ClearysNoteBook

A Few Thoughts…… We can sink or swim on the outcome!

By Rich Luongo

editorial_66431@verizon.net 

She was the darling of the Democratic Party. She was going to break down barriers. The first woman to make a serious run for the presidency. Hillary Clinton was a shoo-in.

Then comes Barack Hussein Obama. A lot of people never took him seriously. Young. Upstart. No diplomatic or international experience. What does he know about running a $2 trillion corporation called the USA? Nothing.

Well, guess what? Hillary's fighting for her life. Obama is attracting lots of people who ordinarily would go for Clinton or play the race card: they would be against a black man.

All of that has faded away and Obama is this close to getting the Democratic nomination. If he does, that would be the breaking down of a very huge barrier. And if elected president, all barriers are gone.

In the meantime, Hillary is being told — in no uncertain terms — to get the hell out of the race. You're not going to make it. She has no intention of dropping out, though. She says she'll stay until the convention.

What this will do, really, is divide the Democratic Party with the Super Delegates undecided, in some instances, as to whom to back. And the Republicans can sit back and smile and assume John McCain will make it.

Well, you know what assuming does to you and me. We can't be that positive that McCain will be elected or that Obama will be the candidate. Things can change drastically before and during a political convention. What could probably happen is what happened between Kennedy and Nixon in 1960: Kennedy won the Electoral College but only got 120,000 popular votes. It could happen again between McCain and whoever gets the Democratic nomination. The winning candidate may not be that popular and could have a lot problems with the Congress.

And let's not forget: Whatever a presidential candidate promises are only empty promises. Nothing happens unless the Congress lets it happen. The Constitution provides that the president carries out the laws passed by Congress and to be commander-in-chief of the armed forces. That's it. Those are his or hers only constitutional duties.

If the newly-elected president wins a small portion of the popular vote — or doesn't win the popular vote at all but is still elected — the new president could find it difficult with the Congress to get anything done.

Kennedy had problems. His major bills got passed only after his death because Lyndon Johnson was probably the most powerful politician in Washington with half the Congress members owing their jobs to him. So it was easy to get Kennedy's laws passed because LBJ wanted them passed.

Again I say this is probably the most important presidential election in the past 60 years. We can sink or swim on the outcome. And I can't swim.

The author is a former editor of the Haddon Herald, a feature editor for The Collingswood Retrospect. He was also adjunct teacher at Camden County College. Presently he is a freelance writer for a number of newspapers in the Philadelphia/South Jersey area.

Related: A Few Thoughts

The author is a former editor of the Haddon Herald, a feature editor for The Collingswood Retrospect. He was also adjunct teacher at Camden County College. Presently he is a freelance writer for a number of newspapers in the Philadelphia/South Jersey area.

Related: A Few Thoughts

A Few Thoughts……….Why Not Universal Dental Insurance?

By Rich Luongo

editorial_66431@verizon.net 

In the ongoing debate about medical insurance — a debate that always gets heated at election time — we don't seem to hear much or anything about dental insurance. Why? Is it a sacred cow?

I'll tell you one thing; dental insurance is one of the biggest fiascos and scams we have in this country. Depending on what company you have, you're given a total of $2,000 coverage each year for dental work. If you don't use it or if there is part of the $2,000 left at the end of the year, it doesn't carry over to the next year. X-rays and teeth cleaning and other maintenance are part of the coverage. You don't pay for that.

However, if you need anything else: extractions, root canals, dentures, etc., that all comes out of the two grand. Here's the catch: if dentures, for instance, are $1,500 total, the insurance company pays a percentage and you pay the rest. Everything comes out of the $2,000. Everything. In the end, you wind up holding the bag and the dentist won't bill you for the balance. You have to come up with the rest of the money at the time you pick up your dentures or you can put the balance on a credit card or pay on time through a finance company.

Dental insurance also pays part of extractions, fillings, etc., while you put out the rest. I'm not complaining about putting out my share but it's got to be paid at the time of the procedure or paid on time through finance companies or on credit cards.

