Letters to the Editor
Goedel
Published Letters: 104 Editor's Choice: 6
-
Future of the US
[Read the article: The haunting of the Democrats]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I find naieve the prevalent belief that the choice of the president in November will alter the course of history for the US.
When a nation makes as many bad choices as we have made since 2000, in wars and at home, forces are set in motion that are not reversible, abroad and here.
Examples are: the emergence of terrorism as a continuing threat in the world, a threat that cannot be countered by military forces but only by astute, international, political action - decisions to be made not only in our White House or Pentagon ; the economic decline of the US brought about by irresponsible fiscal and monetary policies and by the emergence of other nations as competitors for resources; the deterioration of the US homeland in infrastructure and in the education of its children and its citizens, the latter in no small part from the concentration of news media in the hands of a few conglomerates that seek favor with the government; finally, the corruption of the political system by a system of campaign finance that places large financial interests at the helms of the two major parties.
These are not reversible, and it does not matter who is chosen to be president, Clinton, McCain or Obama. The best of them may slow our decline a bit, and the worst accelerate it - but the die has already been cast by eight years of a presidency that tried to build an empire and, instead, destroyed a military superpower.
-
In my area, no sympathy from me!
[Read the article: Obama is wrong about the gas tax]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Everyone knows that driving at 55 mph instead of 75 saves at least 10% in gas. They also know that driving accelerator/brake wastes gasoline (and wears the brakes). In my area, Tampa Bay, few care. They may gripe about gasoline prices, but their driving habits don't show any real concern.
Safety? Not even that influences our drivers. In fact, the half-empty gas tanks are a life-saver for many who collide and set their vehicles ablaze.
I would not mind paying $5.00 a gallon to get more people off the roads and to slow them down a bit.
Sorry, no sympathy for reckless drivers - as so many are!
-
We have had an insufficient choice - no real choice
[Read the article: What should Hillary Clinton do now?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The focus of discussion has been Clinton/Obama. Behind us is the fact that we shall have had little real choice. Only candidates of the big business establishment have been allowed past the opening, sound-bite debates. The candidacy of Rep Dennis Kucinich, for example, was aborted from the competition by Democratic Party leaders.
We have a choice now between a fight-on no-matter-what Republican, and a Democrat who would continue the war in Afghanistan, if not in Iraq too.
We have candidates who will keep the profit-makers in charge of our health-care.
we have candidates with either no judgment in foreign policy or no experience. Pick one!
The American two-party (really one party of big business) government and elections does not work to do what the preamble to our relic of a Constitution sets forth. We have a corrupted, unaccountable government now, and in the years to come it will only get worse.
That is the reality of our 2008 elections. What can one do? Show your contempt for Potempkin Democracy. Vote Ralph Nader in 2008.
-
UC Irvine also Scams
[Read the article: Brain scam]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]UC Irvine also scams the public by creating a title, "Assistant Clinical Professor", which really means "untenured volunteer professor" - in other words, a low echelon, temporary instructor. Part of his compensation is a phony title, a title that is most useful in adding prestige to someeone who does not deserve it.
Why does UC Irvine participate in deceiving the public?
-
Votenader 2008
[Read the article: Barack Obama's epic win]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Obama, McCain, what have we? Two candidates of the major, bifurcated corporate hegemony! Both have accepted large contributions from big pharma, the nuclear, "defense", insurance and banking industries. This is Obama's "change"? Not worth much!
The only candidate who offers real change from the subjugation of most Americans is Ralph Nader. By voting for the candidate who cannot win, we send a message to the corporate party: we know who your real constituents are.
Don't be fooled by phony "change"! Vote for real change! Vote Nader!
-
Now the smoke is clearing...
[Read the article: Hillary's final curtain ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Now the smoke is clearing, and we can see the fog! Yes, Clinton's candidacy is an echo, and Obama's is set to joust with McCain's.
What we can see are two choices remaining who have taken large sums of money from the same good folks who have given us GWB and WJC in the past, who have given us congresses that are big corporations' corrupted instruments.
Change? Do you really expect change from such a criminally bought government under Obama or McCain?
I expect marginal improvements if Obama is president: some better appointments to regulatory agencies, elimination of a tax loophole here and there, but I recall that we do not have a parliamentary system. We have a rigid Constitution that effectively produces political parties that are merely campaigning machines and not promoters of cherished principles.
Sorry, folks! As Sinatra used to sing, "Put your dreams away for another day..." Trouble is under our separation of powers straight-jacket, that day will never come.
-
Separation of Powers is a Flawed Constitution for 21st Century
[Read the article: John McCain's tough stance toward Russia]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Our Constitution is not suited for the 21st century. It was conceived in the 18th century, long before parliamentary government reached full development.
To vest in a newly elected president the awesome powers of foreign affairs is insane. We need a government of parties that have a continuous and well formed view of our responsibilities abroad, a government in which foreign policy is vested in a minister with long experience.
Instead, we have newbies with superficial bluster or personal agendas take the helm and mire us in unnecessary wars or engage in asserting what they think is their manhood in dealing with foreign governments. This is no way to run a country as we can see from our continuing decline.
We need constitutional revision to make our foreign policy more rational and dependable. Congress must do more than advise and consent. The president must do less than take us into war as a substitute for deliberative policy-making.