Letters to the editor

Saturday, October 04, 2008

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Americans suffer while Wall Street turns socialist

The hypocrisy of the current administration that is unfolding in front of the public eye is unbelievable! For years, American families have been losing their homes (and lives) to the corporate greed of the health insurance industry -- with no help in sight. Calls for government-funded health care for all have been dismissed by crying "socialism!" Now the lifestyle (not lives, mind you) of the rich and powerful are threatened and Congress is given days to approve socialism on an unprecedented scale.

Funny how ideology can change overnight when it is your own skin that is hurting ...

The big government bailout is being done under the cover of saving "the little guy" from losing a home to a loan he couldn't afford to begin with and all of us from financial doom. I do not dispute the seriousness of the situation, but where is the realization that illness and bankruptcy from lack of or denial of health care also seriously impact the economy in loss of productivity, tax income and purchasing power?

It is obvious that the "no government" ideology is an "as long as I don't hurt" mentality, but it sure is good to fall back on when the going gets tough.

Well, for some people the going is tough all the time and government-funded health care can be a big help in creating a decent and healthy life for all Americans -- not just Wall Street, the president and his friends.

GUNILLA NORDHAMMAR
Point Breeze

Fiscally unsound

We cannot afford Barack Obama's economic and fiscal policy. Sure, he promises tax cuts for the middle class, but let's examine the facts. Barack Obama voted for higher taxes 94 times in the U.S. Senate. He voted for the largest proposed tax increase in our nation's history, which would have raised taxes on those making just $42,000 a year. Mr. Obama can continue to run on a platform of promising tax cuts for the middle class, but don't be fooled, as his track record clearly indicates otherwise.

Over the course of the campaign, Mr. Obama has proposed raising taxes on income, investments, savings, business, Social Security and energy. Specifically, his proposed tax increases on capital gains and business (which are already the second highest in the world) would discourage economic reinvestment, stimulation and job creation. For example, a manufacturing business is facing decreasing returns in a time of economic uncertainty and tax rates, already high, are increased. Then of course that business would be forced to send jobs overseas as a means of reducing labor costs to avoid operating at a loss. That's the scenario. And guess who loses? The middle-class manufacturer here in Pennsylvania whom Mr. Obama promises to help.

Barack Obama says he will keep more American jobs at home, but that simply cannot be achieved while simultaneously wanting to raise taxes on small businesses. There is no surer way to force American jobs overseas and strangle the middle class than to increase taxes across the board during tough economic times.

DAVE MAJERNIK
Plum

A war Bush chose

I am writing in response to Charles Krauthammer's Sept. 20 column, "History Will Judge Favorably on Our Accidental Wartime President." I used to read Mr. Krauthammer's columns and think his love for George W. Bush was "cute." Now I really worry about his sanity. Not that I ever took what he wrote seriously, but if he thinks invading a country was an accident, he has truly lost it. You can say I'm too caught up in reality, but how can anyone still link Sept. 11 with Iraq?

This war of choice was no accident. Mr. Krauthammer, shame on you. He goes on to talk about "interrogation of high-value terrorists" (torture) and "revised Foreign Intelligence Surveillance" (spying on our own citizens). He just doesn't get it. When history looks back at this "accidental war," it will not really matter what the outcome was; what matters is the freedoms that we as American citizens surrendered during this president's "accidental administration."

ERIC C. KELLAR
Stanton Heights

Wise guidance

The Catholic bishops of the United States have approved a document, "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship" (2007) to provide moral guidance in the political arena for their fellow Catholics. They are clear that they do not intend to tell Catholics for whom or against whom to vote. They recognize that it is the responsibility of the individual to make that decision with an informed conscience. The full text of the document is available online.

At the heart of their teaching shines the absolute principle of respect for human life in all its manifestations. A non-negotiable principle is that it is never permissible to vote with the deliberate intention to support an intrinsically immoral position. They recognize that we live in a complex and imperfect world where no candidate will perfectly reflect all the basic moral values of Catholic teaching. Moral principles must be applied to concrete situations, and the bishops encourage all Catholics to exercise the virtue of prudence to discern the true good and the most practical way to achieve that good. While stressing the sanctity of all human life, they insist that all the issues of the common good and the demands of social justice are intimately related.