Dental insurance, on paper, is a good idea because the costs of dental work are horrendous. But the coverage isn't as good as medical insurance. A few years ago I was confined to a hospital for nine days. There was no surgery involved, mostly tests. The bill was $56,000 which my medical plan picked up fully. Most of the doctor's bill was also covered and I was billed for the rest. No dental insurance anywhere can match that.

When politicians talk about making medical coverage universal and affordable they should also look at the state of dental insurance and make that affordable and universal for everyone, also. It's already been proven that bad teeth and gums can cause all manner of physical problems, such as heart disease or even cancer.

So why not decent dental coverage?

Obama, Clinton, McCain…how about addressing that?

 

The author is a former editor of the Haddon Herald, a feature editor for The Collingswood Retrospect. He was also adjunct teacher at Camden County College. Presently he is a freelance writer for a number of newspapers in the Philadelphia/South Jersey area.

Related: A Few Thoughts

The author is a former editor of the Haddon Herald, a feature editor for The Collingswood Retrospect. He was also adjunct teacher at Camden County College. Presently he is a freelance writer for a number of newspapers in the Philadelphia/South Jersey area.

Related: A Few Thoughts

A Few Thoughts……… Enough. Enough! Enough!! Enough!!!!

 

By Rich Luongo

editorial_66431@verizon.net 

To reiterate, ENOUGH!!!!

Please stop cursing us with incessant, insane, incoherent presidential campaigns. The only other campaign to last longer than this fiasco was the 100 Years War and I'm not convinced the campaign of 2008 hasn't surpassed the century mark. Or maybe it feels that way.

For about two years we've been subjected to the inane goings on of well-known politicians, wannabe well-known politicians, and politicians at-large who'll never get anywhere (Ron Paul ring a bell?), all seeking the nomination of their respective parties because each has said he or she would be the best president this country has ever seen…better than George W., anyway, was and is the promise.

For some two years we were told why candidate A should be the person to run this country and have a finger on the nuclear button, why candidate B would be a better choice, since that finger is well-manicured and has seen a lot of use, while candidates C, D, E, ad nauseam, all said they could do the job better than anybody else in contention, if not anybody else in the history of this country (forgive us, Thomas Jefferson).

But, as I said, enough is enough. We never should have had a two-year primary campaign shoved into our faces. The millions of dollars spent just for primary elections are obscene and immoral, if not bordering on the criminal. This candidate racks up $20 million in a weekend, another nearly went broke and had to borrow money and had to use personal cash. Other candidates, who may or may not be better qualified to run this country than the two now battling for the Democratic nomination, had to quit the race because they ran out of the little money they did have. They didn't win any primaries because they couldn't fight the campaign battle waged by their more well-to-done opponents who outclassed them. 

Still money may not always be the answer. Ron Paul, for example, has plenty of cash but not only has he never gotten to first base, he's never gotten out of the dugout. He's an example of someone the voters just didn't want. Maybe he has good ideas. We'll never know.

Two years is at least 18 months too long for a presidential campaign. Six months should be enough: three months for a primary (how about a national primary where the candidates are chosen without conventions?) and three months for the actual presidential race.

Great idea, isn't it? I think so but the politicians won't go for it because they are publicity hungry, money hungry, and, above all else, power hungry. We're going to be stuck with these overblown campaigns for the foreseeable future. You'll probably see the campaign begin for the presidential election of 2012 right after the new president is inaugurated next January.

Newly-elected senators and representatives will begin campaigning after they're sworn for their new terms in office. That's the way it is in this country. This type of system creates special interests and people with their own agendas.

I have my own agenda. I admit it. It centers on having a government that thinks of the electorate first and politicians who put the wants of the party last while the desires of the people come first. I think that's called Utopia.

I can dream but I also realize that the word "politician" is a ten-letter, four-letter word. That about sums it up.

The author is a former editor of the Haddon Herald, a feature editor for The Collingswood Retrospect. He was also adjunct teacher at Camden County College. Presently he is a freelance writer for a number of newspapers in the Philadelphia/South Jersey area.

Related: A Few Thoughts

A Few Thoughts…….Sounds Like the Guy Next Store

John McCain is a man who speaks his mind in the Harry Truman tradition. That is the most refreshing thing to come along in an American presidential election in many decades. 

