YourNeighborhoodNews.com: The Hooksett Banner

Most people think ATVs are just for fun. But police in Pembroke and Allenstown have a more serious use for them. Some of their officers have received training so the vehicles can be used to catch lawbreakers.

And it makes perfect sense. With all the open space and trails around town, there's a lot of ground to cover.

Police plan to use ATVs to catch trespassers and vandals, but will also be able to help Fish and Game check hunting and fishing permits, among other things.

And this is important. Crimes like these cost society time and money, and can hurt property owners and even the environment.

So don't think of these vehicles as unnecessary items being added to the police budget.

For a minimal cost and some safety training, a valuable asset has been added to the crime-busting capabilities of the police department.

This is one of those times when tax money is well spent.
– Editorials published by Neighborhood News Inc. are written by an editorial board. The board is composed of Publisher and President Amy J. Vellucci, Executive Editor Ginger Kozlowski and Managing Editor Christine Heiser.

According to recent reports, Karl Rove had detailed conversations about Valerie Plame, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson's wife and her classified national security responsibilities with at least one political reporter.

Now that we know that Rove told reporters about "Wilson's wife," who told Rove? Rove had to find out about Plame and her job from someone. Where did this information come from?

Rove had previously denied any knowledge of Plame. In August 2004, facing questions of his role in the Plame leak scandal, Rove denied his involvement saying he did not even know who Plame was at the time of the leak.

"Well, I'll repeat what I said to ABC News when this whole thing broke some number of months ago. I didn't know her name and didn't leak her name."

If Rove is innocent, then why would he claim that he didn't know who Plame was? What did he have to hide? Why was he so careful, saying that "I didn't know her name and didn't leak her name" instead of just admitting that he revealed "Wilson's wife" to a reporter? What about the president? What did he know and when did he know it?

Thirty years ago, a president resigned after a dirty tricks coverup known as "Watergate." Rovegate is now upon us. I call on our Congressman Charlie Bass to take the lead in convening an immediate investigation of these matters to see that justice is done.

As for the misinterpretation of my last letter, I beg all to read my letters carefully. I spend an average of two hours on each and try to say precisely what I mean to. Remaining within the 350-word limit is a challenge that is earnestly enjoyed and, I think, accomplished consistently.

I questioned Mr. Jodoin's statement to the Banner. Looking toward the state for help is socialism. I hoped my impression was wrong, wished him success and still do. My stipulation was a given; his success must equal good town government. I encouraged him to do his homework before the other shoe drops. Is that considered an attack?

My statements regarding the town council and our other "trustees" are made to the group and not individually, except where plainly stated. If someone wants to confront me with logical arguments, I will listen and respond kindly. Being ignored discourages etiquette.

As for the interpretation of Bible-teaching, I cannot find the parable of "tolerance" nor the psalm or proverb. I found the word in the Bible, but it referred to God tolerating the evil of Babylon. In fact, I read God would prefer people be either hot or cold. Being lukewarm, he said, "I will spue thee out of my mouth." (Revelations 3:16).

An accurate translation of the word spue is vomit. I think "lukewarm" could be accurately translated to "tolerant." I am not a scholar, so expound to me the root of this claim that "Christ teaches tolerance."

Again, please read the Bible yourself. Read more than one translation too. Seek him, you will find him.

My conclusion that his hand is at work here compels me to act. Therefore, having experience, and knowing that serving in an official capacity for the town is essentially "clipping my own wings," I humbly accept Pat's nomination and endearingly plead that the dollar offered is given to me personally. It will be framed and posted in a place of honor.

As passed, the bill will reinstate the original members of the commission, and allow them to proceed with what was an excellent effort to review and revise the child support guidelines and custody laws.

In its report, the commission strongly recommended changing the child support guidelines from an "income shares" model, which in reality was nothing more than a Communistic "transfer of wealth" scheme, also known as "disguised alimony," to a "cost shares" model, based on the actual costs involved in raising children in New Hampshire.

The bill also provides for funding a study by expert economists to determine what the real cost is. Commission members stated that they expect federal funds to cover the lion's share of the study's cost.

The second part of the Commissions - report recommended that family courts make a rebuttable presumption favoring shared physical custody the norm, instead of the current predilection of sole maternal custody.

Testimony and research of experts and input from the public provided to the commission, showed that shared physical custody was by far more beneficial to the children when their parents divorce.

A report by the National Probate Judges College went so far as to say that shared physical custody was in the best interests of the children, the parents, the courts and society in general.

In light of all the research demonstrating the harm done to children by sole maternal custody awards, and the resulting fatherlessness, it's disappointing to know that Gov. Lynch refused to sign this bill. It passed without his signature.

Child support guidelines based on the "transfer of wealth" income shares model, along with awards of sole custody to the mother in more than 90 percent of cases, are seen as an entitlement for women and an incentive for divorce.

Both recommendations of this commission, child support revision and shared custody, work together to protect and provide for the best interests of children. Had Gov. Lynch wanted to demonstrate his stated concern for family values, he would gladly have signed this bill.

That he didn't is an indication of his lack of concern, not only for children and families, but for the rights of fathers and the interests of fairness and justice. That's something to remember in the next gubernatorial election.