Norwich University, here in Northfield, has long been known as a leading military school. I believe there is some competition between Norwich and West Point over which is the oldest military college in the country. If I recall correctly, West Point is older but Norwich became a degree-granting institution first.

Anyway, if you live in or around Northfield you know about the military tradition of the Corps of Cadets, and if you live in Vermont you may know of some of Norwich’s other, less traditional, programs. For instance, for many years Norwich has offered a program in Peace Studies, now known as Studies in War and Peace, which is not what you picture for the red-meat military crowd. Norwich also hosts the annual Colby Symposium, which attracts military writers from across the country.

This year, however, is a major departure: next week Norwich will be observing its first Pride Week.  

NORTHFIELD, Vt. – The Norwich University Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Question, and Allies Club (LGBTQA) will be hosting its first ever Pride Week at Norwich University March 26-31.

Highlights of the week include a keynote address by Army Chief Warrant Officer Charlie Morgan and remarks by Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin at Norwich’s first ever Queer Prom on Saturday, March 31.

In conjunction with community partners such as Outright Vermont and RU12 numerous discussions and awareness-raising activities are planned.

There will be six days of events, a day for each color of the LGBT flag with each color representing a LGBT issue or theme, such as red for AIDS awareness and green for allies.

“The purpose of this event is to express and demonstrate equality throughout the Norwich community, along with the public, in order to promote membership in the NULGBTQA and to educate the public on challenges and issues faced by members of the LGBT community,” said Joshua Fontanez, NULGBTQA president and a senior member of the Norwich University Corps of Cadets.

The NULGBTQA made national headlines with its first meeting occurring on Sept. 20, 2011, the day of the repeal of the military’s ban on open homosexuality, commonly known as “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.”

“The NULGBTQA is the first ever LGBT Club on a military campus, and we have had local, statewide, and national attention from members of West Point; the Governor of Maryland; the Director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force and Outright Vermont,” Fontanez said. “Departments across campus and myriad members of the Norwich Community are coming together in order to help create Pride Week, free for all.”

The week’s events are sponsored by the Office of the Dean of Students; the Student Government Association; the Student Activities Office; the Office of Substance Abuse Prevention and Education; the Center for Civic Engagement and Campus Climate Committee; the Office of the Vice President of Student Affairs; Human Resources and Title IX; Sodexo; the Office of Student Success and Retention; Norwich Christian Fellowship; Residential Life and the Infirmary.

Throughout the years that opposition to the Vietnam War got ROTC removed from many university campuses there were many who argued that this was a mistake, and that integrating ROTC into mainstream academic life was essential to keeping military values in line with the liberal values of society as a whole. Norwich deserves a lot of credit for doing this.

(As previously defined: Bunched Knicker Syndrome.)

Apparently Jeff Wennberg went shopping at Costco, brought home a giant industrial-sized can of hyperbole, and scooped out a heaping helping over at one of the Ground Zeroes of the B.K.S. epidemic in our state: Vermont Tiger.

(In fact, I think the Tiggers buy their underwear pre-bunched. It’s a lot easier to work up a good fit of outrage when you’re really, really uncomfortable.)

So Jeff, having recently taken the reins of Vermonters for Health Care Freedom from Darcie Johnston, suddenly feels himself besieged on all sides by the forces of anarcho-Islamo-socialism.

The onslaught begins… after the jump.  

Apparently Vermonters for Health Care Freedom (VHCF) is making progress. The fury and frequency of attacks leveled against the organization from advocates of the single-payer takeover of Vermont’s health care system have reached a fever pitch.

Fury! Fever pitch! Yeah, I drove through Montpelier earlier today and saw blood running through the streets. Now I know why: Jeff Wennberg was under furious, feverish attack. Sadly, it’s the price he must pay for “making progress.” Osama Bin Laden didn’t bother attacking Costa Rica or Belgium; he came after the big dog, the U.S. of A. Likewise, the minions of Socialist Medicine have naturally trained their fire on the biggest threat to their subjugation of the American Health Care System: Jeff Wennberg.

Single payer zealots seem most offended by the use of the word “freedom” in the organization’s name.

Zealots! Yep, Al Qaeda is on board with Governor Shumlin’s reform plan.

