letters to the editor
send yours to firstname.lastname@example.org
HARDISTER WILL DELIVER’
Dear Editor, When I was 12 years old, my parents placed me in a Christian worldview and debate class. For the next six years I immersed myself in government, apologetic and debate classes. My love for history sparked an interest in politics. When I read about the New Deal passed by Congress during President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s term, I saw similarities with the Stimulus Package passed by the Obama Administration.
Roosevelt’s plan to get America out of the Great Depression was spending and starting programs that are now driving us into bankruptcy. Millions of citizens were unemployed during the depression; Roosevelt promised millions of jobs but never delivered. Obama promised that the unemployment rate would stay at 8.1 percent and people would have jobs with the Stimulus Package. However, the unemployment rate has increased to 10 percent under the Obama administration.
I did see signs that said American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009, but I have not seen any fruit from that act. I have seen more spending to pay for these signs and our president promoting spending bills to restore our economy. Did the New Deal create millions of jobs or revamp the economy? No, it only created a burden for the American people. As a nation, we need to educate ourselves on past historical events and learn from their mistakes.
I am an 18-year-old that has a deep concern for my country. I see my country transitioning into a nation that is not the “land of the free and home of the brave.”
I have not been a United States citizen my entire life. I was adopted in 1991 from Romania and received my US citizenship when I was 3-years-old. Because I am adopted, I believe that my understanding of freedom and security is greater than most of the young people in our society today.
I came from a country that was recovering from communist rule. Most people were living in poverty and many orphaned children were roaming the streets. We have not experienced that kind of existence in America. America has always been a nation that is free, where people can voice their opinions and seek to prosper economically. Young and old should appreciate the freedoms and luxuries that our society offers, such as the First Amendment, food, clothing and shelter.
We need Americans who are passionate about their country and who are willing to voice their concerns. This is why I believe Jon Hardister will fight for our rights just as our forefathers did. During the March 18 Guilford County GOP Convention, I heard Hardister passionately state that he would defend the American people and our constitution if elected. Some people may discount him because of his age, but I believe he has a distinct advantage. He is able to bring fresh perspective to a broad range of issues, and has not been part of the corruption so prevalent in our political world. Some of the candidates at the convention read from prepared speeches, lacking connection with their audience and failing to grab their attention. Even though Hardister was the youngest candidate, he was able to connect with the group and hold our attention. He articulated his thoughts well, communicating his passion for our country and the need to stand up for what he believes. I believe he will act on his promises and issues that are important to North Carolinians and the American people. If Jon Hardister is elected, he will be a great value to North Carolina, voicing the will of the people an taking a stand for our rights.
Proud American Citizen, Miana Huneycutt, High Point
A LETTER TO FORMER SEN. JOHN EDWARDS
Greetings, John! I met you at Kepley’s Bar-B-Q Barn outside of High Point when you were running for US senator. I gave you some advice at the time and you used it. Later, when you were running for president, I gave you some more advice, but you either did not receive it from the person who handles your mail or you neglected it. If you had
heeded my advice and put on the boxing gloves instead of mittens in your campaign, you would have become president. I looked at your “debate” with Cheney and it made me wonder how you ever won million-dollar lawsuits.
In your debate, you should have mentioned Halliburton every third word and in your final statement, but in your final statement you began talking about walking downstairs and seeing your father doing math. You threw away all the good points you had made by talking about your father. Your father was not running for office — you were!
You should have never remained seated in your “debate” with the vice-president. Your remaining seated made you look unable to deliver a speech standing up. Your height would have enable you to win.
No matter where I see you on TV, you always wear a black suit. Black suits are not going to bring out your good looks as well as blue, white, green and white suits. Have a change of wardrobe.
You appearing on TV and denying that you were the father of your child was a terrible thing to do. You have lost all credibility. Don’t you know how to refuse to answer a personal question? When you were asked if you were the father of Rielle Hunter’s child, you should have said, “I don’t answer personal questions.”
How you got yourself into such a net is beyond me. You saw what happened to President Nixon when he left a trail of wrongdoing behind him. You saw what happened to Sen.
Gary Hart. You saw what happened to President Clinton in a sex scandal.
If you have misused your campaign contributions in adultery, I hope that you are indicted and that you spend some time in prison.
You can rehabilitate yourself by making a public confession of lying and of adultery and breaking off all relations with Hunter. If you ever marry that woman, she will be the most domineering of any woman you have ever met. Your marriage to her will not last five years.
Just ask yourself how many people knew that you were meeting Hunter at that hotel. One of the people who knew you were meeting her tipped of the National Enquirer. Miss Hunter was probably the one to do so. That was her way of
getting you under her control and getting you to break off relations with your wife.
Mickey Colbert, Sophia
POPE ON A ROPE
Given the complexities of international law and legal resources of the Church, it’s doubtful that Pope Benedict XVI will personally face criminal or civil charges for the unraveling Catholic sex-abuse scandal, however the Church itself will undoubtedly continue to bear the cross of sizeable pecuniary damages arising from decades of child molestation. The Pope himself will linger as a frail, pathetic figure possessing a host of titles and accoutrements but little moral authority (akin, perhaps, to the Clinton presidency following the Lewinsky affair). The Church will continue its steady decline, and the furor surrounding the revelations of recent years may serve to retard future abuses.
This is not, it must be said, a case of a few “bad apples” taking advantage of children in isolated congregations, but a systematic exploitation of youth with the full knowledge and silent consent of the Papacy. Indeed, the John Jay report commissioned by the American Catholic Church in 2002 and released in 2004 verified 6,700 cases of child rape perpetrated by over 4,300 American priests since the 1950s (many more cases doubtlessly escaped detection). Could the popes of this era have been truly unaware of such conduct?
That they lacked curiosity demonstrates they lacked concern, and through indifference abetted the behavior. Furthermore, Benedict’s May 2001 letter to bishops worldwide (as reported by The Guardian in 2005) threatening excommunication for any disclosure of the abuses makes his complicity clear. That religion and perversion are close cousins should come as no surprise, but it is surprising to see how little blame is placed on parents who willingly committed their offspring to an institution predicated on intellectual servitude and medieval orthodoxy. The present scandal affirms once and for all that faith is not a virtue, but a vice emanating from a despicable propensity for obedience and culminating in the generational violation of youth scarred by the dim perceptions of their progenitors.
James W. Bolen, Winston-Salem