Did you know George died just 100 rods from his final resting place.

I've been getting my exercise by riding my bicycle along the Cape Cod Rail Trail and usually do about 10 or 12 miles per day.  Along the way I take pictures of various historical landmarks found almost all over Cape Cod.  One of the areas I find most interesting is the old cemeteries where some of the earliest settlers were laid to rest.  One such cemetery in Harwich has some the oldest gravestones in the country.  I was impressed by the inscriptions that, although quite weather beaten, could still be read.  One such stone indicated that the person buried there fought along side General Washington in the Revolutionary War (I'll probably write something about that one at a later date.)  The other day I met a widow who was reading a book by her husband's gravesite (A Korean War veteran).  The woman told me of another historical gravestone not far from where she was sitting that had a unique inscription.  Today I went back to that final resting place of so many historical characters to find the one she described.  They're not as well known as George Washington was but they are truly a part of America's past as anyone could be.  George Weekes was one unique character, he died just 1,650 feet from his final resting place...only the inscription reads 100 rods.  ~ Norman E. Hooben



The inscription on this gravestone reads:

"George Weekes, born in Dorchester, Mass.,

 A.D. 1683, came to Harwich, married Deborah

Wing Oct. 15, 1714, preached to the Indians,

and perished in a snow storm in the hollow one

hundred rods south of this spot.  He was a

grandson of George Weekes, a Huegenot, who

fled to England, and came to America in 1630."

Photo by Norman E. Hooben

 

The following narrative comes from RootsWeb.com
George Weekes had lived in Boston, but in 1714 removed to Harwich. He was dismissed from the Old South Church in Boston March 27, 1720, and joined the church at Harwich (north side) under the care of Rev. Nathaniel Stone. He afterwards removed to the south part of the town, where many of his descendants now live, and where he carried on a farm. George Weekes was not "liberally" educated, but was well versed in the theological books of the day, and was familiar with the scriptures. In 1730, though not ordained by human hands, he commenced preaching to the Indians, who were located toward the south and far removed from the meeting house, which was on the north side of the parish of 23 square miles. Mr. Weekes built a house of worship for the Indians at his own expense.  Notwithstanding these facts, the pastor, Mr. Stone, objected, but does not appear to have insisted on a discontinuance. Learning, however, the Mr. Weekes on one or more occasions preached to some of his white neighbors, who, no doubt, were glad to assemble occasionally on a weekday or stormy Sunday for religious instruction and conference, being as they were so far removed from their regular place of worship. Mr. Stone vigorously protested and complained to the church in regard to the matter. His grounds of complaint were that Mr. Weekes had "no more if so much as an early common education," that he "had thrust himself into the meeting," that he "had preached to a people of whom I have the pastoral charge, without my leave and against my declared mind." There does not appear to have been any charge of want of orthodoxy. Some years later, Mr. Weekes seems to have taken pity upon an unfortunate woman and taken her with her child into his house. Some took offense at this and would not come to the Lord's table with him, in view of which state of feeling he absented himself from the communion. On being called to account for his absence, he made explanations which were accepted by the church as in a measure satisfactory, but at the same time he was advised to dismiss the woman from his house and to avoid "her conversations as much as convenient. "There seems to have been no charge against him of impropriety. [CI:1236:?4:CI]

In the later years of his life, his mind was clouded, which led to aimless wanderings about the country. He died from exposure to the cold in the low ground south of Harwich Academy, known from the circumstance as "Weekes' Hollow" to the present day -- being more than 80 years old.[CI:1235:?4:CI]

A short distance beyond the new cemetery in Harwich, in an open field where there are a few ancient graves, is one with this inscription: "George Weekes, born in Dorchester, Mass., A.D. 1683, came to Harwich, married Deborah Wing Oct. 15, 1714, preached to the Indians, and perished in a snow storm in the hollow one hundred rods south of this spot. he was a grandson of George Weekes, a Huegenot, who fled to England, and came to America in 1630."[CI:242:?4:CI]

Not Fit For Rutgers

Rutgers’s Silly Condoleezza Rice Protest

Did the students and faculty think she’d get political in her commencement address? They should look at her past

speeches—and realize it’s a shame they won’t hear her inspiring story.

