- Special Sections
- Public Notices
Learn from mistakes of the past
I came across a bit of wisdom yesterday: “The past is in front of you.”
Meaning, the mistakes of yesterday are how we have created today and right now, that doesn’t look too good.
We are entering into a verge between two ways of thinking.
Traditional thinkers, who imitated the ancestors without realizing that this leads to stagnation and decay. Then, the modern thinkers who rush into things with no forethought about the long-term consequences of their choices.
The balance between those two is the area of creative power to not only determine the future but to plan the true costs wisely.
We have squandered our natural resources in pursuit of temporary and short-term gain and now we are faced with that “past” in front of us.
Unfortunately, we have idealized and glamorized greed. It was supposed to be simple, ride on the backs of the greedy and the trickle down would be good for everybody.
What we failed to understand was that the curse of greed is insatiability. There is greedy unrest afoot in our culture — the demand for more and more, yet feeling unsatisfied and ungrateful.
As we enter into this season of thanksgiving, not feeling gratitude is like wrapping a present and not giving it.
Showing appreciation for what we have and for others will enrich your life to a greater depth. Think wisely and wisdom will be in front of you.
Bette and Fred Inman
Mouth of Wilson
Look at the facts about candidate
There is more at stake in the upcoming election than Scott Jackson-Ricketts could imagine [see letter published Oct. 27]. Using facts, not "feelings," we can arrive at an informed decision to support McCain/Palin.
1. Scott worries that everything we care about is at stake. If voters are worried about a global threat, then we have a choice for a senator who has made foreign policy, visits our troops often, and wishes to maintain our position in the world. That candidate is McCain.
Obama even frightens his own vice presidential candidate. Biden warned that Obama might make a serious foreign policy decision that most people won’t like.
Biden on Oct. 19 stated that the world will test Obama within six months and that we will have an international crisis. Why would this happen? It will happen because Obama has no experience in foreign policy.
2. Scott became depressed because he felt that McCain was showing prejudice. He needs to examine the facts. McCain has never mentioned anything derogatory about women, race, ethnicity, or age.
Everyone who has heard Obama speak can recall instances where he mentioned race and age. His treatment of Hillary Clinton spoke more loudly, indicating his view of qualified women. McCain’s actions depict a leader who respects all people and takes pride at having a woman as his running mate.
3. What “altruistic” view does Scott attribute to Obama? Obama’s attempts to foster socialism, share the wealth, will ruin our economic system.
Obama is aligned with the very greedy policies which collapsed our economy. The fact is that Obama refused to vote in favor of regulating the very corporations that ruined the housing market, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (summer of 2005). Obama accepted over $100,000 from Fannie and Freddie (agencies now under federal investigation).
Anyone can have an opinion, but only facts sort falsehoods from truth.
Does a true patriot smear opponent?
In response to Fran Halsey’s and Marvin McMillian’s polemics in last week’s Gazette, I can only say they are no more true patriots than the next person.
Both intimate that they are Christians, yet fill their letters with innuendo and slurs regarding Sen. Obama.
Halsey purposefully tosses in Obama’s middle name in an attempt to shade him as anti-American. No, Obama’s father wasn’t an American but his mother was. Sorry, Ms. Halsey, but Obama is as American as you.
McMillian further slants the truth by suggesting Obama wasn’t American-born, thus disqualified to serve as president. Obama is a native-born U.S. citizen which makes him qualified.
Sadly, I don’t think we’d be having this discussion if Obama’s father had been Finnish.
Both writers claim Obama is socialist. I’ve news for you: we live in socialistic country already.
Shall we do away with Medicare and Medicaid? Are you willing to give up your Social Security checks? And who do you suppose just bailed out our financial institutions?
Democrats AND Republicans, including the president.
Obama's comments about spreading the wealth aren't aimed at making either of you work harder but in addressing inequity of a system that allows the ultra-rich to find loopholes that drop their tax percentage below those who shoulder most of the tax burden now—the middle-class.
Halsey and McMillian oppose abortion, but before they congratulate themselves on being so ethical, I would guess both believe in the death penalty. Their party does.
How can one believe in saving life on one hand while supporting death on the other? If an unalienable right is life, then how do you justify the death penalty? Is that how God blesses America?
I respect John McCain but disagree with many of his policies. Halsey and McMillian disagree with Obama on the issues. I support that.
Yet, it is incredulously ironic that they seek respect for McCain while slandering an honorable man with vituperation, false insinuations, and campaign smear. Are those qualities of true patriots?
Read more. Learn more. Be more informed. May God bless the world.
Talking to enemies won't protect nation
Mr. Scott Jackson-Ricketts had one point right in his recent letter. "Nearly everything we care about is at stake."
We are now at war in the Middle East as a result of terrorist attacks on us, but the war is there, not here.
Yet, Mr. Jackson-Ricketts believes "might makes right" is old and worn out and supports Obama's meetings with the enemies and talking. Mr. Jackson-Ricketts stated "We as a world need to belong to one another, need to accept that getting along is better than not, and easier."
Tell that to the terrorists.
Editor's note: Much of this letter contained philosophical arguments that did not fit The Gazette's definition of a rebuttal. For more information about those rules, see the box at right.