E-mail letters, July 23, 2010

Paying taxes is
civic responsibility

I know I’ve said it before but I must repeat this bit of my philosophy again: “I love taxes!”

There, I said it, and you can call me crazy if you wish, but as a loyal and patriotic American it is the truth of what being a citizen means to me.
I believe in doing my part to contribute to the “common welfare.” I am not rich, so it isn’t as much as I would like, but my pittance lets me show I care about my country and my neighbors.

Can someone tell me what those who want tax cuts for the rich, huge bonuses and estate tax bans, but can’t tolerate helping those who have been less fortunate, care about?
And can anyone explain how an American city, Colorado Springs, can allow the rich to pay for street lights in their neighborhoods but not share the light literally with their poorer neighbors?
There are some individuals who have seen the need to change (i.e. Bill and Melinda Gates, Warren Buffet, Tim Allen) and are giving half their income to charity. They don’t want tax cuts and should set a new example for those to whom much has been given. At least we can all hope that happens.
I am glad I can contribute to supporting our police, firemen, our roads, our schools and many more common needs.  No scare tactics about paying more taxes if the Bush tax cuts expire or 55 percent taxes on my estate when I die will convince me otherwise. Those expiring tax cuts and the elimination of the “death tax” don’t effect me or most other taxpayers because we aren’t in the upper 5 percentage bracket. The message is a scare tactic, not reality.
Nancy Keddy
Grand Junction

Rick Wagner left out
key parts of Obama quote

Regarding Rick Wagner’s July 22 column, here is the meat of the president’s comment about constitutional interpretation that Wagner derides in paragraph 11:

“To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf ...”

How about printing this on the editorial page and let the president’s actual words speak for him? Note that even the Warren Court was following an already set interpretation.

Please, either have Wagner fact-checked before he’s published, or find someone who gives us
opinions based on some real thought. Shame on The Daily Sentinel and him.
Loralee Kerr


Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Search More Jobs

734 S. Seventh St.
Grand Junction, CO 81501
970-242-5050; M-F 8:00 - 5:00
Subscribe to print edition
eTear Sheets/ePayments

© 2017 Grand Junction Media, Inc.
By using this site you agree to the Visitor Agreement and the Privacy Policy