Speaking personally, Jeff, I don’t mind if you use the word “freedom.” Nobody, thank God, has a copyright on it. Actually, what’s more objectionable is when Darcie held that “health care forum” a few weeks ago in Lyndonville, and it was billed as a dispassionate informational session organized by “Vermonters for Health Care Reform.” Now, that was truly disagreeable. Misleading. Mendacious. A big fat lie. I’d rather you just stick to “Freedom,” thanks.

In fact, at least one of the single payer advocates is so incensed he has publicly called for media outlets to refuse to carry VHCF’s paid messages. Apparently nothing protects freedom like censorship.

“At least one.” Uh, Jeff, that’s a far cry from a furious horde.

Oh, and you might want to look up “censorship” in your favorite dictionary. Censorship has to be done by someone in a position of authority. Your critics and opponents can call for all sorts of things; but by definition, they cannot “censor” you.

Look, Jeff, you’ve signed on as head of the biggest anti-health care reform advocacy group in Vermont. That’s a very visible position. You’re going to attract a lot of attention. And, roughly speaking, half of it is going to be negative. That’s not furious, feverish attack; that’s the nature of the political game that you’re now playing. Get used to it, or get out.  

a civil war

a gender war

Americans against

Americans

a bugler sounds

the charge

home to become

a battlefield

a loose cannon fires

from the other side

they have joined ranks

marching to glory

how silly they look

coming right at us

we have baked

thousands of pies

and have weapons

they’ve yet to imagine

an army of bullies

who will cry when hit

run home to their mothers

tattle on us

say mommy I fell down

make it better

she will warn them

never again to play at war

Peter Buknatski

Montpelier, Vt.

GMD Poll:

Does Rush Limbaugh have a mommy?

(Er… Bunched Knicker Syndrome)

Crossover Week has come and gone at the State House, but supporters of a bill that would allow child-care workers to unionize are still pushing their case. And still pushing a bit too hard for the tender sensibilities of John Campbell, President Pro Tem of the State Senate. He’s been blocking the bill throughout the current session because he thinks its backers are overly aggressive.

The latest, according to Terri Hallenbeck on the Freeps’ politics blog, vtBuzz:

Union activists are still pressuring Campbell for a vote on a bill that would allow child-care workers to unionize and be a player in negotiating child-care subsidies that parents receive from the state.

Andrew Tripp, executive director of the Vermont American Federation of Teachers, was quoted Saturday in the Times Argus linking Campbell to Scott Walker, the anti-union governor of Wisconsin.
”That’s an attitude that puts him more in line with what we have in Wisconsin with the Scott Walker administration,” Tripp said.

Ruh-roh.  

Well, that little remark put another twist in Campbell’s shorts.

Campbell fired back Tuesday: “Andy Tripp should do more research before he says things like that and realize that strong-arm tactics, intimidation and misrepresentation is not acceptable in Vermont,” he said. Campbell noted that he was the sponsor of a resolution supporting workers in Wisconsin in their fight against Walker.

Oh, that’s impressive. A resolution! Puts one in mind of Sir Arthur Streeb-Greebling:

Interviewer: How long ago did you start this venture?

ASG: Tricky to say. Certainly within living memory. It was shortly after World War Two. Do you remember that? Absolutely ghastly business. I was against the whole thing!

Interviewer: I think we all were.

ASG: Yes, well, I wrote a letter.

As has been said before in these pages, the unions have been more aggressive in their lobbying than they perhaps should have been — at least by Vermont’s prickly standards. But for Campbell to get so bothered that he derails a good bill… well, that’s poor politics and poor leadership. And lest you think I’m exaggerating about Campbell’s reasoning, he said so himself to Vermont Digger in early February:

“The reason why I believe this bill does not have the right to go forward is the tactics used to intimidate myself and this body are so against what good clean government is about, I think it would be rewarding bad behavior,” Campbell said.

The “tactics used to intimidate myself and this body” (note who comes first on that list) consisted of a union chief showing Campbell a list of union donations to Democratic Senators and implying it was time for a quid pro quo. And his idea of “strong-arm tactics” is an easily misconstrued quote from another union official. Heaven forbid he should ever be subject to actual intimidation or strong-arming; that’d be a rude shock for someone who’s apparently well insulated from the rougher edges of life.  