By Rich Luongo

editorial_66431@verizon.net 

When he gets mad, he lets people know and he isn't shy about using colorful language — expletives, the news media call them — and he definitely doesn't try to hide his anger when anger is called for.

Sounds like the guy next store, doesn't it? Sounds like you or your cousin or your father or even me. But the man is on a higher plane than us. He's running for President. He's John McCain.

McCain, the presumptive GOP choice for President, has been criticized for having a temper and letting it get out of hand on occasion. Ain't that a shame. When we finally get somebody who's human and has emotions and calls a spade a spade and doesn't give a damn about the consequences, we're told we must be wary.

Why? I want somebody with emotions. I want somebody to pick up the phone and lace into some third-rate dictator to tell him what we think of him. It's not diplomacy, is it? Well, diplomacy hasn't been working for years. We need somebody with some gonads who isn't afraid to let others know the way he feels and the way his constituents feel.

McCain spent five years as a guest of the Hanoi Hilton during the Vietnam fiasco. The torture he went through didn't prepare him to be a diplomat. It toughened him. It made him into a man who isn't afraid to take on anybody or anything. That's what we need as a leader. He has the experience to govern.

Whether or not he'll make it, is another story. We have two people opposing him: one whose background is filled with mystery and controversy and another who should probably be doing time.

But the American people being the way they are favor the two others because they are not John McCain, a Republican who represents a continuation of the Bush legacy. One Democratic candidate belongs to a church that is racist and blatantly anti-American while the other couldn't control her husband's philandering (who's now considered an elder statesman despite being impeached and dirtying the Office of President). These are the Democratic choices being served to the American people. A pity, isn't it?

McCain's a good man but I don't think he's going to make it. His age is a factor. At 71 he'd be the oldest man to be elected president, and the job ages a person three years for every year in office. His only saving grace would be to choose a vice president who's about 20 years younger.

But that's all speculation. We do know one thing: McCain is a man who speaks his mind in the Harry Truman tradition. That is the most refreshing thing to come along in an American presidential election in many decades.

The author is a former editor of the Haddon Herald, a feature editor for The Collingswood Retrospect. He was also adjunct teacher at Camden County College. Presently he is a freelance writer for a number of newspapers in the Philadelphia/South Jersey area.

Related: A Few Thoughts
 

A Few Thoughts…..”Press One for English, Press 2 for Spanish”

"We have room for only one language and that language is English and room for one loyalty and that is to the United States," President Teddy Roosevelt

By Rich Luongo

editorial_66431@verizon.net 

It's annoying. Every time I use the telephone and am told to "press 1 for English, press 2 for Spanish," I'm ready to fling the phone against the wall. Why is this necessary? We are not a dual-language nation like Canada where French and English are official languages and both must be represented in every day life. Our defacto language is English and has been for 200-odd years.

And it's still defacto because our Congress refuses to enact legislation making it the official language of the land, thanks to lobbying by various groups, including Hispanic legislators.

Is Spanish being pushed (or I should say jammed down our throats and the throats of our children in school and on kids' TV programs) because of the overwhelmingly large Hispanic population? No. The Hispanic population is not as large as people would think to justify "press 2 for Spanish" or having our consumer products in both languages. (I recently picked up a box of pancake mix and most, if not all of the writing, was in Spanish.)

They are just more unified and politically motivated to get what they want. And it seems to be working.

But, according to the U.S. Census report on ancestry issued in 2004, the 2000 Census reported that the largest group in the country that specified a certain ethnic background were those who considered themselves Germans. Some 42.8 million people — 15.2 percent of the population — reported German ancestry. There are more people in this country who consider themselves German-Americans than any other ethnic group.

Second are the Irish at 30.5 million (10.8 percent of the U.S. population) following by African-Americans at 24.9 million (8.8 percent).

Number four on the list are the English at 24.5 million or 8.8 percent of the population. Number five, ironically, are 20.2 million people (7.2 percent) who list themselves as Americans despite their fact there is no American ethnicity unless you consider yourself American Indian which, in that case, makes you 2.8 percent of the population or 7.9 million, 10^th on the list.

