It is that time of year when college kids who got pets, can not take them home, and can not leave them in the dorm rooms. Or kids who got what the thought was a great pet, only to be overwhelmed with the care and feeding of another living creature. An animal, which may not have responded the way the student expected the pet to.

I read so many postings, long postings, some full of sorrow, about the loss of a pet. From people who had never been given the slightest lesson in how to care for the animal in the first place.

I decided to send letter to two posters tonight, not to talk about adopting their animals, but how to help them keep their pets. One poster had a rat, and the rat had bit him. Out of fear I think. I will know further once he responds to my letter. The second poster does not believe he is able to properly care for his pet as it looks unhappy. Again, when he responds to my questions I will go from there.

Others are going home for the semester, and can not take their pets with them. So instead of leaving the pet with a sitter, it get put up for adoption, or abandon it.

The colleges need to do something about the transfer of animals every year. Maybe having a dorm area pet, say a friendly dog, or cat, even a fish tank would help the students make the transitions in the dorms. And, would prevent the twice yearly animals dumping going on over at Craig's list. Other students who were not leaving for the winter break or summer session, could watch the pets of the traveling students.

Or the colleges and universities could completely ban pets on campus, unless the student has a detailed plan in place for bringing the pet home.

 

Education has taken a small amount of attention during this crazy period of debates before the election. Candidates are for education, but against education costs. They are willing to support better schools, yet have no idea how schools can get better. Producing goals, but not programs, being for education as a general good, but not for education as a important part of their programs. Each year, one issue gets pushed to the education front, it becomes a cause for the progressive to champion, and the conservative to rally against. It is the cause of educating the children who are here illegally.

The question always arises, to what level of education are they granted a right to. What level of education are all people granted a right to. All children deserve the right to a basic education, starting with first grade, and going at least until that child is sixteen, an education is a guarantee. If the student does well, they can move on in there quest for education, attending a trade school, college or even a university. In Massachusetts, students who are citizens of the state are granted a discount at all state colleges. This helps in making Massachusetts one of the most educated states in the country. But not every student in Massachusetts is given the right to a discount at state colleges.

These students are the children of illegal immigrants, illegals themselves. Brought here as small children, and educated in the public school system. Some have received their entire education in Massachusetts, others just a few years. The students who do well, believe by the time they graduate, they deserve the same rights as students who are legal residents of the Commonwealth. The right to a discount education at state colleges. Not an extra right, not a special or only for them right, but an equal right. Which, on first review should be granted them, However, the longer I think about it, the less I am willing to grant this discount. The more I want these students to take the one step that would give them this right.

These students are not being denied college, they are being denied college at a discount. Being require d to pay for collage as someone from their own country would. They could always try going to another state, and applying to one of their state colleges. They would not be denied entrance, they might be offered scholarships. But they would not be offered state citizen rates, For the simple reason, they are not citizens.

Why is the school system, knowing all the illegal citizens in our schools not doing more for these students. Instead of filling their heads with promises of a big college, and the way paved in gold. Students should be told they have to get the ring of citizenship before the path way will be open. Young students and their parents should have every chance offered to them to correct their immigration status. If the parents, and this super motivated kids do not make an effort to correct the problem, their problem. I do not see how just complaining about this 'unfairness' each and every semester will change the basic issue. Instead of marching toward the state house, this students and their parents should be marching to the local community center, to be taking the citizenship test. Pass the test, take the oath of service to the USA, and I will be the first in line to welcome you to the Massachusetts citizen rates for our state colleges.

Several Republicans are trying to lessen the damage the Foley scandal has caused the party by reminding people of other congressmen who, unlike Mark Foley, had sexual affairs with pages. The comparison according to the party line, is while MF only sent out instant messages to pages, these two men had sexual relations with pages. The major talking point becomes why is this man getting attacked , when in 1983 having sex with pages was not such a big deal.

Well as I remember, and news articles from the period agree, it was a big deal. Both men were the subject of many calls for their resignation. Members of both parties were charged with defending the men, at the expense of the young people involved. Both pages, one male, one female were above the age of consent for Washington D.C., and each man claimed the affairs were based on mutual attraction. The two men, one a democrat, the other a republican were in the wrong. They admitted as much when they agreed to stay in Washington and be censored for their actions.

This is our first difference, Foley can not claim the im's were based on mutual attraction. The young man who was the subject of the first set of im's released went to his congressmen and requested assistance in getting the contact to stop. We do not know, and may never know if the young man in question asked Foley to end the contact and he refused. But we do know that the one young man who has come forward did not welcome the contact, but continued it because he was concerned it would
effect his political future.

Secondly neither Congressmen left Washington to allow the scandal to fester. Both men, in a deal brokered by both sides of the aisle, took their censure, and took responsibility for what happened. Each man ended the affair, and continued to serve. In the case of Congressmen Studds, he ran for election again and continued to serve the state of Massachusetts. Congressman Crane was voted out of office. But each man went through the process of agreeing they were in the wrong, getting punished, and moved on. Something that has not happened with Congressman Foley.

Instead of accepting the blame, doing the rounds of 'I'm sorry' he chose to run and hide. He chose to lay the blame every where but himself. He first blamed alcohol, then being gay, then being molested as a child. Everyone is to blame but him, even the young men involved have been painted with blame, but not Foley. He wants to be the innocent man. Well he cannot be innocent. He needs to take responsibility for his actions. Take responsibility for what he did, because with out that, no one will move on. Especially Congressman Foley.

Is he suggesting each and every time he started iming this young men that he was drunk? Does that mean he was drunk on the floor of the house, as one conversation suggested, he was sneaking away from a vote to chat with a former page. He also suggested that his being a homosexual was what caused him to go after young men. Instead of realizing that he was sexual attracted to young men. Does he suggest that being molested turned him into someone who wanted to molest young men himself. While there are many men and woman who have been molested, received treatment, and not passed on the crime of what happened to them to others. To continue using one excuse after another Foley refuse to take responsibility for what he did.


While in Washington these pages were of the age of consent. He is homosexual and he has to admit he is sexually attracted to young men on the cusp of adult hood. Or once he becomes openly homosexual maybe then, an adult male will engage in a relationship with him. Instead of being his pretend room mate.

Finally there is the hypocrisy issue. Neither Congressman Studds, or Crane placed them selves in a position where they were the source of so many quotes specifically condemning what he was doing. He could apparently give an interview condemning sending sexual contact with young children, and then engage in sexual content with young men. True he could have separated the two in his mind. Thinking that as long as he was contacting people he considered men, what he was doing was not wrong. Most people consider a 17 year old to be closer to young boys and not quite adults, and have reacted as such.

As Congressman Foley said himself, “Pointing fingers, trying to catch each other in scandal does not bring honor to this house.” Neither does refusing to admit to guilt, and pointing the finger everywhere but where it belongs.

Congressman Foley, it's time to face the music, like Congressman Studds and Crane did over three decades ago. Step forward, admit your wrong, and let all of us move on to issues more important than what you did, and should not have been doing when you disgraced Congress.