You know what I think? If the Senate fails to take action on this bill, then they are rewarding John Campbell’s bad behavior.

The University of Vermont has heard and rejected protests from two faculty groups over the broadcast of UVM sports on WVMT-AM, the Burlington home of Rush Limbaugh. The Faculty Senate and Faculty Women’s Caucus had asked Interim President John Bramley to break UVM’s contract with the station and seek another broadcast outlet. In his response, Bramley made a fundamentally spurious argument.

“We are a university and believe that the protection of free speech, however controversial or offensive, is important,” Bramley wrote.

“Indeed free speech and the right to express controversial ideas is the very basis of the tenure enjoyed by many of the faculty who are making the proposal,” Bramley wrote.

Free speech is a foundational principle of our society and of academia. But free speech has nothing whatsoever to do with this case. Rush Limbaugh has a constitutional right to freedom of speech, but he has no right to be broadcast on WVMT in Burlington. Nor does he have a right to be associated with University of Vermont sports.

No more than Ben Stein had a constitutional right to be UVM’s commencement speaker.  

After the jump: One simple step John Bramley could take RIGHT NOW.

Bramley’s argument is wrong. UVM is not supporting the free speech rights of Limbaugh or anyone else. The UVM deal takes money away from WVMT, which arguably weakens Limbaugh’s platform. The only way UVM is fostering Limbaugh’s freedom to be a misogynist is by associating itself with Limbaugh’s broadcast outlet, thus lending him a bit of second-hand credibility.

There are better arguments Bramley could have made. “We can’t break the contract” is an old stand-by, tough to argue with. “Lack of suitable alternatives” would carry quite a bit of weight; WVMT is the primary talk station in the Burlington market. Many popular stations wouldn’t want to disrupt their schedules to carry sports broadcasts that probably don’t draw much of an audience. Any stations willing to carry UVM sports might have marginal signals, or might not be willing to match WVMT’s price.

But those are practical arguments, not high-minded academic ones. The appeal to free speech sounds more Presidential. It just happens to be false.

If Bramley is unwilling to end the association with Limbaugh’s enabler, he should definitely ask WVMT to avoid airing promos for UVM sports during Limbaugh’s program. This is a simple thing to ask. And it would at least remove any direct, obvious tie between UVM and Limbaugh. Here in central Vermont, WSNO has been carrying delightfully few paid advertisements during Limbaugh, and filling the time with station promos — for other programs, and for WSNO sportscasts.

If the same thing is happening on WVMT, they may be airing a lot of UVM promos during Limbaugh. That would be bad for UVM’s image, and Bramley should take steps to prevent it.

One other thing he should do: get himself one of those pocket Constitutions, and read the frickin’ First Amendment.  

Recent events on GMD have lead us to believe that it’s time once again to remind all users of our terms of use, which are laid out in detail under “The GMD Team.”  After clicking on the tab, follow the link at the bottom of the list of admins to the bio page. The rules appear at the end of that page.

Now that we’ve got that out of the way, everybody back in the pool!

As the Messenger doesn’t share its “Letters” online, suffice it to say this was my response not only to a letter from Mr. January that appeared in the March 19 paper, but also to the full page ad that Entergy ran in the Messenger last week and Emerson Lynn’s editorial on the subject that is referenced by Mr. January.

Richard January, who blames the state for its efforts to close Vermont Yankee when the original 40-year operating license expires Thursday, failed to disclose in his Letter to the Editor, that he is the Senior Lead Engineer at the facility.

Unlike Mr. January, I have no professional ties either to the industry or to the legislature; so I am free to visit the “elephant in the room” which the State is not even allowed to acknowledge.  I refer, of course, to the fact that continued  operation of Vermont Yankee is simply unsafe.

The facility operates precisely the same reactor design as that of Fukushima 1;  but rather than reserve judgment about Vermont Yankee’s safety until after some of the questions raised by the Fukushima failures could be answered, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission went ahead and rubber-stamped Vermont Yankee’s permit to operate within two days after the Japanese disaster.  They didn’t even bother to inspect Vermont Yankee before issuing a new operating license.

I’m not going to waste a lot of time and space here explaining all the design flaws that figured into the chain of accident at Fukushima.  That information is readily available at a growing number of reputable sites on the internet.  It is only necessary to say that most of those design flaws were known both to TEPCO and the NRC for over thirty years, which is why GE BWR Mark 1 reactors have been eliminated as a design option for new reactors since then.

