Advertisement

Archive for Thursday, September 18, 2008

GOP legacy

September 18, 2008

Advertisement

To the editor:

Is it the strategy of the Republican Party to rail against anyone that questions the dubious qualifications of Gov. Palin and their claims of being "reforming mavericks" in hopes that the American voter will forget their leadership over the last seven years? The Republicans have led us to an unnecessary war in Iraq, an unsure victory in Afghanistan, an unprecedented national debt, the attempted trashing of the Constitution, circumvention of the environmental laws and social reform accomplished over the last 40 years, and their cronyism, at the expense of the middle class, with big business. If it works, then we deserve what we get.

The war, national health care, Social Security, the deficit, the housing situation and the economy are a few of the many issues that need to be addressed. It's time to demand more from both parties. In order to cast an intelligent vote, we need to insist on concrete goals and specific actions on how those goals are to be accomplished from both parties. The issues facing America in this election are far too important for rhetoric, fear tactics and personal attacks.

Bill Dymacek,
Eudora

Comments

jafs 6 years, 1 month ago

Unless the majority party in Congress has a sufficient majority to override presidential vetoes, they are limited in their ability to pass legislation.This is probably why most legislation is some sort of compromise.

0

ASBESTOS 6 years, 1 month ago

Do you even realize what ACLU stands for, asbestos?YEs I do, but the ACLU does not respect the SCOTUS 2nd Amendment ruling, and is AGAINST the 2 nd amendment and the SCOTUS ruling.Yes I know they are the creeps that support NAMBLA for child predatation and molestationYes, I know that the ACLU lobbies for more "rights" for ilelgal aliens and Citizens from other countries, while eroding the rights of the American CitizensYes I know what the ACLU is, and they are the ones that want to give the "Battlefield" POWs '"ight to trial", which meand that the American Military Policy is to no longer take prisoners.Yes, I know what the ACLU is "supposed to be". it is no longer that, it is an organization that supports ultra left wing philosphhy and no longer subscribes to "American" values, but surenders it to "Global interpertations".

0

Richard Heckler 6 years, 1 month ago

Election IssuesNow it's time to force the issues to the front burner and ignore the sex and swift boating from the republicans. Deception and avoiding the issues are the republican campaign trademark. Voters must defend their rights to an ISSUE ORIENTED campaign!The issues it seems are: http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home Bring all the troops home. The Iraq people know how to rebuild a country and run an oil business. Their oil is not our oil.40,000 disabled troops More than 4,000 dead troops1,000,000 dead Iraq men,women and Children Creating new industry that cannot be outsourced Cleaner Energy Sources National Health Insurance ( Support HR 676) Dumping No Child Left Behind Restoring Rights of Americans that republicans took away Reining in the power of the President Restoring the EPA Acts that the republican wiped out Restoring the USDA to a credible agency that places consumers over special interest money Voter Rights NOT special interest rights:Campaigns go too long,spend way too much money and do not necessarily provide the best available.It is up to us to stop the nonsense at the voting booths on the 2008 ballot.Not voting sends the wrong message and changes nothing.Lets's demand a new system and vote in Fair Vote America : http://www.fairvote.org/irv/Demand a change on the 2008 ballot.

0

OnlyTheOne 6 years, 1 month ago

"Good letter." Except everybody seems to have forgotton there were a few Democrats around during the Republicans tenue in the White House. What were they doing? Oh yes, marching to the same tune.

0

KEITHMILES05 6 years, 1 month ago

There are only two issues in this campaign and they tied closely together.The war has put this country into a tailspin and depression. IT'S THE ECONOMY STUPID!

0

Gary Sandell 6 years, 1 month ago

1029 (Anonymous) says: Number of votes it took for Palin to be elected mayor of Wasilla: 909 (32.7% voter turnout)Number of votes it took for Palin to be elected governor of Alaska: 114,697 (51% of registered voters cast a vote)___Number of Electoral votes needed to elect the McCain-Palin ticket: 270.

0

Jason Bailey 6 years, 1 month ago

Here we go again....another day, same song.Who controls the purse strings that drives the national deficit? Congress. Who controls Congress? The Dems.Who has the power to pull the funding on the War? The Dems.Social Reform = socialism when a lib is talkingThe last paragraph starts with a diatribe about SS, Health care...blah blah blah.Since the Constitution is so precious to you ("..the attempted trashing of the Constitution...") please point out to me where in the Constitution the Feds have any power to fix healthcare, institute SS in the first place, get involved in the housing situation or manage the economy. The Fed Bank is charged with overseeing the economy but reports to the Legislature and Executive branches in various forms. Those two entities were never given the power to "regulate the economy" in the sense that we are regulating it today.If you would read the original intent of the Founders most of them were very frightened of what the establishment of Hamilton's Fed banking system would mean to the country. It turned out they were right and Washington was wrong to allow it to happen.Likewise, the Framers of the Constitution did not explicitly give the Feds the power that they wield today -- it's inferred through vague language in the Preamble. War and defense is really the only mandate given to government that is crystal clear.In the end, we have another day where (apparently) only angry liberals are frantically sending in hate mail to the LTE. Apparently, absolutely no conservatives have anything to write to the LJW. We're such a mute bunch.The bias at the LJW is appalling.

