Published: August 18, 2008 10:07 am            

8/17/2008 Letters to the Editor

Obama a turn for the worse



Modern productivity has produced an entitlement class of people under 50 who are playing childish games. Generations weaned on the bottle of instant gratification. Much of that can be traced to TV shows solving all problems in an hour. Generations have been told to expect more for less. They have been assured that it is OK to spend more than you make because in the end the government will be there to soften the fall.

The politicians are the most guilty in the creation of this attitude. They keep bailing out the failures using the taxes of the frugal and cautious, who try to live within their means. It will get worse if Obama gets in office. Remember life under Jimmy Carter?

Exactly why the Europeans are so enthralled with Obama is a mystery. A statement in the 2004 election convention by then mayor of New York Rudy Giuliani about John Kerry might give a clue, “It concerns me that he might accommodate his positions to their viewpoints.” Which may be one of the reasons that Bush is so disliked in Europe — he puts America first over the rest of the world.

Could it be that Europe thinks that Obama is a weak, inexperienced amateur politician who could be manipulated by them to do their wishes?

Speaking of political conventions, there was an article last week in the Times-Review about Leah Daughtry, an ordained bible-toting Pentecostal minister who will be in charge of the Aug. 24 interfaith service that will open the Democratic convention opening in Denver, having a bit of a problem working the atheists into the service. She stated that “... they’re part of the party, you treat them with respect ...” It seems that the Democrats are trying to claim ground on religion and values that have been in the Republicans territory for years.

To me this brings up the question of how a Democrat can claim to be a Christian?

The Democrats have not only condoned the slaughter of 40 million babies, (a total larger than the Nazis and Stalin combined) but have paraded with the homosexuals and abortionists celebrating these feats in the streets of our country. I can understand respecting other people’s religious outlook. And I can possibly understand overlooking the biblical admonishment against men laying with men, etc., but the killing of innocent children because they are inconvenient, especially by “partial birth abortion” is nothing but cold-blooded murder.

At this point I must digress to answer one of my most vocal critics’ main complaints, a lack of giving credit, and being too wordy in my letters. I hope, Maryjane, that thus far I have given adequate credit and you can be assured that I spend almost as much time researching Snopes.com, skeptic.com, factcheck.org, Fallacies, MythBusters and RadicalMiddle as writing. I can give you verified facts about Obama’s momma that this paper would not print. She was not an all American girl.

While you may have 40-plus prelaw hours from Texas Tech and are aware of the current news, the letters I write are to inform the unretired, busy raising a family, working people who would like a bit of knowledge that is not readily available in the Obama loving media.

Repeating a point of view several times helps people remember. If I ascribed credit for all the things I mention in my letters, they would contain as few facts as do yours. Maryjane, you might be truly surprised at the number of people whom I have never met who call and thank and encourage me to continue.



W.V. Bonds

Cleburne



Bonds or the Crank?



As I read your editorial page today, I couldn’t help but notice a distinct difference between W.V. Bonds’ letter and the Local Crank’s commentary. Bond, an unabashed Republican, had thoughts that were all very specific and informative about what would happen if we elect Barack Obama president of the United States.

Patrick Barkman’s comments, on the other hand, were overloaded with colorful adjectives — putdowns of U.S. presidents and vice presidents. He went all the way back to Andrew Jackson and John Quincy Adams.

These are the words I highlighted from his 39 inches you so generously gave him: “repulsive,” “stuffed shirt,” “aristocrat,” “egghead,” “poster-child for ignorance,” “dour,” “colorless,” “geeky,” “prissy,” “nerdy,” “ricin, cowardly elitist,” “dorky,” “naive dork,” “uppity” and “Republican.”

I did notice he described Sen. Mc Cain as “war hero” and “maverick.” He meant these sarcastically, as when he said, some weeks ego, that he had never met a Republican who liked John McCain. I am unrepentant. I like John Mc Cain. When I was safe in Texas, raisin’ three children, McCain was representing me in the worst kind of living conditions anyone can imagine.



Maryjane Brady

Cleburne

        

• Click to discuss this story with other readers on our forums.