Now we come to number six, Mexicans. They make up 6.5 percent of the population for a total of 18.4 million. Number six on the list does not, in my opinion, justify all this "press this, press that" nonsense and writing everything in Spanish along with English. By the way number seven are Italians at 5.6 percent or 15.6 million people.

To really be fair we should also include on the "press this" list German, Gaelic (for the Irish), even Polish, French, and Dutch. They are all part of the top 15 responses to ethnicity on the U.S. Census.

Of course that's taking it to the extreme but that seems to be what people want…the extreme.

Personally I think it's nonsense to have this politically correct dual-language mentality. We are America and English is our language, whether or not you like it. If you don't like it don't try to change the rules for your benefit. If that's your intention, don't even bother coming. Your country wouldn't concede to my demands and we should not — damnit! — we must not concede to yours.

Teddy Roosevelt said in 1907 we have room for only one language and that language is English and room for one loyalty and that is to the U. S.

How right he was.

The author is a former editor of the Haddon Herald, a feature editor for The Collingswood Retrospect. He was also adjunct teacher at Camden County College. Presently he is a freelance writer for a number of newspapers in the Philadelphia/South Jersey area.

Related: A Few Thoughts 

A Few Thoughts….. College is not for everyone and it’s nothing about which to be ashamed

By Rich Luongo
editorial_66431@verizon.net 

The dream of most parents is to have their children go to college, to excel in the land of academia, maybe even going for a Master's Degree.

 

Many parents don't want to hear the truth, though: their kids may not be college material. When I was in college (at Flintstone University) the figure often quoted by educators at the time was that at least 50 percent of those in college should not be there. It would venture to say that figure is higher today.

 

It's been driven into our minds that we have to attend college to be a success. Is that true? Do we all have to have letters after our names to show we've become someone? Frankly, that's a lot of nonsense.

 

Do we need more lawyers or accountants or architects or doctors or MBAs? Do we need all those who are graduated each year? We really don't need more lawyers. We have more attorneys in this country than all the other nations in the Western World combined.

 

And not everybody has the ability to be a doctor or a member of what we call the "professions." That's just the way it is.

 

We've always been led to believe that in order to make a good buck you need a college degree.

 

Years ago, when I was first married, the nicest and most luxurious house on our block was owned by a local plumber, not someone with a college degree. He was educated, obviously. He had to learn the trade to be a success, and apparently he was (if all the trucks parked in the garages behind his house were an indication of his success). 

 

We need plumbers. We need carpenters. We need masons. We need electricians. We need construction people. We need all the crafts. You don't need a college education to be successful in them. You can go to college later, for self-esteem, perhaps, but you won't be pressured to get a sheepskin to make it. You have to go to school, yes, to learn your craft or be an apprentice or whatever it takes. But you don't need a college degree.

 

If you watch the Food Network on cable you'll see chefs make a good living. Most go to specialty schools to learn the food industry, which is a rough business and tedious but when you make it, you can earn six figures a year. And if you get your own TV show, seven figures or more if you count the endorsements and books. Many do get degrees in the culinary arts and learn every aspect of the business, including behind the scenes. Most of us are never told about the food industry and how well you can do in it. Be a lawyer, an accountant, a doctor…that was all we heard.

 

It's getting tougher and tougher to get into college. The tuition is obscene so your child opts for a scholarship to make the grade but if he or she fails at that they'll think they have failed at life. Nonsense. Look at the crafts. Take some business courses at a county college and open a business. You can be a success without a college degree.

 

College is not for everyone and it's nothing about which to be ashamed.

The author is a former editor of the Haddon Herald, a feature editor for The Collingswood Retrospect. He was also adjunct teacher at Camden County College. Presently he is a freelance writer for a number of newspapers in the Philadelphia/South Jersey area.

Related: A Few Thoughts

 

A Few Thoughts……On Barack, Hillary, and John

By Rich Luongo

editorial_66431@verizon.net 

 

Think about this for a moment. What is the most radical, liberal society on the face of the earth? France? The Scandinavian countries? Would you believe, the United States?

