- The Washington Times - Sunday, April 20, 2008

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Slow down, Obama

Jennifer Harper, in her article “Blogger garners fame after ‘Bittergate’ ” (Nation, Thursday) misses a central point.

The point is not how Mayhill Fowler obtained Sen. Barack Obama’s comments and subsequently published them, but rather that Mr. Obama made them in the first place.

The conflict over Mrs. Fowler’s publication of the remarks is much akin to the speeder’s argument to the judge that his ticket is “unfair” because the policeman was hiding behind a bush, disregarding the fact that the speeder was doing 80 mph in a 55 mph zone.

The offense here (an offensive characterization of blue-collar and rural America) is Mr. Obama’s condescending attitude toward the people who constitute the backbone of America.

These are the people who work hard to keep up, who see their sons and daughters off to war, who serve as police officers and firefighters (often as volunteers) and still believe in God and the United States.

Mr. Obama’s obvious disdain for working-class people in rural America is the issue at hand. Mr. Obama was doing 80 mph in a 55 mph zone.

Let’s keep focused on Mr. Obama’s mind-set, not distracting side issues such as the policeman’s presence being unexpected.

J. E. STOLL

Stafford

Bank criminal fingerprints

Through the years, the FBI fingerprint bank of U.S. citizens has been used effectively to identify criminals without infringing on the rights of innocent citizens.

In the early 1940s, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover first suggested that American citizens volunteer to be fingerprinted. Then a civic-minded high-schooler, and with parental permission, I walked down to the York, Pa., police station and had my fingerprints taken.

Your Page 1 story, “Proposal expands DNA collection to all arrests” (Thursday), recalls my experience of 60 years ago.

Sen. Jon Kyl’s proposal to take a DNA sample from all persons arrested for crimes in the United States is a good start. This prudential measure could be expanded to include all citizens.

To be sure, such a data base could be abused by corrupt officials in the justice system, but the Constitution provides for countervailing safeguards. And far the reasoned eye can see, Big Brother is not a threat to the basic rights we Americans enjoy.

ERNEST W. LEFEVER

Chevy Chase

Population control to curb food consumption?

The Friday editorial “Food lessons” has a timely focus on the grave implications of the current food crisis in the world. It also deals with usual food supply, demand and usage.

Most of the international media similarly have voiced their concern. However, there is hardly any reference to ever-increasing world population (about 80 million a year) and consequently more requirements for food, water and other resources. The Earth cannot support indefinite increases in the population.

Those countries and ethnic or religious groups that refuse to control population beyond the replacement level of, say, two children per couple should not be given any international assistance, so that the international community can at least try to deal with the problem.

Why should prudent countries and peoples subsidize irresponsible behavior?

The developed countries should also have a social security policy to provide good child benefits only for the first two children. There should again be no such benefits for additional children at cost to the taxpayers.

It also is generally known that fresh fruits and vegetables promote good health, and people should be encouraged to eat them as part of their regular diet, which would also reduce demand for meat, meaning less land resources needed to feed the world.

VIPUL THAKORE

London

Our energy responsibility

Finally, an energy Op-Ed column that doesn’t involve global warming. Michael Williams’ article, “Meeting energy needs” (Friday) addresses the problem and not the bogus predicted symptoms manipulated by Al Gore and the carbon traders. There is only one thing missing from the Op-Ed, and part of the solution is within the headline: We need to adjust our energy behavior. We need to build an infrastructure within the urban environments that can support clean mass transportation as well as individual needs.

We should draw a circle around cities, make them all electric and iteratively expand the circles as the population grows. We have the capability right now of individual electric transportation within dense urban areas. That would limit the variables to production and disposal since the circle would be within the capability of storage.

We would then need to connect the urban areas with mass transportation of individual clean units (i.e., trains of electric cars) and detachable commercial units (for cargo) until the infrastructure and technology of clean energy catches up with the demand and we can once again switch to an individual distributed system.

The key to electrical power problem is not the production, but the storage. If we can just adjust our energy behavior and accept reality instead of a “state of fear” scheme, production storage and disposal or recycling can be transitioned to a clean environment without destroying the energy equilibrium that supports human survival.

LARRY STONE

Peyton, Colo.

The truth about Obama?

Sen. Barack Obama’s latest ruminations in a San Francisco fundraising affair (“ ’Compassion Forum’ focuses on ‘bitter,’ ” Page 1, Monday) very clearly and truthfully shows the senator’s true colors.

Mr. Obama was talking about people in little towns in America clinging to religion and guns because they are bitter. He has been trying to hide his extreme liberal and left-wing politics throughout the political campaign.

He is every bit as arrogant, elitist, snobbish and left-wing as Sen. John F. Kerry of Massachusetts. And we know what happened to Mr. Kerry’s campaign for the presidency against President Bush.

The Democratic Party in the United States has been hijacked by the extreme left-wing element of the party. The current leadership of the Democratic Party is and represents the ultra-left of this country, including the two candidates running for president as standard-bearers of the once proud party. What has happened to all the centrist and blue-dog Democrats?

The leadership of the Democratic Party should do justice to their true political orientation and aspirations for this country. They should rename the Democratic Party the Socialist Party.

This will be more honest. However, some members of their leadership might think they have not gone far enough and insist on including the name “Marxist,” which more truly reflects their stupid economic policies.

The only reason they do not do the name change is because the American public will not vote for a socialist or a Marxist party, not because it does not reflect their true feelings.

ARNALDO VAQUER

Arlington

Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times is switching its third-party commenting system from Disqus to Spot.IM. You will need to either create an account with Spot.im or if you wish to use your Disqus account look under the Conversation for the link "Have a Disqus Account?". Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.

 

Click to Read More

Click to Hide