In an interview, Cardinal Roger Mahoney, the archbishop of Los Angeles, was asked whether a Catholic could vote for a candidate who does not agree with the church on each and every one of its moral principles. He replied, "I think somebody could vote for either candidate quite comfortably, knowing that no one is running on the exact scheme of the church's teaching." In consort with Cardinal Mahoney, all Catholics should give a serious ear to the wise guidance of the American bishops.

REV. DAVID L. SMITH
Uptown

Benedict's words

As the "good Catholic" fog begins to drift in on letters to the editor, consider this: It appears that not only are the sheep scattered, but our shepherds are as well. Let us defer to our Supreme Shepherd, Benedict XVI. These are his words just prior to his papal election: "Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. ... There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia."

DANIEL YATES
Regent Square

We receive more letters than we can fit into the limited space on the editorial page, so we'd like to share some additional letters with our Post-Gazette Web site readers.

Same essential beliefs, different details

What concerns me most about Wendy Scott Paff's comments is that someone might take them seriously ("Leaving the Church: It's Not About Lifestyles; It's About Christ," Sept. 24 Perspectives). The Episcopal Church and its leaders have not given up on Christ, the Creed or the Trinity.

Those of us in Pittsburgh who are going to remain Episcopalians rather than "realigning" recognize that it is possible to differ on the details while holding fast to the essentials of Christianity.

Episcopal belief is contained in our worship and is articulated in the Book of Common Prayer. The latest edition of this was approved in 1979 and has remained unchanged since then. Contrary to what Ms. Paff says, the Episcopal Church has continued to ordain and to approve conservatives as deacons, priests and even bishops, as the consecration this last year of former Pittsburgher Mark Lawrence as bishop of the Diocese of South Carolina attests.

If Ms. Paff wishes to realign in order to worship only with those who interpret Scripture and the basic documents of the church exactly as she does, that is her choice. However, those of us committed to remaining in the Episcopal Church do so because that church continues to offer rich and meaningful expressions of Christianity.

We invite you to join us in any of the parishes committed to the Episcopal Church and to see for yourself.

JOAN R. GUNDERSEN
President
Progressive Episcopalians of Pittsburgh
Church of the Redeemer
Squirrel Hill

Let's try 'average' for a change

Over the years I have spoken with many people who have wondered why an "average" person can't make it to the White House. Many of these friends and relatives have said this is what the country needs, someone who can relate to the everyday problems faced by millions of Americans.

Well, we now have someone running who is an average American ... high school cheerleader, PTA member, mother, mayor of a small town and wife of a steel worker's union member. This sounds like just the person they were looking for. As for her bouncing from college to college to get her degree, I have several friends whose children have switched schools. When you are young it's sometimes tough to find the right fit for yourself. She wasn't groomed for an elite Ivy League school since her birth like many of our leaders have been.

Everyone of us knows someone whose past is quite similar to Sarah Palin's. I for one am ready to try an "average" American in national office. I think her governing experience certainly is equal to and probably greater than Barak Obama's. I think Mr. Obama is also qualified to be a vice-presidential candidate on the Democratic side, but not in the No. 1 spot.

As for John McCain's age, I don't think it is a problem, with people living longer than ever (despite our "terrible" health-care system). I think he'll be around for a while. If something should happen to him, I am sure Sarah Palin would choose a vice president with experience (just as Barack Obama did). People say they would be fearful if something would happen to John McCain and she ascended to the presidency. Barack Obama would take the same level of experience Sarah Palin has, or less, into the White House as president on day one. Now that scares me!

TOM MILLER
Irwin

A frightening prospect

Be afraid, non-radical-right Americans; be very, very afraid. The jeering mob that scornfully dismissed Barack Obama's community service (while waving their "service" placards) are the same good folks who sneered at the military service records of John Kerry and Max Cleland. Country first?

