The American Spectator

Reader Mail

CRADLE TO THE GRAVE
Re: Philip Klein's It's A Raid!

Despite any protests to the contrary, this is cradle-to-grave welfare.
-- Stan Welli
Aurora, Illinois

---

I return from an eco-tour of Central America to find the election over and Barack Obama installed as our new president! At first I was quite sure one of my predictions for the future had come true: that a scheduled presidential election would not be held. But as I have since learned the Republicans have ceded this one to the socialists.

So let me make my predictions for the next four years based on an Obama presidency.

1. A weapon of mass destruction will be detonated in one or more of our larger cities killing hundreds of thousands of citizens.

2. The Dow Jones will dip significantly below 5000.

3. Social Security payments will be cut off for people with retirement incomes of approximately $40,000 plus.

4. Public transportation will be required in cities. No cars allowed.

5. Freedom of speech will be severely restricted -- the so called fairness doctrine will be re-enacted by Congress as the first step.

6. The cost of medical care will skyrocket and the quality will plummet.

7. To keep track of us, an internal passport will be instituted and required to register in hotels, or to travel. All illegal aliens will be granted amnesty; registered democrat; and given the entitlements we had to work to provide for the lame and lazy; welfare, social security, medical care, food stamps etc.

8. The number of people living in poverty will increase by 15%

9. Unemployment will rise to 11%.

10. The rights conferred by the second amendment will be extinguished.

The goal of the democrat leadership is a Cuban style democracy. One Party, one leader, one candidate, one correct vote. Strict control of the population by a central state apparatus and we serve the government, not the other way round.

Costa Rica looks mighty good to me!

-- Jay Molyneaux

Denver, North Carolina

The time has come for the argument against over-taxing the rich to get down to the real issue. It’s actually very simple. The next time someone from the left comes on one of your shows and starts talking about how the rich “can afford it” or how the rich “need to pay their fair share” or how “the little guy needs some relief” or some other platitude, you have to be prepared to pound them on the following points:

But it’s their money. When did it become legal to plunder the rich?

What happens if the rich quit? What if they decide to shut down their businesses? What happens if the rich say to themselves, “the heck with it, why should I work 20 hours a day trying to run a business, if no one is at least going to say thank you? Why should I work myself to the bone, just so that I can have more money confiscated from me? I don’t mind helping, but I’m not going to stand here and be called villain when I’m the one forking up the money to pay for everybody else’s living. The heck with this……..I quit!”

What happens if Atlas Shrugs? Then what are you going to do?

This country was built on the premise that its citizens were free to keep the fruits of their labor. If the government violates that fundamental right of man, then where does it end? I submit to you that one needs look no further than the failed state of North Korea and the former USSR to see what’s in store for us, once we go down that path that says the government has the power to take “from those according to their abilities” to give to “those according to their needs” which is what’s really behind Obama’s statement to “spread the wealth around”. We all know that is the basic tenant of Marxism, and that whenever it has been tried throughout history, it has ended in disaster for the people of the country or regime that perpetrated it on its citizenry.

This is the argument that needs to be made, and the sooner it starts, the better.
-- Richard DeRosa
Stockton, California

"False ideals cannot be shattered by criticism. Right ideals must take up the battle against them." -- Franz Werfel
 
Social Security was an integral part of an interesting experiment (completely without Constitutional foundations, which is why the Supreme Court knocked down many components of the FDR’s New Deal, and which is why he subsequently sought to stack the SCOTUS, which also was ruled to be completely unconstitutional  which makes FDR the father of abuse of executive power -- yet the Left who idolize Roosevelt deplore Bush 43) that morphed into an entitlement transmuted into an inalienable right (for both native born and illegal immigrants). The thing with experiments is that they require monitoring, verification and set end points. Social Security has none of these qualities. One might well wonder how people ever survived before the Nanny State put a pacifier in the mouths of babes (citizens). The answer was family support and real community support, not community organizers.  
 
Social Security is the greatest Ponzi  scheme ever invented. And what makes it so great is the people who get short change (royally screwed) aren’t today’s voters; in fact, most of the victims of this inter-generational rip have not yet been born. While it is true that if Social Security was ended today the result would be devastating to the economy in general and the elderly in particular a change is sorely needed.   
 
