Letters to the Editor

This is Viewpoints for Saturday, Sept. 6, 2014

Georgia blue

In Georgia lives a man named Perdue. He wants to stop Georgia from going blue. And he wants to represent me and you. He’s running against Michelle Nunn, daughter of a political top gun. Perdue is a factory closer, which gives us workers a poser. Do we vote for the rich right-winger, Or do we vote for the lady humdinger. It’s a decision we need to review. And forget about Mr. Perdue. Come on. Lets make Georgia blue.

-- Alfred J. Graham


Clear lead

Just when it appeared President Barack Obama had moved into a clear lead as the worst president in U.S. history, Jimmy Carter, as keynote speaker at the Islamic Society in Detroit, Michigan demands America follows principles of Allah.

Wow -- what a country. Jimmy, should we all practice Sharia law?

-- Van Adams

Warner Robins

Looking at ugly

Getting rid of blight is a good thing. Although I think some of the materials from the houses can be salvaged, who is going to keep the grass and weeds cut on the vacant plots? Or is it going to look like Forest Hill Road. It is a shame these homeowners have to look at the waist high growth. Not only did the unnecessary widening of the road take a large portion of their yards with flowers and trees they worked hard to grow, they also have to look at all the mess. And the rest of us have to look at the ugly, too, when we travel the road. Please, please, someone cut the growth.

-- M. Nixon


Legislative priorities

I have had Crohn’s disease since 1961 and I am sure that medical marijuana would make me feel a lot better. There was no valid reason for our state Legislature not to pass Rep. Allen Peake’s HB 885 last year that would have legalized medical marijuana in some forms. Especially for pediatric seizures.

Our Republican state Legislature and governor were more concerned with their total capitulation to the NRA. With a ridiculous, massive gun bill that has penalized local governments financially and not made us any safer. Plus their despicable campaign to not allow our 5 percent of our poorest citizens enrollment in Medicaid at little cost to our state government.

The results of our GOP state government last year is a poorer state. Expansion of Medicaid in our state would cost $2.5 billion in a decade. Actually, it’s more logical that the expansion would increase revenues.

-- Frank W. Gadbois

Warner Robins


I would like to reply to the editorial from the editors on “Immigration reform cannot be attained through executive order.” First, I am not sure where the figure of 120 million Hispanics in California came from. There are only 38 million people in California and 38 percent are Hispanics, so 14.5 million. I get the point, it is a large number. Second, when people say “Immigration Reform,” they really mean “Illegal Immigration Reform.” We have an immigration policy in place; we do not have an illegal immigration policy. Simply because we are not supposed to allow it. Third, who really cares what economists say if they are split? Isn’t this one of the two jobs where you can be right only half the time and keep your job? Yes, of course it provides cheap and easy labor. That doesn’t make it right. Fourth, of course we can send them back. People may not like it, may not think it is right, or may not think it is cost-effective or feasible, but we can do it. It has been done before when Eisenhower was president.

Simply, do not hire them. If they cannot find work they will basically self-deport for the most part. Fine those doing the hiring the first time; serious jail time for the second offense. People will then quit hiring illegals. And we should have the fortitude to deport a large majority of the rest.

Then, of course, shore up the border. This would allow others here to find work. Then we could start a serious immigrant worker program. It is well and good to be kind-hearted and want everyone to have the experience in this great country, but we cannot simply allow everyone in South America or the world to come here. Most are unskilled laborers and we have plenty of our own wondering around all day doing nothing.

I do agree with the premise of the editorial that an executive order is not correct. The editorial said that would be wrong for several reasons, but only lists one reason. That reason is good enough though, the next president might simply undo it. It is going to be tough to work with Congress as the editorial suggests because both sides of the aisle have their own agendas and keep swerving on this issue. Even now most Democrats want blanket amnesty and Republicans are split from wanting amnesty for those all already here to even slowing down legal immigration for skilled workers.

-- D.T. Wallace


The figure of 120 million was in error.

-- Editors

Agendas against the FairTax

Advocating the FairTax as an economic issue underestimates the impact of the FairTax on liberty. The FairTax defunds and disbands the IRS. This is why politicians, think tanks and lobbyists oppose the FairTax. The IRS has silenced, threatened and raped the wealth of America for over 100 years. The fear of an audit has silenced Americans, organizations and corporations. The wasted money spent on compliance is just that: wasted. If one wants to argue the benefits of the income tax over the FairTax please get in line with the socialist who want to see capitalism destroyed.

Look at what the corporate gains tax is doing to corporate America and American jobs. Our style of government depends upon the availability of free speech. Citizens must be able to challenge authority in a peaceful manner without fear their wealth and freedom will be taken from them by a tax agency doing the bidding of the highest bidder in Congress. The FairTax may have flaws (what tax structure does not?) but it does restore liberty -- something a flat tax can never do. www.fairtax.org is a good place to start your own personal quest for information about this proposal.

-- Beverly Martin

Fulton, Mo.

A different strategy

In Friday’s Telegraph, nationally renowned journalist Tom Friedman gave some valid reasons on why the U.S. should proceed cautiously in the Middle East. I agreed with his premises except, like President Obama, Friedman fails to understand that a swift and lethal U.S. military response against ISIS was necessary in retaliation for the beheadings of two Americans. President Obama’s news conference at the NATO Summit in Estonia clearly showed how inexperienced and unproven he is in formulating and executing an effective foreign and military policy for the Middle East.

President Obama just doesn’t get it. He doesn’t understand when a military response is needed or when a military strategy is needed. In the case of the recent beheadings of two Americans, Obama needed to order an immediate military response rather than call a press conference. The president should have launched a fleet of fighters, bombers, drones and cruise missiles and delivered an immediate, lethal military response of such “shock and awe” on every identified ISIS target and position. A side benefit of such a lethal response would be to destroy a significant amount of ISIS military capabilities, which would aid the Iraqi government in regaining territory occupied by ISIS and pushing it out of Iraq.

The next president will have quite a challenge ahead to undo all the harm Obama has done to America. I hope Americans will learn from this mistake and elect a person in 2016 to be our next president who has the background, experience and qualifications to deal with foreign and military affairs in such a dangerous world where our adversaries and even our allies no longer respect America. I just hope this nation can survive the next two years.

-- Alan Gardner

Warner Robins