The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

Most of these obits are omitting another important transformation Byrd underwent; from a longtime supporter of all things coal to a man who recognized the importance of beginning a transition to a clean energy economy. Indeed, one of the last votes Byrd cast was against the infamous Murkowski Amendment, which would have stripped the EPA of the ability to regulate greenhouse gases.

To call West Virginia a coal-heavy state is a massive understatement — it provides 50% of the nation’s coal exports, and accounts for tens of thousands of our state’s jobs. Any politician publicly rebuking coal here is just asking for trouble, and Byrd was noted for being a champion of coal.

But in December 2009 Byrd wrote an op-ed that criticized modern-day mining practices and accused the coal industry of “having its head in the sand” on climate change. State pols were sure there must have been some mistake. Governor Joe Manchin chalked the whole thing up to a “misunderstanding.”

But it wasn’t a misunderstanding… after 50 years in the Senate, the 92-year-old statesman had apparently revised his views on both coal and global warming. Byrd found it increasingly difficult to argue that the interests of coal companies and the interests of his state are one and the same.

Between noting the clearly debilitating effects of mountaintop removal mining and noting the reality of climate change, Byrd found it increasingly hard to continue to support coal. Many other politicians in his position would likely have continued to support it anyway — that being the politically safe thing to do. But Byrd spoke up, despite a lifetime of backing coal.

This shift should give hope to all those who recognize that the environmental practices and energy policies we have now are not sustainable — even the most stalwart of fossil fuel supporters can see the light, if, as Byrd did, he has the conviction to keep the long term interests of his constituents at heart. His transformation would have been completed would he have been able to vote for comprehensive clean energy reform.

You can read Byrd’s op-ed here. Rest in peace, Senator.

Oh, boy, just what Mercer Mall needs…. another clothing store for the teen and young adult market. I predict a FAIL within a year’s time.

I visit the mall occasionally to shop Rose’s or to gawk at the new smartphones on display at AT&T. (I plan to dump my iPhone for an Android device *if* I even stay with them) Other than that, the place has nothing to interest me except a once-in-a-blue-moon sale at Penney’s that actually features something I want.

But, the entire Mercer Mall situation deserves a separate rant of its own, so watch for it!

"I don't know. I'll just tell you this, if this passes and it's five years from now and all that stuff gets implemented — I am leaving the country. I'll go to Costa Rica."

You hear that, guys? Health-care reform will not only cover 30 million Americans and reduce the deficit, but it'll also get rid of Rush Limbaugh! This is, like, the best bill ever!

Unfortunately, it turns out that Rush was merely referring to seeking medical care outside the U.S. Which is still pretty funny, since the country he chose, Costa Rica, has a universal health care system… you know, the kind he doesn't want to see in this country.

In a January 5, 2010 letter to the Corps of Engineers Huntington office, the EPA declared that it would not object to issuance of a permit for Hobet Mining’s Surface Mine No. 45 in West Virginia, one of the projects had subjected to enhanced review. The review process produced a negotiated agreement in which Hobet agreed to cut the impacts to headwater streams in half (from burying six linear miles to only three).

A news article from 2009 was also seemingly missed by the Telegraph:

On August 10 of that year, the EPA gave the nod for the federal Army Corps of Engineers to issue a Clean Water Act permit for CONSOL Energy Inc.'s Peg Fork Surface Mine near Chattaroy in Mingo County.

So much for the myth the Obama Administration is anti-coal… and these are only two stories, found in about 60 seconds using Google.

Isn't it far better to submit these permits to careful scrutiny, then take action after working diligently with the coal companies to resolve environmental issues, rather than continue to let them indiscriminately befoul our state's drinking water, decimate hundreds of miles of streams, and turn our natural beauty into barren moonscapes?

I emailed this to the paper but doubt it will see publication, for the simple fact that it doesn't fit into the editorial staff's blatantly right-wing agenda. In its zeal to condemn anything and everything Obama, the Telegraph is doing its readers a disservice by missing, whether by accident or intentionally, coal-related news stories that prove the administration is willing to reach compromises with our state's coal operations.

Taitz has been laughed out of courtroom after courtroom as she doggedly pursues her so-called "case" against Obama. She's prime joke fodder, but a recent post on her blog indicates she might be a tad dangerous, too:

"What is the real intention of this Kenyan, Indonesian communist usurper? Is it to provide security for us or to destroy our security? Judge for yourself.

