Printed letters, October 18, 2012
I have no problem with newspapers making editorial endorsements for political candidates. I do have a problem when they do so, as The Daily Sentinel has done for Mitt Romney, when they blithely overlook so many of the important facts that should be considered.
For instance, our president is not a king. Not much can be accomplished without the cooperation and participation of Congress. The minority leader of the Senate, Mitch McConnell, stated at the outset of the Obama administration that the Republican objective would be getting rid of Obama and doing nothing that might be considered a positive accomplishment for the administration. He and Republicans in Congress followed through on that promise.
The Sentinel suggests that leadership could overcome problems of political partisanship. A great many Republicans have signed a pledge that they will under no circumstances vote for anything that could be construed as a raise in taxes. So what, you say?
Those that renege on that pledge would be targeted for defeat at the next election. So says the originator of the pledge, Grover Norquist. Norquist considers any tampering with benefits for special interests in tax law as being a raise in taxes. All of the above brings doing anything positive for jobs improvement and dealing with deficits and debt to a screeching halt.
What about jobs? The Sentinel conveniently overlooks the fact that our jobs problem is directly related to a lack of consumer spending. Consumers are buried in debt, some are jobless and many, if not most, are uncertain of their continued employment. I guess Congress and the president could mandate that you have spend more money in the economy. Does that meet with your approval?
Health care? The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, designed Obamacare. Romney got a similar plan approved for Massachusetts and it’s working.
Letter writer covered liberal talking points
Congratulations to Holly Von Helms. She covered most all of the liberals’ talking points in her letter to the editor published Oct 11.
✓ The financial collapse had nothing to do with the Dodd/Frank bill, even though liberals were in charge of the House and Senate. It was the GOP bad.
✓ For the first time in American history, the opposing party wanted to take back the White House. Libs would never do that. GOP bad.
✓ How can anyone in his or her right mind believe the president is leading us down the path of a “progressive socialist takeover.” Tea Party bad.
✓ Take all the money from “the rich” because they do not create any jobs. Only the government can create jobs. That is “only fair.” Another GOP bad.
✓ Von Helms forgot in her talking points how the president killed Osama bin Laden and brought peace to the Middle East. Oh, I almost forgot that Bush made the video that caused the “unrest” in the Middle East. My bad.
Give readers more local news, not national endorsements
The editorial staff of The Daily Sentinel would better serve its clientele by discussing local politics only, and not extending beyond those who serve in this valley or serve the state. I’ve never agreed with a paper endorsing a political stand on the national level.
To date, the Sentinel has been very even-handed in publishing columnists and national opinions from across the political spectrum to voice their positions. That is what I, as a reader, want to see so I can arrive at my own opinions.
While I can understand the desire and temptation to add a recommendation for president, the reality of it is that it reads as trite compared to the intense and deep arguments that currently exist on both sides of the political fence.
I personally don’t care whom the Sentinel endorses for president. I care far more deeply that our paper pays attention to our local news and candidates since we all live and play here in the Grand Valley. In the future, please stay away from endorsements for national office and bring your journalistic focus to the home front.
Nuclear power is too pricey to include in our energy mix
We don’t want any more subsidies for expensive, unsafe nuclear power or dirty coal. We do want a clean energy economy and more jobs. The candidates are not talking about climate change and the need for energy independence without breaking the bank.
Progress on energy efficiency is already reducing our electricity needs and is the most cost-effective solution while creating more jobs. Wind and solar provide many jobs, and wind is cheaper than new coal per kilowatt-hour.
One of the most expensive forms of new electricity is nuclear power. Power companies won’t build them unless they get loan guarantees and charge ratepayers ahead of construction to cover cost — $8 billion per reactor! That’s electricity we don’t need.