 |
||
|
 |
Letters to the EditorFrom: C@wmconnect.com Interesting web site, just discovered it. First of all, I want to tip some of the readers who may take every word they read to heart, if you read the comment about slavery and the Democratic party...look into it. Yes the Dixiecrats were for segregation, however, lynching was not permiting-not that this loophole justifies the Dixiecrat platform. Strom Thurmon was a Dixiecrat...southern Democrat. When Strom Thurmon put his vote in as a part of Congress for who knows how many years, you wouldn't guess his vote and commentary on political issues would be similar to today's Democrat, for example Bill Clinton? Yes, you can find the relation between the Dixiecrats and modern Democrats, but lets be realistic here, no democrat takes pride in the fact their party stood for segregation. I was not talking about contemporary. I was talking pre-Civil War. The Democrats were pro-slavery while the Republican Party was formed for the express purpose of ending slavery; however, you did bring up a good point, which is that the pro-slavery stance of the Democrat party died a slow death, only ending with Strom Thurmond’s death in 2003. I am glad to say that I do not think the Democrats are pro-slavery; however I believe that Welfare and unearned giveaways are a form of slavery. When you kill someone's desire to make a better life for themselves, then you have killed their spirit and made them a slave to the system feeding them. There are better ways; unfortunately, they are more expensive in the short run than a simple handout, but they are worth it. The old Work Programs Administration (WPA) concept, also known as Workfare, was a wonderful thing. The problem for the Democrats is that it allows people to help themselves. They then don't need or want free handouts. The Democrats have positioned themselves as the granter of free handouts. If they don't need the free handouts, will they not need the Democratic Party? Absurd, but that is what the Democratic National Committee appears to think. As least, their actions point to that thinking. In the end, there are no free lunches. Not for the folks receiving them ("the poor"), neither the folks providing them ("the government"), nor the folks paying for them ("the taxpayers"). As for Andy Rooney for President, who am I to stand up to Andy Rooney? Sure, he is funny and witty until people begin to take that article seriously. Gee, get a grip. Andy is too smart to run for President. Of course, I found President Clinton to be comic, in a black comedy sort of way. Why can't Andy have all the cars and boats he wants? Because I think the kid who has the potential to go to Harvard deserves to eat so he can live long enough to see his high school graduation. So what if Andy Rooney has nine boats instead of ten, maybe one boat will save a life whether it be in America or elsewhere. I love my money, I love my clothes, my car, my home but if I knew the power that me giving up one luxury held, I would gladly do it. Hey, you're a nice guy. I applaud your desire to help folks. It is the American way. What I don't like is your desire to force others to do it. Do what you want with what is yours, and let everyone else have the same right. When you tax people for social good, it is being done at the point of a gun. Are you doing good or ill? I think, and there are many that think like me, that you are doing more ills than good; in addition, the government wastes more than it helps. Some programs like Welfare actually do more harm to the recipients than help. If all of the taxes I pay for "social programs" were returned to me, I would give it to the Salvation Army. I am not even a member of their organization, but I've noticed that they really help people. They do it in terms which are beneficial to the recipients, they do not demand you believe in their faith, and they do it more efficiently than any other charity in the United States. As for crack addicts squirting out babies...unwanted babies are gonna be popping up all over the place with President Bush's Abstience funding. Trust me folks, nice ideas to teach your Catholic children, but this plan won't work, read the books because, as a matter of fact, someone thought of that plan before Bush and there are hundreds if not thousands of publications proving why it is not effective. Oh yeah, crack addicts...hmmm...cocaine...connection anyone? Okay. I agree. This plan won't work. Parents, not government, should teach morals. In fact, the government should not be in the business of deciding what is moral or immoral. That includes all of the Democrats' social welfare programs that don't work, but are kept because they are "morally good” since they “help the poor and down-trodden.” One example is the Reading Is Fundamental program. As it exists, it is an incredible failure. Even the RIF and Office of Budget and Management reports state that the program is a massive failure. The RIF report justified increased spending because it makes a good baby sitting service. I want kids to actually learn how to read, and RIF can't do it. The Democrats in Congress made it a moral issue; it still exists, and is still failing in its mission. The waste here is not the money, but in the children who are under served, and are doomed to low paying jobs because they have no reading comprehension. Let's not even talk about the missed pleasures of reading. What does all this have to do with what you said? Simply that your morals and my morals are personal