"Seeing targeted destruction of our economy, our security, dissipation of American jobs, massive corruption in the Government, Congress Department of Justice and Judiciary, it might be time to start rallies and protests using our second amendment right to bare arms and organise in militias."

Sounds like a call to arms to me…. and possibly to many others, in which Taitz's already bad year may just be an inkling of what's to come for her. Here's a rundown of her low points in 2009:

• August 3: MSNBC's David Shuster calls out Taitz on live TV after she lashes out at "Obama's brownshirts" in the media. Said Shuster: "You're making a reference to Nazi Germany, and to a lot of us who lost relatives in the Holocaust, this is deeply, deeply offensive."
• August 6: In a sign of an intra-Birther power struggle, fellow conspiracy theorist Andy Martin publicly declares it's time to "shut down the Orly Taitz circus."
• Sept. 16: Federal Judge Clay Land, who is presiding over a Georgia Birther case, belittles Taitz in a widely circulated order that accuses Taitz of failing to understand legal principles grasped by "any middle school civics student." Land adds: "Unlike in Alice in Wonderland, simply saying something is so does not make it so."
• Sept. 17: A fellow member of the California bar files a complaint in response to Taitz's call — during an interview with TPMmuckraker — for Judge Land to be tried for treason.
• Sept. 21: Army Captain Connie Rhodes, Taitz's own client in the Georgia Birther case, sends a letter to the judge renouncing Taitz as her counsel. Rhodes, who sent the letter while deploying to Iraq, tells the judge that Taitz submitted an emergency filing without Rhodes' permission or blessing.
• October 13: A frustrated Land fines Taitz $20,000 for repeated frivolous filings. "When a lawyer files complaints and motions without a reasonable basis for believing that they are supported by existing law or a modification or extension of existing law, that lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law," he writes. "When a lawyer abuses her privilege to practice law, that lawyer ceases to advance her cause or the ends of justice."
• October 14: Appearing on Joy Behar's show, Taitz is forced to explain why she described the judge as "delusional":
• November 12: An affidavit from a prospective witness in a California Birther case alleges that Taitz asked witnesses to perjure themselves — and much worse.

Anyone who supports this woman or her cause should be ashamed of themselves.

Male residents of the local area will be participating in a “Mixed Up Male Beauty Pageant” in order to raise funds to help pay for the medical care of Bryson Fanning, age 2. Bryson is being treated for Histiocytosis at UVA Medical.

Documents and/or Photos available for this release:

Bryson Fanning, age 3

To view supporting documents and/or photos, go to www.enr-corp.com/pressroom and enter Release ID: 220529

So no, I was not a Michael Jackson fan per se. In this light, it’s worth noting that when I first saw the Thriller video, I was as impressed as any hardcore Jackson fan. It was slick, well produced and years ahead of anything else in that genre. Don’t forget this was long before MTV made music videos a part of our culture, and most of them at this time were not very memorable on a technical or musical basis.

To be perfectly honest, I didn’t quite understand all the fuss at the time over Michael Jackson himself. The one-glove bit was ludicrous. He could sure dance and sing, but the ever-present sunglasses, carefully curled hair and outlandish clothes made me snicker on more than one occasion.

By the time “Bad” was released, Jackson was already a joke to many. His music had become overshadowed by his odd behavior, plastic surgeries, accusations of child abuse and everything else. Jackson gradually deteriorated into just another sad case of too much fame being gifted to someone who wasn’t equipped to deal with it.

And yet, the news of his death a few days ago gave me pause. I’d forgotten, as had millions of others, how important he was to the way the music industry had evolved and changed; how incredible a performer he’d been; how much skill and craft could be found in his music.

The debate rages on about how his personal life must or should be reconciled with his artistic one. Some feel that the two cannot be judged separately; that his artistic legacy is forever tarnished or ruined by the things he did and/or was accused of doing. But can we honestly criticize Michael Jackson’s actions without considering how his own suffered abuse no doubt shaped his later life and reported actions?

I’m not sure, yet I don’t want to free him from all blame for his actions, either. Can we negate the influence he had on generations for his music, when in fact many classical artists universally revered today in academic circles would be condemned by the public for their personal behavior if it were revealed in the tabloids the way Jackson’s was?