I guess all the good kids who chose to serve in the Peace Corps, Vista, Teach America and myriad community service programs before embarking on making a pile of money are just pathetic, liberal, unenlightened lightweights.

Sarah Palin is one scary lady who feels empowered to impose her personal religious convictions, selective interpretation of constitutional rights, censorship and intolerant "morality" on the entire nation.

Behind the pretty face, beguiling smile and clever words is one mean-spirited mama, following the Karl Rove strategy of character assassination, which John McCain knows so well -- first as victim, now as perpetrator. Mr. McCain, have you no shame?

MARY ELLEN KIRBY
Stanton Heights

Lies and deception should not be tolerated

Columnist Paul Krugman gives compelling reasons why we should be upset by the McCain campaign lies ("Blizzard of Lies," Sept. 13). I agree with Mr. Krugman, but take issue with the idea that we should show some tolerance for such behavior because it's nothing new. We may have become inured to these tactics, but are they acceptable simply because they are commonplace?

Rather, I would think voters would be incensed by the blatant disdain Mr. McCain has shown for the American people. He has deceived, misled and lied to us. His behavior demonstrates neither honor nor judgment, but rather a singular and dangerous thirst to win by any means. I had considered Mr. McCain to be the better candidate until he showed an utter and complete lack of scruples in selecting Sarah Palin, and now continues to insult voters through the contemptible manner his campaign uses to deceive the public. He has laid aside "County First" for his own interests and proves that the change to a McCain/Palin administration from the Bush/Cheney one would be in name only.

Mr. Krugman is right -- politics ain't beanbag. However, when voters make decisions based on information peddled on television, as many do, they have a right to expect that what they are told be scrutinized sufficiently to separate truth from spin. Lies and deception should not be acceptable, from either camp, and every responsible media outlet in the country should report them for what they are and should continue to do so until voters finally get it.

BRIDGET McNICHOLAS
Whitehall

A 'reformer' from the mold of Bush

So Sarah Palin claims that she wants to "reform" Washington. Then, in a move right out of W.'s playbook, her appointed attorney general stonewalls Alaska's legislative inquiry into the firing of the state's public safety commissioner by refusing to honor lawfully issued subpoenas ("Palin Probe Likely to End Before Election: Governor's Husband and Other Key Witnesses Refuse to Testify," Sept. 20).

As a taxpayer more concerned that every dollar I earn is becoming diluted by every dollar the feds print to prop up failing companies, my patience with Republican antics is growing thin. How can Gov. Palin claim with a straight face to welcome an investigation only to suppress it until the election is over? On my "more of the same" index, this move is off the charts.

BRYAN NEFT
Mt. Lebanon

The smoking minority are being persecuted

I vehemently disagree with the smoking ban that Clarion and other state-owned universities are trying to impose ("Clarion U. Students Light Up," Sept. 16). Although I both understand and respect the health concerns, you cannot ban smoking on a campus altogether.

Smoking has been allowed at Clarion since the campus was founded; the students who have already paid their tuition to attend the school and the students who are well adjusted and happy should not have one of their rights, the right to smoke, revoked. While it can be said that both smokers and nonsmokers alike have equal rights in this matter, the rights of the nonsmokers may be dealt with in other ways.

People who choose to smoke are already confined to the outside of buildings and dorms when they need to deal with their addictions. It is absolutely unfair to ask them to leave the campus altogether in an effort to satisfy a few lazy students who cannot take the time or effort to avoid people who they can clearly see are smoking.

I never have and I never will smoke. I just find it outrageous that Clarion University would persecute the minority that does smoke without considering how they feel.

AVA MAKAL
McCandless

We welcome your letters. Please include your name, address and phone number, and send to Letters to the Editor, 34 Blvd. of the Allies, Pittsburgh 15222. E-mail letters to letters@post-gazette.com or fax to 412-263-2014. Letters should be 250 words or less, original and exclusive to the Post-Gazette. All letters are subject to editing for length, clarity and accuracy and will be verified before being published.

First published on October 4, 2008 at 12:00 am