A+ A A-

Any required reading list ought to include varied perspectives

To the editor,
Does the left really encourage critical thinking or do they just seek to criticize anyone that fails to conform? I have to ask after reading the list of suggested reading presented us by Bernadette Loesch on June 5, here in the Sun.
Wow, 24 by count and every one a progressive left winger. Now Bernadette, how in the world do you, or anyone else, broaden their perspective, garner a wide range of facts and opinions from which to make an informed judgment when they only see and hear a single point of view? Your list is not "home work", it's propaganda. The only sources you left off your list was Karl Marx and Chairmen Mao. You sound like my fellow townie Henry Osmer when he demanded everyone stop watching Fox News and tune in to MSNBC a few weeks ago.
Speaking of Henry, I see where he's still on his blame America campaign for everything. Some time ago he was saying that the U.S. sold poison gas to Iraq but after that was debunked he has now changed his term to weapons of mass destruction. Still wrong Henry, WMD are chemical, biological, or radiological. Yes I know the media has taken to calling any large explosive device a WMD but they are really not. Yes very large conventional weapons are powerful but still are not WMDs.
Back to Bernadette: I would like to suggest that she take her own advice and do her homework by reading and listening to a variety of opinions and facts available from both sides, then think and decide for herself what is reasonable rather then being told what to think and say by others.
Steve Earle
Hill

Last Updated on Friday, 07 June 2013 08:17

Hits: 332

Revision of pope’s words shot my chances on christianmingle.com

To the editor,
A few weeks ago Pope Francis made a startling remark which in essence said that belief in Christ is not necessary for salvation. In so stating he was bucking 788 years of church teaching which has always been very clear: "outside the church there is no salvation". This theory, introduced in 1215 by Pope Innocent III, was an attempt to retain and grow new membership. Not just Catholics but most of Christianity adopted this monopolistic attitude.
Like many atheists, I knew immediately that the media jumped the gun on this one. Being an ex-catholic and grilled in church theology, I nevertheless felt a bit more liberated to know that this Pope hopefully will lean a bit left of center. To explain this doctrine is beyond the parameters of this short letter. It would only infuriate the "outsiders" even more. Suffice to say that I'm pleased with Pope Francis, who is a remarkable improvement over his predecessor. However, he has opened up a can of worms here.
It didn't take long for the Vatican damage control unit to explain "what the Pope meant". I'm hoping that Christians will choose the Pope's words rather than the "second version". Just when I was about to make my move on "christianmingle.com", my chances were looking good after the Pope's announcement that atheists could also go to heaven but after his inner circle got through parsing his words, I probably don't have a snowball's chance in hell on that website.
Like Congress, change comes slow in the Vatican. We should be thankful that the Pope has ignited a debate after seven centuries. The problem is that it is ill timed, since we have so many more urgent problems facing this country. Rather than debating who's saved and who isn't maybe we should all donate a jar of peanut butter to the Got Lunch Plymouth summer program. We'll all be the better for it.
George Maloof
Plymouth

Last Updated on Friday, 07 June 2013 08:11

Hits: 264

Political reads should be thought-provoking, not thought-providing

To the editor,
In response to Bernadette Loesch's reading and movie list:
You know what they say Bernadette. Garbage in, garbage out. I am familiar with one of the books and several of the movies and have appreciated them, but not to build a world view on them. Bernadette, dig deeper. Don't let these authors do the heavy work for you. If you accept there views whole they will lead you astray. Think for yourself. God Bless.
John Demakowski
Franklin

Last Updated on Friday, 07 June 2013 08:05

Hits: 304

Chortling or not, I’m still waiting for explanation of Medicare vote

To the editor,
Today I read the Letter to the Editor that Rep. Dick Burchell of Gilmanton wrote in response to a letter I wrote a day earlier where I pointed out that he, and Representatives Worsman, Sylvia, and Cormier all voted not to accept Medicare dollars from the federal government, which allows the Belknap County Nursing home to provide short term rehabilitative services for those senior residents of Belknap County.
The program will cost an estimated $200,000 but is offset by revenue/reimbursement of $414,044 that Medicare will give the county.
Rep. Burchell spent his time writing a response to me where he said it was "unsophisticated and rude for me to chortle over someone else's opinion", rather than using the time and space in the paper for him to explain to the residents of Belknap County why he did not support this appropriation, which covers speech therapy, along with medications, testing, and x-rays to those in Belknap County who need these short term services with absolutely no cost to the taxpayers in Belknap County.
Rep. Burchell: regarding my questioning of yours and the other three reps who voted no, I'd like to remind you that I and every citizen have the right to question and even chortle if we choose. But I wasn't chortling at your vote; I disagreed with it because it lacked key elements of good governance, which includes not only participation but transparency, responsibility, accountability, and its responsiveness to the needs of its people.
Paula Trombi
Meredith

Last Updated on Friday, 07 June 2013 08:02

Hits: 2333

Government needs the will, not new laws, to secure the border

To the editor,
The advertisements promoting the "gang of eight's" "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" are about as phony as their sponsor, "Americans for a Conservative Direction", and the bill itself. There is NOTHING CONSERVATIVE about rewarding criminals for their illegal acts, but that is what "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" does.
Advocates promise that the bill will close the border. But, they don't need new laws to close the border; they just need, but don't have, the will to close the border. They broke many (all) previous promises to close the border.
They promise that illegals won't be able to get (federal) welfare. But, that doesn't require a new law; they just need to enforce current laws. But once illegals are "legalized", they are eligible for many state and local welfare benefits funded by American taxpayers.
They promise that illegals will pay back taxes, but there is no mechanism for taxing unreported income. And, most illegals probably qualify for a subsidy (via the earned income tax credit) rather than owe taxes.
They say illegals will pay a fine. First the fine was $2,000, then $1,000. Now only the first installment of $100 "must" (if it isn't waived) be paid before getting amnesty. Whatever the fine, it is small compared to the approximately $16,000 of annual benefits received by each average illegal household.
While American citizens get promises, higher taxes, labor competition, and more crime, illegal aliens get amnesty/legalization/rewarded for breaking our laws, welfare, and the ability to take jobs from Americans and depress their wages.
"Comprehensive Immigration Reform" is another 1000 plus page bill full of goodies for everyone but the vast majority of American citizens. It is being sold to us with promises that are not intended to be fulfilled by people (politicians, businessmen, and special interest groups) who expect to benefit from the bill.
Even the name of the sponsor of many advertisements supporting this bill is intended to deceive the American people. "Americans for a Conservative Direction" is funded and controlled by three very liberal billionaires who wish to take advantage of another feature of the bill, greatly expanded visas for skilled workers. This will allow these billionaires to replace skilled, but costly, American workers with cheap immigrants.
No legislation is needed to fulfill the promised desirable features of this "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" bill. The desirable sounding promises are just intended to divert our attention from the real intent of the bill, to benefit politicians and payoff their political supporters, including rich businessmen and other special interests.
Tell Senators Ayotte and Shaheen and Congresswomen Shea-Porter and Kuster to reject this bill and demand enforcement of existing laws.
Don Ewing
Meredith

Meredith, NH

Last Updated on Friday, 07 June 2013 07:51

Hits: 366

 
The Laconia Daily Sun - All Rights Reserved
Privacy Policy
Powered by BENN a division of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Login or Register

LOG IN