Letters to the Editor for 6/14/10

-A A +A

Lethal dose of incumbents
Regarding the guest editorial, "Rising above politics," by Mayor Mitchell, is it not a dichotomy to be a politician and then declare that you are rising above politics?
Ray Charles, if he were alive, could see through that rhetoric.
Readers might come by the notion that you are making a political statement for Boucher's re-election.
Concerning the health bill vote, Boucher did not break ranks with the Democratic Party on his own accord.
Nancy Pelosi allowed his breaking ranks after she was assured she had the votes to pass the bill. If he broke ranks on his own, it follows that he will not be an effective member of the House, given tactics this administration employs.
In simple terms, he is not his “own man,” but rather another of Pelosi’s puppets.
Today’s political climate has turned toxic and partisan because Americans are fed up and have buyers’ remorse after seeing this administration at work. The toxins may be a lethal dosage of incumbents.
A vote for Boucher in November is another vote for the Democratic Party, which will continue to proliferate a Socialist/Marxist agenda; allow open borders; prolong drunken, deficit spending; dither support for industry and jobs; and disregard our Constitution and Christian beliefs.
Voters this November will decide whom they want to represent them. A Democratic party that endorses abortion, same-sex-marriage, homosexuality, removal of our Christian God from our daily lives, environmental laws and taxation that force industry to relocate offshore; or a Republican party which promotes capitalism, balanced budgets, constitutional soundness and a Christian conservative ideology.
If you vote for the former, you are the problem. We can survive this present administration but we will not survive an electorate that is clueless.
And if either party violates the latter, then we must replace them at the polls. It is our duty.
Our forefathers professed, "it is the responsibility of the citizenry to keep their government in check; and never allow the government to keep its citizenry in check,” for it is better that government fears its citizens, than the citizens fear their government…, sic, for the latter is tyranny.
Benny R. Robinson

Health care vote nothing to celebrate
Galax Mayor C.M. Mitchell’s recent editorial, “Rising above Politics,” defends Rep. Rick Boucher’s multiple votes to kill affordable health care and claims they were statesmanlike.
To me, and I speak politely, Boucher’s actions wallowed in pure political filth to save his own derriere; for he betrayed his loyal base for a negative mess of Republican pottage.
Further, the good mayor tries, incorrectly I think, to instill fear in Medicare recipients by stating that “health care reform will be paid for by senior citizens.”
Wrong! Medicare will rightfully be checked for fraud, abuse and waste, all rampant; but will increase payments to primary care physicians and will be expanded for all who require expensive prescriptions. This isn’t a scare tactic, just fact.
Rep. Boucher’s votes against health care reform may have suited Mr. Mitchell and a multiplied host of others, but they were not right; and I believe he’ll have to pay for them at the November election.
In my humble judgment, voting for the lesser of two evils isn’t a viable option. He simply sold the people of the Virginia 9th District down the proverbial river.
And while I realize the honorable mayor’s profession is dispensing healing medications to suffering humanity, I think he dosed out some toxic, stinking snake oil potions in his Gazette guest editorial.
I can’t see for the life of me how any medical professional can in good conscience oppose affordable health care for everyone, not to mention publicly commending a politician for trying to kill it outright.
John A. Duvall
Elk Creek

Ad space for sale — on your congressman
While I was looking at the NASCAR page in The Gazette the other day, an idea came to mind that would address our current political situation.
Why not require politicians to wear logo patches, like the racecar drivers do, of the companies that donate to their campaign funds?
This would not change the fact that the Congress is a wholly owned subsidiary of big business, but at least we would know from which side of his or her mouth our representative is speaking.
If the public got mad enough at a particular company — Goldman Sachs or BP, for example — we could withhold our votes from politicians wearing that logo.
Now if I can just find a congressman willing to sponsor legislation to this effect!
David Hoffman