Attention all Amateur Operators.
Please Read, and send your comments to the ARRL and Romney Website.


Wednesday 16 November 2005 @ 15:48:10 | Eastern Massachusetts ARRL Romney
'Disses' Amateur Radio In
Televised Town Meeting Posted on Wednesday16 November 2005 @ 15:48:10

Governor Mitt Romney dismissed the role of Amateur Radio operators in
emergency communications
during a televised 'town meeting' program last night on WCVB's 'When
Disaster Strikes: Segment Two.'
The program featured public safety and volunteer organization officials
from
across Massachusetts
among its audience.

Host and moderator Natalie Jacobson asked an increasingly-agitated Governor
Romney questions about
communications interoperability, and communication without commercial
power.
Romney was next asked
by Jacobson, '...so does it come down to ham radio?...'

The Governor replied in a disgusted tone, 'No, we don't need to deal with
ham radio operators...'

Embarrassed public safety officials later tried to put in a good word for
Amateur Radio. National
Weather Service Warning Coordination Meteorologist Glenn Field was prepared
to state the importance
of Amateur Radio, when Salvation Army Colonel Fred Van Brunt was called
upon. Van Brunt remarked
about his organization's quest to improve its communications capabilities
and how Amateur Radio has
aided his organization. 'The ham radio situation helps a great deal,' he
stated.

'I have already written and submitted a letter to the Governor's Office,'
wrote Eastern MA Section
Emergency Coordinator Rob Macedo, KD1CY. 'I have also written an email to
Natalie Jacobson.'

ARRL Section Manager Mike Neilsen, W1MPN sent a section-wide email today to
all Eastern MA ARRL
members describing the incident along with actions he and his staff were
taking to mitigate the
situation.

'[Romney's] attitude about us sets an unfortunate tone within the state's
executive branch,' wrote
Neilsen. 'As a former military officer, I see this as a failure in
leadership. My immediate concern
is our working relationship within the [Massachusetts Emergency Management
Team] environment.'
Neilsen intends to address the Governor's comments as 'an urgent matter' at
a meeting on November 17
with Don Carlton from the Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency.

'I was very disturbed about what the Governor stated on the program,' wrote
Ron Wood, W1PLW, the
section's Public Information Coordinator. 'It does show that more work is
needed by all hams in the
section. It's a great idea to write letters explaining the good we do.'
Wood
is attempting to
schedule a meeting with the Governor's office tomorrow so that EMA ARRL
staffers might discuss the
matter further.

Tom Kinahan, N1CPE wrote that Governor Romney's comment has made 'a PR
problem' for Kinahan in his
role as MA State RACES Officer.

'I've got a roster of over 150 Amateur Radio operators that support local
communities, and those of
us that directly support the state government. There are at least double
that in terms of people
that are actually out there that I don't have formal paperwork on that
support Amateur Radio
emergency communications in some organized manner... The Governor has said
that he 'certainly
doesn't need to rely on ham radio' -- where does that leave the RACES
program now?'

'I am ashamed tonight that I am a Republican!' remarked one ham radio
viewer. '[Romney] speaks in
derogatory tones about hams. He certainly shows an ignorance as to what we
do and are capable of. I
suggest a grass roots campaign of local hams calling the State House and
The
Governor's Office to
protest.'


--

laborkei wrote:
Attention all Amateur Operators.
Please Read, and send your comments to the ARRL and Romney Website.


Wednesday 16 November 2005 @ 15:48:10 | Eastern Massachusetts ARRL Romney
'Disses' Amateur Radio In
Televised Town Meeting Posted on Wednesday16 November 2005 @ 15:48:10

Governor Mitt Romney dismissed the role of Amateur Radio operators in
emergency communications
during a televised 'town meeting' program last night on WCVB's 'When
Disaster Strikes: Segment Two.'
The program featured public safety and volunteer organization officials
from
across Massachusetts
among its audience.

Host and moderator Natalie Jacobson asked an increasingly-agitated Governor
Romney questions about
communications interoperability, and communication without commercial
power.
Romney was next asked
by Jacobson, '...so does it come down to ham radio?...'

The Governor replied in a disgusted tone, 'No, we don't need to deal with
ham radio operators...'

Embarrassed public safety officials later tried to put in a good word for
Amateur Radio. National
Weather Service Warning Coordination Meteorologist Glenn Field was prepared
to state the importance
of Amateur Radio, when Salvation Army Colonel Fred Van Brunt was called
upon. Van Brunt remarked
about his organization's quest to improve its communications capabilities
and how Amateur Radio has
aided his organization. 'The ham radio situation helps a great deal,' he
stated.

'I have already written and submitted a letter to the Governor's Office,'
wrote Eastern MA Section
Emergency Coordinator Rob Macedo, KD1CY. 'I have also written an email to
Natalie Jacobson.'

ARRL Section Manager Mike Neilsen, W1MPN sent a section-wide email today to
all Eastern MA ARRL
members describing the incident along with actions he and his staff were
taking to mitigate the
situation.

'[Romney's] attitude about us sets an unfortunate tone within the state's
executive branch,' wrote
Neilsen. 'As a former military officer, I see this as a failure in
leadership. My immediate concern
is our working relationship within the [Massachusetts Emergency Management
Team] environment.'
Neilsen intends to address the Governor's comments as 'an urgent matter' at
a meeting on November 17
with Don Carlton from the Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency.