Obama’s offer of change is to further drain and re-channel today’s resources. We Baby Boomer’s (I am at the tail of end) need to wean ourselves off Social Security within a reasonable time period (ten years from the start of the next administration?) if we to be able to face our grandchildren with clear national conscience. If we don’t begin to make changes now, I fear for my grandchildren -- and they are far from being born.
-- Ira M. Kessel
Rochester, New York

---

READ CLOSELY
Re: W. James Antle, III's Rocking the House:

Antle's report is false. I just received a solicitation from the NRCC on behalf of Michelle Bachmann this morning. What are you trying to do?
-- Tal Campbell
Beaumont, California

W. James Antle, III replies:

I specifically reported that the National Republican Congressional Campaign Committee pulled its scheduled advertising buys on behalf of Michelle Bachmann, which it did. But the NRCC has continued raising money off Bachmann, sending out solicitations asking people to donate to the embattled congresswoman -- and, of course, to give the NRCC itself some money as well.

How to resolve this seeming contradiction? According to the Hill, the NRCC has sent out a memo saying it wasn't really abandoning candidates like Bachmann. “There are more paths to victory for Republican candidates than we have money to fund,” spokeswoman Karen Hanretty said in the memo. “Some candidates, like Congresswoman Bachmann, are sitting on more than $1 million cash on hand in districts that President Bush won in 2004 by double digits.” This makes it sound like pulling the ads was an expression of confidence, like the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee's decision to stop advertising in Colorado now that Democratic candidate Mark Udall is well ahead in the polls.

This argument just doesn't hold up. The ads are being pulled at a time when Bachmann's Democratic challenger has started raising vast amounts of money -- over $1 million -- and a SurveyUSA poll shows Bachmann trailing 47-44 percent (within the margin of error). Bachmann will no doubt get some benefit from the latest House Republican solicitations, as will the NRCC. But when her strongest socially conservative supporters complain about being abandoned, they have more than half a point.

---

GORE'S SECRET LEVER
Re: Paul Chesser's Climate Alarmism's Flimsy Foundation:

Paul Chesser is right on target. Cultivating fear of environmental collapse is an enormously effective lever for centralizing political power. It was used to great benefit by the Maya kings of Mesoamerica, who surrounded themselves with an intelligentsia that enforced the idea that, lacking  the proper ritual activities (which included blood sacrifices and the building of enormous public works projects) their civilization was doomed. The sun might not rise, the rains would stop and the harvests would fail. I can imagine what happened to the first Mayan "denier" who dared to speak out against the notion that the sun, rains and crop yields had little or nothing to do with the favored rituals of the Mayan priestly class.
-- Ken Smith
Ellendale, North Dakota

---

STOOPING TO THEIR LEVEL
Re: David Callon's letter (under "So Do You") in Reader Mail's John the Lockpick:

I love the comments of reasonable citizens concerning cheating, fraud, lies and villainy. It's OK for our side to do it, because the other side does it too.

Dr. Callon complains, at length, that Mr. Ferrara's article is not balanced and objective. Then he vehemently attacks the perceived partisanship of the Heritage foundation and then strongly criticizes Mr. Ferrara's writing ability.

And yet, with the possible exception of mentioning the book "Loser Take All: Election Fraud and the Subversion of Democracy," by Mark Crispin Miller, Dr. Callon makes no effort to refute any of the instances of fraudulent activity mentioned in Mr. Ferrara's piece. Nor does he cite any instances to substantiate his claim of "a sinister effort by some on the right to compromise our Democracy". While, given the nature of politics, instances of Republican and Conservative attempts to influence an election through fraud have undoubtedly taken place, there does not appear to be any widespread, coordinated effort underway, in this regard. If there were, it is almost a certainty that the Main Stream Media would be reporting on it ad nauseum, much as they screamed about the actions of Kathleen Harris in 2000 [she was ultimately proved to be correct in her actions, though no retractions were ever made by any media outlets for their remarks about her]. Yet MSM news stories abound concerning Democrat officials and Democrat related groups participating in just such activities this year [Ohio Secretary of State and Acorn to name but two].

The point is, it is not acceptable for anyone to engage in voter fraud. Voter fraud steals YOUR voice. This government was set-up to allow the citizenry to select responsible people to represent the majority views of the populous. Voter fraud negates that and allows a few to dominate the majority.

The government will continue to stand only as long as people have confidence that their vote counts and that they have a say in their government. The enforcement of voting laws is one of the main reasons for that confidence. When it evaporates, then governance will be decided by bullets, as it is in half the nations of the world.
-- Michael Tobias

---

FACT CHECKING RELIGION
Re: Cameron S. Jackson's letter (under "Site Check") in Reader Mail's John the Lockpick:

I took Cameron S. Jackson’s prompt and checked out the website of the American Episcopal Church. Its “A-Z Directory” did not have any entry regarding any creed(s) as one might suppose. However, when I placed a search for the Nicene Creed and it did indeed turn up over a hundred “discussions”. Actually, it read more like a glossary; but that was OK by me. Nothing worse than reading a bunch of ignoramuses yapping about and “sharing” their opinions on whether we “in the modern context” can be held accountable to a creed written by a bunch of men who never had seen an airplane or an indoor toilet.

