p.s., thanks for the praise, but I’m just a xerox machine. LAFF! Most of the time.

# – # – # – # – #  2013-Apr-21 @ 10:09  

Response to Louis MenchIse:

“The 2nd Amendment ends with the words, “shall not be infringed.” The 1st Amendmant has infringments. One cannot yell, “Fire!” in a crowded theater, nor can one distribute child pornography – to cite just two examples.” This is one of the usual arguments from progressives who try to amend the 2nd Amendment without actually going through the trouble of amending it.

The 2nd Amendment does end with the words, “shall not be infringed.” No one has ever been harmed by another individual keeping or bearing arms. Keeping or bearing is benign. When the arms are actually used is when there is danger, and there are plenty of laws that come into play should one do so. No defender of the 2nd amendment is advocating for the repeal of laws against murder, assault, reckless endangerment, manslaughter, etc. Responsible gun owners take that responsibility very seriously and understand the impact of their actions. I have spoken with many of them and the last thing that they want to do is to actually use to gun against a fellow human being. However with evil in the world, they want to have the choice (pro-choice?) to defend against a deadly attack against themselves or someone in their care. The only way to be able to do that, is to be armed at that precise moment. Where I received my firearm training they stated it very plainly. If you ever have to use a gun to defend yourself, it will change your life…and it won’t be for the better.

Now to address the progressive argument, the First Amendment states, “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech…” Do you notice the difference between “shall not be infringed” and “abridging”? The right to keep and bear arm shall not be infringed, freedom of speech shall not be abridged. According to the Mirriam-Webster dictionary, abridge means to “reduce in scope; to shorten in duration or extent.

Both of these amendments were to protect individual rights from the tyranny of the government. The First Amendment was to prevent the government from muzzling it’s critics. The Second Amendment was not about deer hunting (Governor Cuomo, call your office). It was about the right to shoot at the government if it became tyrannical. Does anyone see how giving the government a national data base of where every gun is located, could infringe on those rights. Would we still be British subjects if King George III knew where every firearm in the Colonies was located? As it is stated in the Declaration of Independence, “that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends [the right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness], it is the Right of the people to alter or abolish it, and institute new Government…” The model of this Republic is that the people are sovereign; a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. As Thomas Jefferson said, “When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.” Which of these statements is closer to the truth?

· Does the IRS fear you, or do you fear the IRS?

· Does the EPA fear you, or do you fear the EPA?

· Does the Federal government fear you, or do you fear the federal government?

Are we closer to the founding principles of this great country, or closer to tyranny?

Bill O’Connell, ‘76

# – # – # – # – #  2013-Apr-15 @ 10:12  

Kevin Moore
Apr 11 (2 days ago)

Good Morning,

It was with much sadness that I read of the passing of Dr. John Ansbro in your last issue of Jasper Jottings. Dr. Ansbro was the chairman of the Philosophy Department while I attended Manhattan and even convinced me to minor in philosophy in my sophomore year. He had a keen sense of what we would now call “social justice”. He was working on a book on Dr. Martin Luther King while I was at MC, although I am not sure he ever finished it. He also used to organize “World Hunger Days” in the resident, commuter, and engineering cafeterias once or twice a semester whereby students would give up their breakfast, lunch and/or dinner have the monies allocated by the college to that student to the food service donated to a world hunger organization. I admit it was quite easy for the residents to be a part of this as most of them skipped breakfast (it started way too early) and the pizza at Broadway Joe’s was far, far superior to anything available in the cafeteria for lunch. I was privileged to work with him on many of these projects which hopefully raised some awareness and help some of those less fortunate than we Jaspers. He was a good man with a sly sense of humor. May he rest in peace.

Kevin Moore
BA 1980

# – # – # – # – #  2013-Apr-13 @ 09:59  

Dear John,

On Tuesday evening the Manhattan College Latino Alumni Club sponsored a presentation by NYPD Deputy Chief Ruben Beltran on the development and use by the Department of various technological tools to help make the City a safer place. His boss, Deputy Police Commissioner, James Onalfo was also present and participated in the discussion as well. It was a very interesting and encouraging to learn how far the Department has come in utilizing modern technology to aide the cop on the street with his day to day duties. I was impressed with what I learned Tuesday evening.

There was an Article in Wednesday’s April 10, 2013 Edition of the New York Daily News at page 2, highlighting some of these new techniques.

I have a copy if you need it.

Best,

Mike

McEneney, Mike (MC1953)

# – # – # – # – #  2013-Apr-11 @ 07:20