In the spring of 2011, Rutgers University paid $32,000 to get an important, boundary-breaking woman to speak on campus: Nicole “Snooki” Polizzi of MTV’s Jersey Shore.
Yet at the same university where a crowd of over a thousand applauded Snooki’s discussion of her hair and partying, inviting Condoleezza Rice to speak at graduation is just not right, at least in the minds of a small but vocal group of faculty and students.
The selection of the first African-American woman to serve as secretary of state had the the unanimous support of the Rutgers board of directors. But a handful of professors and students opposed her invitation to speak at the 2014 commencement because of her role in the Bush administration. To his great credit, university president Robert Barchi stood by the invitation and released a note defending the choice earlier this spring. After it became clear that Rice’s participation would lead some to put their political grievances above a celebration of the students and would turn commencement day into a circus of protest, however, Rice did the regrettable right thing and withdrew.
"As a professor for thirty years at Stanford University and as its former provost and chief academic officer, I understand and embrace the purpose of the commencement ceremony and I am simply unwilling to detract from it in any way,” said Rice in a statement.
What, exactly, did the Rutgers protesters think Rice might tell students that was so objectionable? Political figures do occasionally use their platform as a commencement speaker to push their own policy agenda. In 2013, Vice President Biden spoke to graduates of the University of Pennsylvania and made sure to hit on topics from climate change to gay marriage and immigration reform.  Jon Huntsman’s 2011 commencement address at the University of South Carolina was viewed as a debut for his potential presidential bid; he used the occasion to tout the greatness of free market liberal democracy (and Ben Folds).
So yes, sometimes in graduation speeches, political types get a little bit political, and not everyone in the audience will agree. It might make sense to oppose a political speaker on the grounds that the views he or she will convey will clash with the values some students hold. (Imagine being a pro-life student at Barnard College and having your graduation capped off with a speech from the national head of Planned Parenthood, as is happening later this month?) 
But the extent to which Rice’s prior speeches completely avoid any and all ideological agenda-pushing makes the Rutgers protests look downright ridiculous.
Take 2006, when the then-sitting secretary of state spoke at Boston College’s commencement ceremony. The most controversial statement she made that day? Her admission that she cheers for rival Catholic institution Notre Dame’s football team. (This line drew justifiable boos.)
She told students the story of how she came to value education so dearly. Tracing her roots to her grandfather, the son of a sharecropper in Alabama, and her experiences growing up in the segregated South, she reminded students that America still thrives “despite the fact that when the Founding Fathers said, ‘We the people,’ they didn’t mean me.”
Rice reminded them that they have responsibilities as they go out into the world: to follow their passion, to rely on reason, to remain humble and charitable, and to be optimistic. In her 2012 commencement address at Southern Methodist University, she hit the same notes.
You know, all the usual saber-rattling and warmongering. Humility! Optimism! Heaven forbid we pollute young minds with such right-wing neocon propaganda!
Even when Rice’s speeches are in a political context, she avoids throwing red meat. In her speech at the 2012 Republican National Convention, a time if there ever was one for taking jabs at the other side, Rice never once uttered President Obama’s name.
When given an opportunity to speak to groups of students who are about to embark on the next chapter of their lives, armed with an education—and probably at least five figures worth of debt—Rice time and again has offered eloquent reflections on education and her incredible journey from segregated Alabama to the highest echelons of academia and government. 
Her story is a remarkable one of perseverance and overcoming incredible obstacles and injustice, an inspiration regardless of one’s political views. What a shame the students at Rutgers will not get to hear it

Obama is a crook...and do you know what? There's not a damn democrat who gives a damn!