0

Flap Doodle 6 years, 1 month ago

Change America needs: Dump the Pelosi/Reid Democrat Congress!

0

kidicarus 6 years, 1 month ago

To place the blame for our country's current state entirely on one party is plain stupid. Both parties are at fault. Instead of pointing fingers and calling names, perhaps we ought to be constructive and figure out how to get out of this mess. Both camps have some good ideas. Initially, both the McCain and Obama campaigns seemed like they wanted to rise above the partisanship and get things accomplished. Now, it looks like we're back playing the same old game.

0

Grundoon Luna 6 years, 1 month ago

Mavericks? Yeah, sure . . . It's nothing but the same old garbage. Palame is now adopting the Rove approach to investigations: Don't cooperate. The right fights took and nail when there is an attempt to hold them accountable. They are goin' down!

0

JohnBrown 6 years, 1 month ago

When will the Republican't Party take responsibility for their actions? Their stewardship of this country is appalling, but what's worse is that they won't even own up to it.(*) Republican't: the party that can't govern, can't balance a budget, can't regulate banks and lending, can't clean up after a hurricane, can't follow the Constitution, can't win either of two wars, can't figure out who the real enemy is, can't keep their promises, can't tell the truth, can't protect us from terrorists, can't keep our military strong and "ready", can't supply our military with the stuff they need, can't take care of our vets, and can't figure out we need to get off oil.-Pay no attention to that [old] man behind the curtain.

0

Jason Bailey 6 years, 1 month ago

@Every Angry Lib:Duplenty: I believe it is you that needs a Civics lesson, friend. The President submits a budget but the Bicameral legislature must pass it by Resolution. Discretionary spending is set by the House and Senate Appropriation Committees. Direct spending is mandatory spending by law which (the last time I checked) was enacted or changeable by the Congress. Who controls the Congress?I believe there's a small thing called checks and balances outlined in the Constitution. The Congress has the power to control spending thus my statement about balancing a budget is correct. They could DEMAND that Bush submit a balanced budget or not move the submitted budget to Resolution on the floor of the House/Senate.@LogicSound:Please read my post in context before spewing hatred and name calling (I know that's hard for you guys). I said that 90% of the Liberal agenda is Unconstitutional when viewed from a Constructionist vantage point. Perhaps you should do some research on what the Constructionist philosophy is. I didn't make a blanket statement that it WAS unconstitutional, I specifically qualified the point from a Constructionist view.Regarding the terrorist attack...give me a break! You need to read about what Osama himself said on how 9/11 came to be. He is on the record as saying that after the Al Qaeda attacks in the 90s against US interests abroad and seeing Clinton's anemic response that he knew the US was weak. The fact is that your guy's lack of a sufficient response when it mattered led up to 9/11, per Osama's own words!@1029: I really think we need...oh never mind. Your attempt at an intelligent comment doesn't warrant a response.

0

1029 6 years, 1 month ago

jason2007's 9:42 comment is a perfect example of how ignorant the average American is about how government works. Required high school curriculum needs to be reformed to put more of an emphasis on understanding how our government works.

0

1029 6 years, 1 month ago

Number of votes it took for Palin to be elected mayor of Wasilla: 909 (32.7% voter turnout)Number of votes it took for Palin to be elected governor of Alaska: 114,697 (51% of registered voters cast a vote)

0

a_flock_of_jayhawks 6 years, 1 month ago

OnlytheOne says,"Except everybody seems to have forgotton there were a few Democrats around during the Republicans tenue in the White House. What were they doing? Oh yes, marching to the same tune."I seem to recall them being threatened by the R's with "the nuclear option". Remember that?

0

staff04 6 years, 1 month ago

Ugh...I hate when people whose knowledge of the federal budget process comes from high school or college textbooks try to argue.You are all wrong. Here's a good place to start:http://budget.house.gov/crs-reports/98-721.pdfhttp://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL34622_20080819.pdfAnd jason2007, the Democratic Congress DID in fact reject the President's budgets for FY 08 and FY 09 and passed balanced budgets instead.Do some homework and then come back and try again.

0

Jason Bailey 6 years, 1 month ago

@JohnBrown:1) Balance a budget? Who controls the budget since 2006? A: Dems2) Can't regulate banks and lending? Where does the Constitution give any Fed party that power? A: It doesn't.3) Can't clean up after a hurricane? Who's responsibility is this? A: The States.4) Can't follow the Constitution? Um, 90% of the Liberal agenda is Unconstitutional when viewed through a Constructionist vantage point.5) Can't win either of two wars? Who declared defeat and said the surge would never work? A: Barry Obama and Harry Reid (BTW: even your party is no longer saying we lost Iraq so you might want to get in line)6) Can't keep their promises? Where are all the promised reforms that Pelosi spewed before gaining a majority in Congress? A: They haven't happened.7) Can't protect us from terrorists? Are you kidding me? Please let me know where we've been attacked since 9/11....I missed that newsflash. Oh, BTW your party's revered and esteemed Father of Liberalism FDR had an attack on his watch too but it didn't happen twice under his watch....same goes for Bush.Care to try again?