Of course, we have liberals in the Democratic Party and there are various other liberal politicians who don't belong to any party. We have radicalism and we have people marching in the streets, a throwback to Vietnam.

And the Republicans are pushing a conservative agenda through John McCain in an attempt to thwart the Democrats' efforts.

But, I ask, ponder this:

Barack Obama is the first black man — or woman — in American history that has a chance at getting the Democratic nomination for president. That is radical enough but he comes from a mixed marriage: a white mother and an African father. He embraced Islam as a youngster and he was later raised by his white grandparents.

He now belongs to a Christian church in Chicago led by a pastor who is blatantly anti-white.

Yet voters don't seem to care about any of this, especially those in the South, a region often considered the bastion of conservatism. He has charisma and is calling for change (although he never tells what kind of change that could be or how it will happen). Still, he's racing towards the nomination.

But so is Hillary Clinton. She is the only woman ever to get this far in the race for the presidency. Her background, with her husband's, is shady and many people have criticized her for many things she may or may not have done and some have said she should be in prison.

What does that have to do with the price of oranges?

Nothing.

In this radical, liberal society she could be president and so could Obama.

Now, we have John McCain. Out of the two, he's the most qualified to be in the Oval Office because of his background and years in the Senate.  But he doesn't offer anything different than what we now have. So what are we to do?

This is, undoubtedly, the most important presidential election this country has seen in generations and the outcome will set the direction for the 21^st century.

I just hope all of us know what we're doing, especially the one who becomes president.

The author is a former editor of the Haddon Herald, a feature editor for The Collingswood Retrospect. He was also adjunct teacher at Camden County College. Presently he is a freelance writer for a number of newspapers in the Philadelphia/South Jersey area.

Related: A Few Thoughts

A FEW THOUGHTS….. Oaklyn Residents Are Fed Up With Paying Through the Nose

By Rich Luongo

editorial_66431@verizon.net 

On March 11, voters in Oaklyn made their collective voices heard by rejecting, for the second time, a nearly $6 million project to improve Oaklyn Public School. In December they knocked it down the first time. More voters came out this month to defeat the measure by even a wider margin.

But, take heart. The school administration is going to try for a third time and present the same proposal again. And the people of Oaklyn will again vote it down. You see the school district can legally go for a hat-trick and hope the third time is a charm. It won't be. So, after spending all this money on special elections, the spend-thrift school district will go for another election next year if the third time bombs.   

The people of Oaklyn are not ogres. They're just sick and tired of the school administration playing politics and manipulating our money. The $6 million is for a new roof, air conditioning, and a whole host of other things that need to be replaced or added to make the building handicap accessible.

Fine.

But why did the administration wait until things got so bad that they were forced to present a large package that would result in well over $100 in additional taxes for each homeowner? That does not include the eventual increase in municipal taxes (which will come as surely as night follows day…not original, but you get my drift) and the increase from the county.

Why did the administration not address each problem when it arose and asked for the people's help at that time? It wouldn't have cost so much. And why did they allow the situation in the school to get so bad that they needed this quick fix? Where were the state and the county? Weren't they keeping tabs on the school? Where were the state inspectors?

Oaklyn complains about money. Check this out: we have a superintendent for the district (the building) and a principal for the school (the same building). Each has his own staff and each has his own office space.

Wait a minute. The superintendent has his own house. The district bought a house next to the school a while ago and that's where the superintendent holds court. Why? The school building wasn't good enough for him? He had to have his own "presidential palace"?

Get rid of the building. Sell it. Use the funds to help refurbish the school. Force the superintendent to go back to the building/district he supervises. And eliminate the principal's job. You'll save a few bucks there.

Make the superintendent do the work of the principal. One building. One school. How much work could there be?

Well, to ease the load, we can do away with the ninth grade and send our elementary school graduates to Collingswood from the freshman year, rather than from the sophomore year, which the district now authorizes. Save a few bucks there.

Cut some of the non-teaching staff. Eliminate the assistant business administrator. Do you really need two BAs for such a small district (only one building)?

There are so many ways to cut. I was going to make a suggestion that the school board be empowered to engineer the cuts. But, really, how effective can those members be when most of them run each election unopposed?

