Love it or leave it
I’m amazed at the abysmal ignorance of Americans who think they know what’s best for America. A prime example is the letter, ‘“Irresponsible’ choice” by Kent Price (BDN, Sept. 10). It took a decade and 17 U.N. resolutions to get Iraq’s dictator to disarm.
Weapons scientists from Russia, France and Germany were in the country setting up chem-bio plants, assembling specialized equipment for nuclear weapons. Hussein was only a year away from manufacture of weaponized radioactive isotopes also could readily have bought nuclear bombs from former Soviet republics.
Hussein was walking in King Nebuchadnezzar’s footsteps in Iraq. Freedom-loving countries must preempt the destructive plans of rogue nations to preserve liberty.
So we have a fiery, loyal, true patriot come on the national scene as a moral scrubbing cleanser and vile, stinking moral corruption and she is welcomed as an irresponsible upstart. America was established to function magnificently only for God-loving, fearing worshiping citizens.
So, if folks dislike Sarah Palin’s brand of blue-blood patriotism, please do us all a favor and go live where a leader plays your tune of nationalism.
• • •
GOP fear issues
I want to hear the issues. I want to hear what the candidates will do about the economy, jobs and housing. I want to hear what they will do about health care, education and our crumbling infrastructure.
I want to hear what they will do about the Iraq, national security, our weakened military, alternative energy and protecting our environment.
But Republicans fear issues like a plague. Do voters hear any solutions or proposals on the above from the Republicans? All you hear are idiotic ripostes like lipstick and pigs, elite and effete, terrorist and ’60s radicalism.
Republicans are running scared. They want to keep to the low road and hope that the voters will listen to vacuous ramblings and vote them into office.
• • •
Palin not Clinton
As a woman, not as a person, I was outraged to read Pat LaMarche’s article on Gov. Sarah Palin (BDN, Sept. 3).
Pat LaMarche cleverly disguised her remarks as a person who can now read the mind of a conservative Republican.
LaMarche then proceeds to refer to Gov. Palin as a “girl” four times in her column. She then has the audacity to call Gov. Palin a “uterus” three times. This is unconscionable in today’s world.
You would think the liberal media could at the very least show respect to a political candidate who does not share their views. Maine ladies, this is how the liberals think, believe and write.
Do they really represent you? LaMarche refers to Gov. Palin as Mrs. Palin in her article. She’s a governor; do you write about Mr. Baldacci? Show some respect for her office. I just want to add two words to LaMarche’s closing statement, she writes “Mrs. Palin is no Hillary Clinton,” I’ll add “Thank God.”
• • •
Oil state governors
Leave it to the party of Snowe and Collins to select once again for one of the nation’s highest offices an inexperienced governor from an oil industry state.
With all their promises of change, as people head to the polls, they should remember for whom Bush and Cheney will cast their votes
• • •
Pig lovers, unite
A huge brouhaha is in the news over a remark that Barack Obama made in describing John McCain’s policies.
Obama said you can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig. It was clear he was talking about McCain, but the McCain campaign chose to claim that Obama was referring to McCain’s running mate, Sarah Palin, and feigned outrage.
What bothers me is that Palin had already compared herself to a pit bull in a previous speech. I think what we need here is some animal-usage guidance.
What animal comparisons are acceptable? Snakes, vultures? Why the outrage over a pig comparison? Is this bigotry?
By golly, I think it is! It’s swine hatred!
Pig lovers of the U.S., unite and stand up to this outrage! Pigs deserve as much respect as pit bulls. Maybe more — they’re more cuddly.
This treatment of pigs is detestable, and I must voice my protest. Who’s up for a Million Pig March on Washington?
Silly Season, anyone?
• • •
Life begins at birth
I would like to respond to my friend Hayes Gahagan’s OpEd “Reproduction and responsibility vital to the U.S. (BDN, Sept. 11). This is an important issue in the presidential election, especially because Democrats and Republicans differ on the issue. Although most people have their minds made up, an open, respectful discussion is still useful.
Hayes’ premise that Americans need to outproduce the “Islam-fascists” with a high birthrate is weaker than the premise that humans are already overpopulating the earth. The problem of overpopulation can be seen everywhere – global warming, abuse of resources, destruction of environment, etc. An article in the same issue, “Humans silently extinguishing fish species,” is an example.
Hayes’ statement “once life is conceived, there is a corresponding responsibility to nurture it,” is an admirable and ideal philosophy. And this confronts the biggest element of the issue — when does life begin?
I believe life begins with the birth of a healthy baby. Our age is determined from birth, not conception. Our creator has made us so that many fertilized eggs do not develop into a healthy baby for many different reasons.
Miscarriages and stillbirths are not uncommon.
There are many good reasons a pregnant woman may want to have an abortion. Our society has no business making laws to force her to go through pregnancy that has significant complications that could lead to her death.
Hayes’ article did not address this point, however, I think Republican candidates favor making a law that would take away the abortion choice.
William Babson Jr.