things. They should not be enforced by law or at the point of a gun. Personally, I believe that my morals are a personal affair, and not for public consumption. No guns don't make you a killer. But why run the risk of having a child endanger himself or other people. Has a democrat tried to take all your guns away? No, we simply want them to be registered and used with the utmost precautions. Not because we hate republicans but because we love Americans and don't want them to die! Look at gun violence in the United States in comparison to other countries, maybe we're smart enough to recognize a problem and address it. Keep your guns, we're just trying to make our streets safer. The world is a place of trade-offs. I don't believe that there are any “free lunches.” If you remove all guns in order to protect children, what are the trade-offs? According to our friends “across the pond” in "Jolly Old England," the trade off is a monstrous increase in violent crime, including crime committed with now-illegal guns. The second trade off is something that the Founding Fathers feared. Do you want power in the hands of the people, or in the hands of a government elite? I trust people to care for themselves more than I trust some remote and uncaring bureaucrat. Where do you stop? Do we remove table knives because hundreds of thousands of people are killed each year with knives? What about cars? More people are killed on our highways every year than in all of our wars combined. Then there are the unfortunate folks with AIDS. Do we eliminate them in order to minimize the risk to others? Before you answer, "That is absurd," you should know that is what they did in Cuba. In Castro's government, all HIV-Positive and AIDS patents are isolated. It is a slippery slope with a rapid decline. You cannot remove guns from America. There's no point in making them illegal because guns are very easy to make. There are a lot of them, and international traffic in arms is large and slippery. Guns are an American tradition. You may as well tell folks they can't have cars and must ride buses. If you really care about children not being hurt by guns, then you would support gunlock laws. Some states already have these laws and they are effective. Even the NRA likes the lock laws. In the end you cannot protect people from their own folly, no matter how much you want to; however, you can make the price of a Hitler type taking over in the United States too expensive by insuring the general public is well armed. I will end this part of our discussion with the following fact. In cities and countries with the highest number of people carrying personal side arms, the crime rate is the lowest and the violent crime rate is almost nonexistent. If you feel homosexuality is wrong it may not be a phobia but whatever it is, get over it! What is wrong with you people, homosexuality is not treated this way in other parts of the world. Whatever you feel is wrong with it, get over it. Homosexuality is here to stay and everyday people feel more comfortable with it. Democrats don't ask you to take homosexuals into your homes and embrace them but if they're qualified for an open position in your company you better not allow your "opinion" to prevent you from hiring the best candidate. I don't feel that homosexuality is wrong and I am not homosexual. Genetic studies have proven that folks are born with their sexual orientation. If God decided to make 20% of the population something other than heterosexual, whom He did, then who am I to complain? I think you are mixing Republicans with Religion. They both start with the letter “R,” and if you are a product of the RIF program you might get them confused. Just as the Republican Party has a Religious Right, the Democrats have the Religious Left. Don't make the assumption of a stereotype. I am not a member of the Religious Right, and I have friends who are homosexual. I believe that sexual orientation is a personal issue, and not an issue for government. I have yet to hear any of my friends who are minorities play the victim card. Maybe its because affirmative action gave them the opportunity to rise up above poverty, get an education and achieve success. I have been a college student for most of my life and my education is my life but I would gladly give up my first choice university and go to one of the other 6 that accepted me so the struggling Hispanic kid can embark on the only college offer extended to him. Well, you don't live where I do. Playing the victim card is common here. In fact, there are plenty of lawyers who make a nice living threatening folks with the Race card. Affirmative Action is at the point of a gun. It is unfair. Why should someone who worked hard to becomes skilled at their job lose out to someone who didn't, just because they are a racial minority? Unfair! Unfair! The Federal 8A Program is even worse. It is a total waste of money and has been corrupted into garbage. You either believe that people are good or sheep. You cannot enforce anything with laws. The fact that we have police proves the point. Affirmative Action has been gamed into a worthless system that benefits players. Discrimination against people based upon race, creed or life style is bad; in fact, I feel it is evil. That is my personal, moral judgment. I also feel that Affirmative Action and programs based on Race, such as the Federal 8A Program, is a blatant form of discrimination and harms the recipients. In addition, it does not work. How do I think people