Something has to be done. We're fed up with paying through the nose.

The author is a former editor of the Haddon Herald, a feature editor for The Collingswood Retrospect. He was also adjunct teacher at Camden County College. Presently he is a freelance writer for a number of newspapers in the Philadelphia/South Jersey area.

Related: A Few Thoughts

A Few Thoughts…….Consolidate Small Towns; that sounds Like a Good Idea

I'll tell you one reason why towns are reluctant to merge: Who will be the boss? Who will be the mayor? Who will run the show? Who will be lord and master over the fiefdom? Somebody has to lose his or her job; a mayor has to go……………

By Rich Luongo

editorial_66431@verizon.net 

I'm not enamored of Gov. Corzine (ever since he made snide remarks about Italians and cement boots while running for the U.S. Senate) nor do I support everything he does. However, I do agree with his idea of having towns consolidate, either their municipal governments or services. I'm fed up to here with paying exorbitant taxes for the privilege of living on property that I own.

Tavistock and Pine Valley are examples of governmental stupidity. Tavistock has eight residents and Pine Valley has fewer than 30 (with a seven-member police force!). Both are really nothing but country clubs. Pine Valley is supposed to have the country's best golf course (but I wouldn't know anything about that since I don't get involved with that elitist sport).

Each must by law have the trappings of a municipality: town government, mayor, all the departments. Pine Valley must have some helluva crime spree to have seven cops for 30 people. Plus it has a board of education, although it has no school, but it must have a board to protect the interests of those youngsters who go to school in other districts.

All of this costs money. Well, the millionaires who live in Tavistock and Pine Valley (are the cops millionaires?) can probably afford to pay the taxes for the luxury of living where they do.

But the vast majority of us who live in this state are not millionaires. Many can barely make the mortgage (and some aren't, as can be attested by the foreclosure notices and bankruptcies). So why aren't the politicians who run our governments…and our lives…looking at consolidation of departments and the merger with other towns? Why do they continue to sit on their duffs and wring their hands and ask the state to do something?

Well, the state — through Corzine — wants to do something: merge! Consolidate!

I'm all for that. Why do towns with under 5,000 population (in South Jersey that's a metropolis) not join up with neighbors and make one bigger town to save taxes or, at least, merge departments for better purchasing power?

I'll tell you one reason why towns are reluctant to merge: Who will be the boss? Who will be the mayor? Who will run the show? Who will be lord and master over the fiefdom? Somebody has to lose his or her job; a mayor has to go, a town council or commission has to go, a chief of police has to go…and it goes on and on and nobody wants to do anything because they'll be out of work.

And the taxpayer continues to foot the bill for this indecision. Something or somebody has to give. I'm fed up to here with paying huge taxes for little in return. Come on, politicians. For once think of your constituents and leave your ego on the porch.

The author is a former editor of the Haddon Herald, a feature editor for The Collingswood Retrospect. He was also adjunct teacher at Camden County College. Presently he is a freelance writer for a number of newspapers in the Philadelphia/South Jersey area.

Related: A Few Thoughts

A FEW THOUGHTS………About Italian Culture

By Rich Luongo

editorial_66431@verizon.net

Some 30 million people in this country consider themselves ethnic Italians. Some of us are 100 percent (like me) and others are part Italian (like my kids; my wife's German…but I don't hold that against her — LOL, as they say on the computer).

And to honor the rich Italian culture in this country, October is set aside as Italian-American Heritage Month. It has been for years. But few know this. It's almost as if people don't care, including some Italian-Americans. That's a shame.

Why are the Italians ignored? Well, we're not, really, thanks to The Sopranos on HBO and the old Gotti "reality" show on A&E. Many non-Italians (and, frankly, even some Italians) see these shows as representative of Italian-American life, despite Justice Dept. statistics stating that less than 1 percent of Italian-Americans are "connected."

A few seasons back there was an attempt to portray a typical Italian family on TV. The series starred the veteran actor Paul Sorvino as a toll collector who quits his job to help his wife with the restaurant she opened. That's it. That's the premise. Nobody got killed. Nobody got knifed. Nobody went to bed with anyone who wasn't that person's spouse. It was a clean show about a real Italian family, not a gangster family.