These questions are not raised to negate the severity of issues of child and sexual abuse, should they ever be concretely proven in Michael Jackson’s case. I only mention them because he’s left a very complex and not at all neat and clean legacy behind.

It will only be in decades or even centuries that we are able to state who were truly the legendary and influential artists and creators of our time. Will Michael Jackson be on the short list? I think he will. His personal life and behavior should, in the long run, be irrelevant to his importance and impact on the world of music.

I was a graphic artist and as such did not work with Tom on a daily basis. However, I also wrote an opinion column for many months back in 2006, and thus got to know Tom a lot better as he worked with me to hone my writing skills and get my message across in limited editorial space.

This was an exciting time for me and Tom really enjoyed the often heated public responses to my unashamedly biased approach to politics, religion and local issues. He sometimes joked to me that page A-4 of the Thursday edition, which was when my column ran, seemed to be the only page of the paper read on those days. This was when the BDT had an electronic message board tied to the online edition, and we would really get a kick out of the discussion my columns generated.

Tom even told me that he would sometimes receive extremely nasty emails or phone calls concerning something I had written. But to his credit, he would run what I wrote and let the chips fall where they may. He always said that feedback of any type meant people were genuinely interested in the topic at hand, even if they didn’t agree with the conclusions of the writer.

Thanks, Tom, for allowing me the opportunity to connect with our readers, and for your always steady hand at the wheel as we went through ownership and staff changes. Through it all, Tom never lost his vision of what the BDT should be, and of the responsibilities of the news and editorial staff.

More than anyone else, Tom WAS the Bluefield Daily Telegraph. The paper will continue, and no doubt someone will ably step into his position and carry onward. However, it simply won’t be the same newspaper without Tom sitting in his office on the third floor.

The Newspaper Association of America released some data in March 2008 on the general decline in advertising revenue in newspapers. While total newspaper advertising dollars fell a dramatic 9.4% last year, Real Estate classified advertising revenue fell a staggering 22.6% from $5.16 billion in 2006 to $3.99 billion in 2007.

This is clearly driven by several major forces:

• The real estate audience is no longer reading newspapers, having shifted its attention to the Internet, which is now the primary research tool for real estate research. This makes it more difficult for newspapers to sell ads to their customers. The National Association of Realtos reports that 84% of buyers used the Internet in 2007 compared to less than half which used print media.
• The traditional classified advertising products are in many cases not cost-effective compared to their digital alternatives. With free Internet real estate listing services, why would one buy newspaper classified advertising? Also, as rates have been going up over the years and these products are often sold via expensive telesales operations, it is extremely hard to compete on price with internet advertising
• The change in the housing market means that agents and brokers are feeling poorer and spending less marketing money. In addition we have seen the dramatic decline of the home building industry. When they are spending, they are actively looking for cheaper alternatives as they shift their ad budgets to online sites.

Ad spending in newspapers in the real estate industry has held up for longer than other industries such as autos and recruitment, but today’s market is forcing a change of behavior in how brokers and agents allocate their budgets. This will lead to a positive impact to the real estate advertising Industry as a whole as it emerges from the current decline. But there is no doubt it will take a few years.

Ad spending is more complex in the real estate industry and not purely driven by the transaction. It is also driven in a large part to appease sellers to get the listings and for brokerages to advertise to retain agents. These marketing decisions are not made on a strong financial basis and until the Industry can work to change the mindset of sellers and agents there will be lots of inefficient spending in the future.

While the news for print real estate advertising is not good, let’s face it – it was inevitable. The triple whammy of the housing market, audience migration and the slowing economy is making a tough job even tougher for the newspaper industry. While there have been numerous efforts from the newspapers to build online services these have yet to prove themselves universally successful and definitely don’t make up for the decline in overall advertising dollars. These institutions have been around for decades, and have enormous revenue streams, but it’s going to be interesting to see how all this shakes out over the next several years.

So, while the trends mentioned above are very bad news for the newspaper industry, it’s great news for the real estate industry and consumers. Removing costs and shifting ad spending to more efficient means will help brokers and agents build profitable businesses and also benefit home buyers and sellers as it helps take unnecessary costs out of the process.