should deal with the problem of discrimination in real life situations? I offer a simple solution that works. Recently, I was the target of discrimination by a black person. I am white. This was in late 2003, at one of the big box electronic retail stores. I complained to the manger of the store where this took place. She happened to be white and she told me that it was not possible. It was a typical “ostrich” reaction to an unpleasant problem. Not a problem for me! I never went in that store again. In fact, I never went into any store owned by chain again. Did this hurt them? Not yet. The guy who abused me didn't care. The manager of the store I complained to didn't want to hear it. The Board of Directors never even knew it happened. One person avoiding that store will only be a grain of sand in their Profit and Loss Statement. Thousands of people avoiding that store will show up in the Statement. Hundreds of thousands of people avoiding that store will put the entire chain out of business. Is it fair? Yes. Should I have written a letter to Corporate headquarters? No, I didn't feel like going through the pain. No one says I have to do business with people I don't like. If their company allows this kind of behavior, even if they don't know it, too bad for them. I don't care if the man at the hotel speaks Spanish because I took the time to learn how to speak it. If I got the money to stay in a hotel, I got the money to buy a couple books and learn. How many hotels does Andy Rooney stay at where the deskclerk doesn't know English, really folks? I don't think you should have to speak English until this country starts offering it to you for free. I believe in that melting pot theory, I love America because its different. I embrace going to Chinatown one day and Spanish Harlem the next because its culture within my own country and I don't have to go overseas to be a part of it. For all of you who think everyone should speak English in America, you can thank myself and my Democratic friends for teaching the cleaning ladies at our former university how to speak English. I've never met more grateful, hardworking individuals. And the word, "misunderestimated" is not a part of their vocabulary. This is a joke, right? Did you read this after writing it? I am not going to comment on most of it because you made it too easy. I will talk about English in America. Just because you're stuck on the road and have $69 for a motel does not mean you are under any obligation to learn a foreign language. That is the whole point. It is a foreign language. That means it is not the language of the land! Even the Spanish-speaking people in California fought for the mandatory teaching of English to their children. Why? Simple, they wanted their children to get better jobs than the ones they have. You can't get a job interview with someone if you can't speak his or her language. English is the language of this country. I don't care that there is no law proclaiming it. It is not necessary to pass a law enshrouding a simple fact. In addition, it is now an international language that is spoken almost everywhere in Europe, Eastern Europe and Asia. If you want to succeed anywhere in the world, learn English. If you want to succeed in America, then learn English. You did a good thing teaching the cleaning lady how to speak English. You must have felt it was important to go through that effort. My point exactly. Now go out and do it again and again and again. Better yet, help get a law passed that non-English speakers in public schools get taught how to speak the language. Of course, the Democratic National Committee is on record as opposing that stance. California already passed the law and its children are receiving the benefits. One more thing. If you move to a foreign country for work, do you expect the people there to learn English for you? I don't enjoy Andy's point of view, but I will pass it on. Just to motivate my fellow Democrats even more. I agree with some republicans, on some issues. I actually like a few republicans. But you can't really pride yourself on being an American if you don't have a heart, and if you believe your material luxuries are more important than giving public schools in places like Anacostia air conditioning, or even an adequate supply of paper then you're not in my American dream. I'm not talking about granting money on the basis of Christian teaching either...church and state people, its simple. If we want our kids to learn the Christian way, we send them to private school. If we can't afford it, we teach religion at home. This country is about differences and about opportunity, these are not obstacles, they are qualities to embrace. I am so glad you have decided to like a few of us slimy, hard working, honest Republicans. You are acting like a hypocrite. I hope you are not one in real life, but simply mouthing off. That I can forgive. As far as my heart, I quote Mark Twain, "I have the heart of a small boy. I keep it in a jar on my desk." I am proud to be an American. Now get your hands out of my pants pocket. Maybe this is why you Liberals want to ban guns! I do not agree with many republicans but I don't hate them. Sure you do! Read what you wrote. The problem is that you can't align what you know to be the truth about the few Republicans you are friends with, and the stereotype of what you think Republicans are. That stereotype is Scrooge, and it’s a lie. The truth is hard working middle class folks, just like most of us. The Editor |