It barely lasted one season.

Years earlier there was another series about an Italian family. In each episode the family sat around the dinner table and ate and drank and talked. Cute but not very interesting. It died, too, apparently because the family rarely got up from the dinner table. (Too much cholesterol?)

So in come the gangsters and out goes any attempt to portray real Italians. Why is it all right to do this to an ethnic group that has contributed much to world society but it's not okay to malign other minority groups? Is there an unwritten rule somewhere that says it's fine, almost mandatory, to slap Italians around?

Let's look at the facts of what Italians have contributed to this country and brought to American culture, without mentioning the obvious: Columbus, Vespucci, opera (Italians invented opera), law, pizza, spaghetti, etc.

A huge literary figure died recently of cancer of the throat. He wrote scores of books and helped forge what we now call the police procedural novel. His name was Ed McBain who produced 55 books of the 87th Precinct gang (the last was published two months after his death).

His legal name was Evan Hunter and wrote The Blackboard Jungle under that moniker along with many others and other books under different pseudonyms. McBain? Hunter? What does that have to do with Italian-Americans?

His real name was Salvatore Lombino of New York.

Walter Lantz, creator of the Woody Woodpecker cartoon character, was born Lanza in New Rochelle N.Y., and young Angelo Siciliano had sand kicked in his face on a Coney Island beach and the legend of "Charles Atlas" was born.

American born A.P. Giannini, founder of the Bank of America in California, loaned money to a young Walt Disney in 1927 for Steamboat Willie, the cartoon that launched Mickey Mouse.

Alphonse D'Abruzzo was born in 1936 and later rose to fame as Alan Alda in the M*A*S*H TV series. His father was the actor Robert Alda.

John Basilone of Raritan, N.J. — called a one-man army by Gen. Douglas MacArthur — was the only man in U.S. history to receive both the Medal of Honor and the Navy Cross for valor during World War II. He was killed during the landing at Iwo Jima.

Composer Harry Warren (born Salvatore Guaragna) of Brooklyn was known as "Mr. Hollywood Musical." He wrote, among other songs, "Chattanooga Choo Choo," "Lullaby of Broadway," and "You Must've Been a Beautiful Baby."

And let's not forget, Chef Boy-Ar-Dee — Hector Boiardi. Or Charles Bonaparte, the American great nephew of Napoleon Bonaparte, who was named attorney general by Pres. Teddy Roosevelt and founded what later became the FBI. By the way, Napoleon was an ethnic Italian and was born and lived in Corsica before that island was taken over by the French.

I could go on and on. But you get my drift. There are a lot more stories about Italian-American contributions to this country — including the Planters peanut company — than body-counts and indictments. If the powers-that-be in the entertainment field would only realize this and make more films and TV shows about real Italian-Americans, everybody would be better off.

But a bullet to the back of the head and throwing the body off a pier is better for the ratings and the bottom line than showing how Italian-Americans really live…like everybody else.

The author is a former editor of the Haddon Herald, a feature editor for The Collingswood Retrospect. He was also adjunct teacher at Camden County College. Presently he is a freelance writer for a number of newspapers in the Philadelphia/South Jersey area.

Related: A Few Thoughts

 

 

A FEW THOUGHTS

By Rich Luongo

editorial_66431@verizon.net 

When you first got married you started taking pictures to record your new life together. You wanted to make sure you would remember where you had gone and whom you had seen. 

 

Then when the kids came you took stills and movies (later videos) to record their every move. You wanted them to know, when they got bigger, what they were doing and what relatives and friends had visited them and played with them. 

 

That was the plan. 

 

Recently my wife and I unpacked the thousands (yes, thousands!) of pictures we had taken of our kids with the purpose of chronicling the historic aspects of the mementoes so we could turn them over to our offspring to share with their own families. 

 

But something was definitely amiss…. 

 

We couldn't remember most of the people in these pictures! We couldn't ID where they were taken! Sure, there were the usual celebrations (there are cakes and Christmas trees in many of the photos) and shots of beaches (where was that?) and we did recognize the most obvious relatives: grandparents, aunts and uncles, close cousins. 