Completely apart from the flawed designs, there is the fact of Entergy’s lack of transparency and mismanagement of countless condition issues at the geriatric facility, which would not have been tolerated in a properly functioning regulatory environment.

In light of all this, Senator Sanders and others are now challenging the NRC to justify its decision to ignore common sense following Fukushima, when it blithely issued the new license without any review or reassessment.

It’s high-time that the agency, so long engaged in promoting rather than effectively regulating the industry, is challenged on its exclusive purview over reactor safety.  It’s time to fire the fox who’s been guarding the henhouse. But that doesn’t help Vermont, which is facing an uncertain future in the shadow of a dangerous relic at Vermont Yankee.

All the economic arguments for continued operation of Vermont Yankee fail on close examination, and the frequently repeated myth that it represents 600 Vermont jobs is simply untrue.  More than half that number are not even resident in Vermont; and the state is already proving that it does not need to buy power from VY in order to enjoy one of the better economic recoveries in the nation.

It seems, in a world increasingly opposed to the heavily subsidized, environmentally unsustainable role of nuclear energy,  it is a spectacularly poor public relations decision on the part of Entergy to continue to operate Vermont Yankee in defiance of the duly elected state legislature, the governor; and now, the Public Service Board.  To do so is to operate in defiance of the people of Vermont, and risks turning half-a-million former rate-payers into a giant anti-nuclear lobby and an embarrassment to the industry as a whole.

It is the last desperate gesture of a company headed for ruin and indifferent to how many lives it puts in jeopardy as it extracts the last bit of profit from a dying facility before abandoning it and its accompanying waste pile as a toxic legacy to our children’s children, into the vanishing point of distant time.

Sue Prent

Awwww. Sad tidings from the Vermont Press Bureau:

We told you last week about a former Douglas staffer considering a run for statewide office. Kevin Dorn now tells us he’s opted against a candidacy of any kind this year.

Dorn had been bruited as a potential Republican challenger to Bernie Sanders. To which we responded with our usual tasteful sarcasm. Hope we didn’t deter Mr. Dorn.

Well, we greeted the news of his possible candidacy with a pheromonal blast of Bonnie Tyler. We mourn his departure with the downbeat echoes of the Flaming Lips:

Tell everyone waiting for Superman

That they should hold on as best they can

He hasn’t dropped them, forgot them, or anything

It’s just too heavy for Superman to lift

Hot on the heels of Monday’s announcement that Chittenden County State’s Attorney TJ Donovan will challenge incumbent Attorney General Bill Sorrell in the Democratic primary, comes the first open rumbling from another rumored challenger: House Speaker Shap Smith. Both VTDigger and the Burlington Free Press have received the same e-mail from Smith:

“A number of people have encouraged me to run for Attorney General,” Smith wrote in an email Monday evening. “I’m giving it careful consideration, and I will be making a decision soon.”

The Freeps also has Sorrell talking up child pornography as a key issue. This may well be a big problem, but I wonder if (a) it’s really the biggest unmet legal challenge in Vermont, and (b) it isn’t a stereotypical tough-talking chest-pounding sort of issue for an AG candidate.

(Could also lead to interesting debates, since Sorrell differs with the State’s Attorneys on how to tackle the problem. They want more computer experts, he wants more regular staff. Even though he acknowledges a huge backlog of computer forensic work in child-porn investigations.)

And hey, the frequently ethically challenged Vince Illuzzi is still out there, too. Still hasn’t made up his mind.

“I’m still leaning toward running,” Illuzzi said Monday in an interview with the Burlington Free Press. “A number of people have asked me to consider running as an independent.”

I trust that it’s not the same “number of people” talking to both Shap and Vince. That’d be awkward.

From the Brattleboro Reformer’s Facebook Feed:

…A federal judge issued an order late Monday prohibiting Vermont from shutting down Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant on March 22, when its state-issued certificate of public good expires.

[…]

On Monday, Murtha issued a follow-up order saying the state can’t try to enforce a closure of the plant over the waste issue until appeals are heard and ruled on by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York.

Maybe if Vermont were to become a corporation, we’d get more respect?