'I was very disturbed about what the Governor stated on the program,' wrote
Ron Wood, W1PLW, the
section's Public Information Coordinator. 'It does show that more work is
needed by all hams in the
section. It's a great idea to write letters explaining the good we do.'
Wood
is attempting to
schedule a meeting with the Governor's office tomorrow so that EMA ARRL
staffers might discuss the
matter further.

Tom Kinahan, N1CPE wrote that Governor Romney's comment has made 'a PR
problem' for Kinahan in his
role as MA State RACES Officer.

'I've got a roster of over 150 Amateur Radio operators that support local
communities, and those of
us that directly support the state government. There are at least double
that in terms of people
that are actually out there that I don't have formal paperwork on that
support Amateur Radio
emergency communications in some organized manner... The Governor has said
that he 'certainly
doesn't need to rely on ham radio' -- where does that leave the RACES
program now?'

'I am ashamed tonight that I am a Republican!' remarked one ham radio
viewer. '[Romney] speaks in
derogatory tones about hams. He certainly shows an ignorance as to what we
do and are capable of. I
suggest a grass roots campaign of local hams calling the State House and
The
Governor's Office to
protest.'

One more good reason not to vote for him...but look at the bright side:
This will give him a chance to flip-flop again and say how much he likes
hams. ;-)

P.S. Even though I'm not a resident of the state of Massachusetts, I
wrote a letter of protest at the time. As a non-resident, you can
imagine how far it got.

Clara Peller wrote:

...
One more good reason not to vote for him...but look at the bright side:
This will give him a chance to flip-flop again and say how much he likes
hams. ;-)

P.S. Even though I'm not a resident of the state of Massachusetts, I
wrote a letter of protest at the time. As a non-resident, you can
imagine how far it got.

That is certainly one avenue to pursue; however, some roads lead to
better places than others.

How about a re-evaluation of us, our plans, our equip., etc. and instead
of finding fault with other--why they do not find our services
desirable, we ask the question, "What can we do to become
up-to-date-current and make our services desirable--to the point they
can't ignore us?"

But then, that stands a fat chance ...

Regards,
JS

John Smith wrote:
But then, that stands a fat chance ...

Where is Barry Goldwater when we need him?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith wrote:
But then, that stands a fat chance ...

Where is Barry Goldwater when we need him?

Right where he should be.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

Cecil Moore wrote:
John Smith wrote:
But then, that stands a fat chance ...

Where is Barry Goldwater when we need him?

Yeah, butt; Remember JFK, "Ask not what your country can do for you; Ask
what you can do for your country ..." (paraphrased, of course)

Regards,
JS

I am a Democrat. Even I can tell this is a smear job. Lots of
operatives out there with their "eyes on the prize". Don't be misled by
these emails. The gloves are off. Internet dispatches are ALL suspect.

We are all sailing in rough seas. In the end, each of us can pick the
candidate we are most comfortable with.

73,

John
AB8O

jawod wrote:
I am a Democrat. Even I can tell this is a smear job. Lots of
operatives out there with their "eyes on the prize". Don't be misled by
these emails. The gloves are off. Internet dispatches are ALL suspect.

We are all sailing in rough seas. In the end, each of us can pick the
candidate we are most comfortable with.

73,

John
AB8O

John,
I would respectfully beg to differ with you. This incident actually
happened a couple of years ago, -long- before he threw is hat in the
ring; no reason to 'smear' him back then...

In article ,
Carter-k8vt wrote:

jawod wrote:
I am a Democrat. Even I can tell this is a smear job. Lots of
operatives out there with their "eyes on the prize". Don't be misled by
these emails. The gloves are off. Internet dispatches are ALL suspect.

We are all sailing in rough seas. In the end, each of us can pick the
candidate we are most comfortable with.

73,

John
AB8O

John,
I would respectfully beg to differ with you. This incident actually
happened a couple of years ago, -long- before he threw is hat in the
ring; no reason to 'smear' him back then...

You miss the point, the smear is NOW. Why bring up comments that are
two years OLD, NOW? To smear the guy, is the only reason.....

In article ,
Carter-k8vt wrote:

jawod wrote:
I am a Democrat. Even I can tell this is a smear job. Lots of
operatives out there with their "eyes on the prize". Don't be misled by
these emails. The gloves are off. Internet dispatches are ALL suspect.

We are all sailing in rough seas. In the end, each of us can pick the
candidate we are most comfortable with.

73,

John
AB8O
John,
I would respectfully beg to differ with you. This incident actually
happened a couple of years ago, -long- before he threw is hat in the
ring; no reason to 'smear' him back then...

You wrote:

You miss the point, the smear is NOW.

No, 'You', I believe YOU miss the point. *Romney* said he did not like
ham radio operators. Words from *his* own mouth. Period.

Please tell me why -quoting- what HE ACTUALLY SAID is a smear...and if
by some stretch of the imagination, you manage to twist a direct quote
around as a being a smear, well then, Romney smeared himself. Finally,
are we to give him a free pass just because he said it 'x' number of
(years) (weeks) (days) ago?

Why bring up comments that are
two years OLD, NOW?

Well, because he never retracted the statement. Presumably then, these
are STILL his feelings towards hams. Again, does a negative statement he
makes just 'time out' and shouldn't be quoted after a certain period of
time even though he still stands by the statement? What period of time
would you suggest that after which, we just ignore what he said?