 

BREAKING: We just learned the Obama administration is paying for yet another Obamacare program that Congress never...
Posted by Rep. Peter Roskam on Friday, June 12, 2015

Trump was right...Megyn Kelly wrong!

Fox News moderator Megyn Kelly, confronted Donald Trump about past comments of Trump’s, referring to women as ‘pigs’ and ‘slobs’  It was one woman Megyn, not women (you should get your facts straight). That one woman was none other than Rosie O'Donnell and as far as I'm concerned she's much worse than any adjective Donald Trump can muster up.  It would be polite if one were to say that Rosie O'Donnell is uncouth and if you do not agree with the refined adjective then you're just as bad as she... When Rosie O'Donnell said, “I’d Like to Take My Period Blood and Smear It All Over Pro-Life People’s Faces” that comment lowered the bar to anything remotely associated with refined or lady-like.  Trump was kind enough to limit his description to 'pig' and 'slob', he could have been more truthful and tossed in a few words known mostly to drunken sailors.  ~  Norman E. Hooben

Source for the following: LifeNews.com

Rosie O’Donnell: “I’d Like to Take My Period Blood and Smear It All Over [Pro-Life People’s] Faces”



Rosie O'Donnell

Today, comedian Rosie O’Donnell said “women’s rights“ are under attack in America and that politicians are undoing all the advances abortion activists have made. The Hill reports that O’Donnell told Jenny Hutt on SiriusXM’s radio program that she believes there is a war on women. She said, “Bigger than any specific people, there is a war on women that is happening in this country. Women fought for equality in this country, and right now, politically, it’s being taken away from us.”

Then, unbelievably, O’Donnell said she would like to do this to pro-lifers: “I’d like to take my period blood I no longer have and write, ‘you’re all assh—s.’ I’d like to smear it all over some people’s faces.”

Additionally, during the interview with Hutt, she said that London Marathoner Kiran Ganhi’s decision to run without a tampon while menstruating is a critical demonstration for women’s rights.

Although O’Donnell didn’t mention the Planned Parenthood scandal specifically, it is likely she is referring to pro-life Senate Republicans who tried to defund the abortion company in light of videos showing their top executives haggling over the price of aborted babies’ body parts. Unfortunately, Senate Democrats defeated the legislation even though the videos expose Planned Parenthood’s complete disregard for human life and countless potential violations of federal law.

As LifeNews previously reported, O’Donnell recently canceled her plans to adopt another child after finding out that he faced health problems.  Earlier this year, O’Donnell separated from her wife, Michelle Rounds, and news reports reveal that the pair plans to divorce. In fact, right now they are in the middle of an ugly custody battle for their daughter, Dakota, who was born in 2013.

Dakota’s biological mother, Jami Weaver, had agreed to carry another child for the couple but their arrangement was canceled when O’Donnell learned the child had gastroschisis, which is a birth defect of the abdominal wall that causes the bowl to protrude into the abdomen. According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), about 1,871 babies are born each year in the United States with gastroschisis. Weaver explained, “Rosie told me she could not handle having a special needs child.”

However, when Weaver delivered Dakota and was planning to have her tubes tied, O’Donnell asked her to wait. She said, “When I was walking around the hospital, trying to induce labor with Dakota, Rosie asked me not to go through with having my tubes tied, which I’d planned to do. They said they wanted me to have another child for them in the future. When I later found out I was carrying a boy, I emailed them to say I needed to know they were on board, because otherwise I would have an abortion.”

O’Donnell responded and said, “Don’t do that!”

Unfortunately, after the birth defect was detected, O’Donnell said she did not want to continue with the adoption even though doctors said they could fix it with surgery. Weaver concluded, “Rosie said that she’d had a previous relationship with a girlfriend who had several kids, most of whom had ‘issues’ including autism. Rosie and Michelle weren’t the warm people I thought they were… I just felt like I was a dog breeding puppies for Rosie.”

The Iran Nuclear Deal...and how it was planned from the beginning to end