Unfortunately, the very first item to pop up was “inclusive language”. This was followed by “filioque” and then by another but different “inclusive language” entry. “Jesus Christ” came in a baffling 23rd. That being said, there were a number of well written entries answering curious points about the creed and the faith. There are also a number of entries concerning subjects with little relation to the creed. (Oddly, one such entry is about Gene Robinson’s election as the diocesan bishop of New Hampshire.)

Perhaps the Episcopal Church is not quite as “off the subject” as Mr. Hillyer had suggested. On the other hand, it gives pause when Mr Jackson himself asks "...did you know that the Episcopal Church teaches that the Holy Spirit emanates from both God the Father and Jesus Christ the Son?” Anyone who has paid attention while reciting the Nicene Creed is familiar with its profession: “We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified.” This profession is of profound historical significance and is one of the points of disagreement between the Western and Eastern Churches.

I do not know if this point in the Nicene Creed was indeed news to Mr. Jackson or if he was simply being provocative. But it is very likely that many young mainline Christians have been brought up through worship and instruction by clergy who felt doctrine and study of Scripture were old hat and more relevant issues were at hand. The problem is that, not only have entire generations not worn the “old hat,” they’ve never seen the “old hat.” They will know, though, that the Church gets all full of itself about hunger, racism, sexism and “peacemaking.” Young congregants may not be able to name the four Gospels; but they do know the Church employs advocates (lobbyists) to “speak truth” to the members of Congress and will bend the President’s ear every time they get a chance.

Christianity is exploding in Africa and Asia bringing thousands under Lord Jesus. Thousands of Christians are suffering persecution and death across the world; yet the Church in America and Europe is fading away content that they are right on the issues. We may actually need missionaries from the new Churches to come to our lands and proclaim the Gospel anew.
-- Mike Dooley

YOU OR THE BEAR
Re: Eric Heidenreich's In Praise of PETA:

So someone wakes up to the fact they have created this problem of not killing bears in self defense and wonder why this happened. Can it be their complete lack of common sense when it comes to protecting wild life? This brings to mind the protesters standing in front of a fence meant to keep the hogs in the area so as not to be in the traffic and not get harmed until they could be processed for human consumption. The fence came down MMM? I wonder if one of the idiots that were killed in the stampede broke it so as to let the hogs out of captivity. You see there is no logic involved in being a P.E.T.A. person you just have to have skill enough to stand in the way of stampeding bulls or hogs. I was amused at the ones who were captured and we didn't know if the Japanese were going to let them go or not. It was funny seeing them lined up against the bulk head of the ship looking like deer caught in the head lights of a car at night. The entire organization is lame brained. I am for ethical treatment of animals I have two dogs two cats and a rabbit , I make sure they are treated well but I would not sacrifice a human to save one of them. I guess I am racist in as I go with my own kind: human beings.
-- Ken Roberts
Lebanon, Ohio

Well, I have mixed feelings about the article about PETA:  first, I feel insulted that all people who have concerns about animals and their welfare are lumped together by the author as intolerant nuts.  Secondly, I feel PETA was "damned by faint praise" by the author, as PETA does so very much to investigate and promote causes that a single person does not have the wherewithal to pursue, such as wholesale cruelty of dogs in China for their fur, the inhumane treatment of cows in the Slaughterhouse Industry, etc. They have had a huge impact on assuring compassion toward sentient beings in the world, and their nonjudgmental approach to individual cases is legendary, notwithstanding the acts of a minority of rabid individuals who are part of any organization.
 
Maybe the author should do a little research into PETA's mission and past accomplishments before writing a silly article about a single silly case. You do no service to those readers who may need to be educated about the larger issues involved in animal rights, and much harm when you castigate an organization you know nothing about.
 
I'm so glad that Eric was pleasantly surprised at PETA's nonresponse; as a reporter, perhaps he should have used this opportunity to look with more objective eyes into animal cruelty and its links toward victimization and generalization to vulnerable beings as a whole (the aged,  children) everywhere.
-- Dr. Glenda Berg
Seattle, Washington

WRITTEN LIKE AN ADULT
Re: Judah Friedman's Almost Grown:

Mr Friedman's latest piece is vulnerable and undeniably accurate. Thank you for publishing it.
-- Mark Stern

---

SILVER LINING
Re: R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.'s The Shoddiest Coverage Ever:

At least the Democrats found a way to bring down the price of gas.
-- Mike Showalter
Austin, Texas

---