 

But who was that old gent with the bald head who hogged a few of the photos? And that fat lady wearing the big dress with flowers on them? And those precocious kids who were pretending to beat up our kids? 

 

My wife and I couldn't remember. We couldn't even remember when some of the pictures were taken. If a few of the birthday cakes didn't have ages and names on them, then we'd really be at a loss. 

 

The problem could've been solved by simply dating the photos and putting names on the back of them. But we didn't. Who did? Very few people did. In the past few years, though, the film labs started putting the dates on the back of the prints they developed. And new cameras now record the date right on the shot. Thank you. That's helping a lot. 

 

But most of the old pictures – 20 years and beyond – are lingering in limbo without dates, without locations, without identification of any kind. 

 

And besides that, where are the negatives for these photos? Of course, in our collection there are negatives piled high but are they the ones for the pictures in the shoebox? (Of course they're in a shoebox. Doesn't everybody put their photos in a shoebox?)  

 

What about empty photo envelopes with CVS and Walgreen's names on them? The negatives are missing. We couldn't reproduce the photos we wanted unless we painstakingly looked at every negative in a bright light, a daunting task in anybody's language. 

 

But thanks to computers and new technology you don't need negatives to make copies anymore. You can simply scan your photos and, voila! you have a copy. You scan them at your nearest photo shop (usually inside a drug store or supermarket these days) or on your own computer. 

 

But I still don't know the name of that guy with the bald head or that fat lady in the flowered dress. Are they relatives? Cousins? A long-lost uncle or aunt? Or just party crashes? We'll never know for sure but at least we can continue to scan their pictures to make them immortal. 

 

Can we do anything less than that?

 

The author is a former editor of the Haddon Herald, a feature editor for The Collingswood Retrospect. He was also adjunct teacher at Camden County College. Presently he is a freelance writer for a number of newspapers in the Philadelphia/South Jersey area. Starting this week Mr. Luongo will be writing op-ed articles for ClearysNoteBook

 

 

A FEW THOUGHTS

By Rich Luongo

Commendations go to Wegman's supermarkets for its recent announcement that it would discontinue the sale of all tobacco products in its stores. Admittedly, cigarettes and similar products are good sellers for the chain; nevertheless, it was felt the health benefits in getting rid of them outweighed the profit margin.

You don't hear that too often from major food corporations — or from many other corporations — that the public good is more important than the bottom line.

It remains to be seen how many other supermarkets follow suit, and that goes for large and small chains and even convenience stores.

Now let's hear something similar from the major pharmacy chains. How about getting rid of tobacco and everything associated with tobacco since your stores are in the health business…ostensibly? After all, you dispense prescription drugs and OTC medicines and sell various medical appliances and devices and peripheral items designed to keep people healthy and alive. It seems a contradiction in your mission to also offer for sale items that can and will kill you.

If pharmacy chains were really concerned about the health of their customers, why are tobacco products sold up front, at the register, in plain sight of everyone as they walk in, while the pharmacy department is in the back of the store, out of sight of just about everyone? If the health of the customer was really at the top of the priority list for these chains, tobacco would be sold in one of the side aisles, away from everyone and the pharmacy section would be moved up front.

But it's all a merchandising thing. You walk through the aisles distracted by all the candy and dolls and cards and every other item you can think of and you fill your cart with goodies before getting to the pharmacist to pick up your life-saving prescription.

Smokers, on the other hand, simply want to pluck down their $6 for a pack of cigarettes and get out as quickly as possible to puff away. For this reason, the tobacco is up front and so the clerks can keep an eye on the inventory. It's so easy for someone to be tempted to walk out with a few packs, considering the astronomical costs of a smoke these days. However, there are signs — albeit small — on the front doors admonishing any adult who tries to buy cigarettes for minors.

It's a crime.

So is selling the junk.

The author is a former editor of the Haddon Herald, a feature editor for The Collingswood Retrospect. He was also adjunct teacher at Camden County College. Presently he is a freelance writer for a number of newspapers in the Philadelphia/South Jersey area. Starting this week Mr. Luongo will be writing op-ed articles for ClearysNoteBook