0

Richard Heckler 6 years, 1 month ago

How will the rest of the U.S. economy be affected if the republicans social security privatization plan is enacted?Put simply, moving to a system of private accounts would not only put retirement income at risk--it would likely put the entire economy at risk.The current Social Security system generates powerful, economy-stimulating multiplier effects. This was part of its original intent. In the early 1930s, the vast majority of the elderly were poor. While they were working, they could not afford to both save for retirement and put food on the table, and most had no employer pension. When Social Security began, elders spent every penny of that income. In turn, each dollar they spent was spent again by the people and businesses from whom they had bought things. In much the same way, every dollar that goes out in pensions today creates about 2.5 times as much total income. If the move to private accounts reduces elders' spending levels, as almost all analysts predict, that reduction in spending will have an even larger impact on slowing economic growth.The current Social Security system also reduces the income disparity between the rich and the poor. Private accounts would increase inequality--and increased inequality hinders economic growth. For example, a 1994 World Bank study of 25 countries demonstrated that as income inequality rises, productivity growth is reduced. Market economies can fall apart completely if the level of inequality becomes too extreme. The rapid increase in income inequality that occurred in the 1920s was one of the causes of the Great Depression.http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2005/0505orr.html

0

ASBESTOS 6 years, 1 month ago

Hey Merril, in both of the sites you posted, both have members of ACORN national offices and the ACLU, both ultra left wingers.Like that is an objective group.Windlass the moronic yahoo:"Since 2001, the Republican Party controls the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches."But hey , SNAP, Dems have had control of the legislative branch, and have slept on the Chairmanships of the House and Senate Banking and Finance committees. Well did they let this happen for political means, or did they just let it ride and got fat on the low interest loans and then just "blamed the GOP". """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""They're committing suicide, folks."And the way you post I am supposed to believe that you actually care about the soldiers? Yeah, right, you are just pooliticizing a side effect of men and women in conflict. You are despicable.

0

OnlyTheOne 6 years, 1 month ago

And once again I ask, "Were there not Democrats in a position of authority and power in Washington during this 'rape' of America?"Of course there were but the LTE writer (and a number of others) seem to forget this one small point!Now I dislike Bush, Cheney, Rove and the bunch of 'em as much as the next guy but let's be honest the Dems ain't done us no good for eight years either.

0

Jason Bailey 6 years, 1 month ago

@Staff04:Man you guys are dense. That's not the point. You guys get so caught up in the most minute details. I know the congress passed balanced budgets but who sets the level of discretionary and direct spending? The Congress!Who has the authority and power to change entitlement spending (thus reducing the yearly cost load to the budget)? The Congress!Who has the authority to override the war and pull the plug on funding the "War on Terrorism"? The Congress!They do none of the above so please link all of the above statements back to my original point earlier today: In regards to an out of control deficit, the Dems are as much to blame as Bush.

0

JohnBrown 6 years, 1 month ago

jason2007 1) Balance a budget? Who controls the budget since 2006? A: Dems.JohnBrown: Wrong: President submits and congress passes or rejects. Bush can veto any achanges he doesn't want and Republican'ts in congress can sustain the veto.2) Can't regulate banks and lending? Where does the Constitution give any Fed party that power? A: It doesn't.JohnBrown: Article 1 of the Constitution.3) Can't clean up after a hurricane? Who's responsibility is this? A: The States.JohnBrown: Since the Congressional Act of 1803 the President has been tasked with responding to, planning for, recovering from, and mitigating against disasters. 4) Can't follow the Constitution? Um, 90% of the Liberal agenda is Unconstitutional when viewed through a Constructionist vantage point.JohnBrown: I disagree, but even if true, the Supreme court would set them straight. But that is a different topic. The topic at hand is habeas corpus and safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary state action.5) Can't win either of two wars? Who declared defeat and said the surge would never work? A: Barry Obama and Harry Reid (BTW: even your party is no longer saying we lost Iraq so you might want to get in line).JohnBrown. Did we win? Is it over? Was iraq the fight we should have chosen? 6) Can't keep their promises? Where are all the promised reforms that Pelosi spewed before gaining a majority in Congress? A: They haven't happened.JohnBrown: Conservatives pride themselves in being against big government and for reduced spending. BUT, Reagan added $2 trillion in debt while he was in office and Bush II has added another $5 trillion. of our $9 trillion debt, two conservatives created $7 trillion of it.7) Can't protect us from terrorists? Are you kidding me? Please let me know where we've been attacked since 9/11:.I missed that newsflash. Oh, BTW your party's revered and esteemed Father of Liberalism FDR had an attack on his watch too but it didn't happen twice under his watch:.same goes for Bush.JohnBrown: As I recall, 9/11 happened under the Bush administration. Where was the protection then? Oh, but you ONLY want to talk about since 9/11. Well, what about the anthrax attack? That was a second, unrelated terrorist attack that happened under Bush. Further, neither purpertrator has since been captured "dead or alive'. Instead we spent billions "attacking" Bin Laden in the wrong country.Care to try again?

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.