- The Washington Times - Tuesday, February 5, 2008


In support of Obama

As voters in the Super Tuesday contests (“Hillary plans 21-state chat; Edwards quits race,” Page 1, Thursday) we are all faced with the undeniable truth that these are hard and troubling times, and yes, things must change.

Our reputation abroad has been damaged by a foreign policy that has valued political gamesmanship at the expense of reasoned, attainable goals. At home, the only problem more compelling than the growth of the deficit and economic recession is the monstrous rise in heath care costs. Again, things must change.

A lot is made of this concept of “change” by the candidates and their surrogates. We voters need to be certain that we understand what sort of change is called for in order to combat these problems at home and abroad. We will need a bold change in the way our country is governed. The poll-driven, sometimes appalling governance we have endured over the past 20 years will not be equal to the tasks at hand. We must realize that in this election, change has nothing to do with the relatively petty notions of race or gender.

Think of it this way: It’s not the sex of the captain that most strongly determines the direction of a ship. It is the navigated course and the wisdom of the commander that dictates the vessel’s voyage. This is why I am supporting the only candidate who has demonstrated the reason, vision and inspirational leadership to lead our nation regardless of race or gender. That candidate is Sen. Barack Obama.


Lake Mills, Wis.

Bay Area disgrace

Audrey Hudson’s article “Airport found legitimate in troop treatment” (Nation, Thursday) hit a nerve. All of the officials connected with this situation, from the airport to the Inspector General’s Office, should hang their heads in shame. The feeling of revulsion that has swept over me is beyond description.

The San Francisco Bay Area was once a major transfer point for Americans involved in the Pacific theater of conflict during World War II. For some, the last vision of home was that of the Golden Gate Bridge passing astern. Now their progeny cannot use the simplest of facilities to relieve and refresh themselves on a stopover; the Marines cannot film in San Francisco for recruiting ads; nor can they set up a recruiting office in Berkeley without extreme harassment.

I have left my heart and whatever other American body part of me on a pier in the Embarcadero.


Fairfield, Conn.

If not Hillary, who?

With all due respect to others, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is not confused or upset when questioned on national and global issues (“Obama, Hillary return to mat,” Nation, Saturday). She is highly qualified and does not give the same old speech. The 2008 Democratic nominee must be prepared to challenge the Republican nominee on issues regarding microeconomics, the International Monetary Fund, health care inequality, foreign intelligence gathering, flag burning, homosexual marriages, Social Security, global warming, poverty, abortion, immigration, economic collapse, peak oil prices, the Federal Reserve, the Department of Defense, the budget and school prayer.

A woman will be elected president of the United States. Women vote, die in war, go into space and direct news bureaus. They are senators, governors and bishops. It is because of the unrelenting struggle of women like Mrs. Clinton, and the hundreds of thousands of women like her, that the current generation of women have the opportunities they do today. In the 1960s, want ads in newspapers were divided into two sections: jobs for men and jobs for women. A generation of women put an end to that. A woman will be president of the United States. If not Mrs. Clinton, who? If not now, when?


New York City

Gov. Kaine, the appeaser

Virginia Gov. Timothy M. Kaine doesn’t want to crack down on the crime of illegal immigration (“Richmond aflutter on illegal aliens,” Editorial, Jan. 14) or risk offending the business lobby by making it more difficult for lobby members to find black-market labor in his state.

At least he is honest. Though he apparently is labeling illegal aliens “new Americans,” real American workers are watching their wages fall and their taxes dollars go to subsidize the employers’ illegal “cheap labor.”

Here in Georgia, we have watched as illegal aliens have packed up and left our state for more hospitable places because our legislature passed the Georgia Security and Immigration Compliance Act last year. What we have proved is that enforcement works.

So does appeasement. Mr. Kaine should expect to be able to welcome many former Georgia-based illegals because of his benevolent attitude.



Dustin Inman Society

Marietta, Ga.

McCain’s ‘disturbing elements’

If Debra J. Saunders thinks her Sunday Commentary column, “GOP stronger or broader?” will sway true conservatives by making threatening comments, such as that Florida “shows many Republicans have come to understand that when you aren’t willing to bend, when you view compromise as disgraceful not a necessary part of democracy when you insist on all or nothing, then you get nothing,” she is wrong. She is wrong because unlike those who are willing to “compromise” their conservative principles, we understand the difference between compromise and surrender.

Besides the McCain-Lieberman, McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy betrayals of conservative principles, other disturbing elements of Sen. John McCain’s character are emerging, including his ill temper, displayed too often in the Senate.

This has led Republican Sen. Pete V. Domenici, who witnessed a particularly nasty scene, to say that he had considered supporting Mr. McCain for president but had changed his mind. “I decided,” the senator told Newsweek, “I didn’t want this guy anywhere near a trigger” (“Senator Hothead,” Feb. 22, 2000).

The endorsements of Mr. McCain by California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and former New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani should have sent warning bells to conservatives throughout the country, but didn’t, which tells me that too many conservatives are turning into RINOs “Republican in name only.”

Mr. McCain claims he is the best candidate to handle Muslim terrorists, yet he supports the Kosovo Liberation Army, many of whose members were trained in Osama bin Laden’s terrorists camps, as reported by The Washington Times’ Jerry Seper (“KLA rebels train in terrorist camps,” May 4, 1999).

As for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, the other candidates don’t like him because he is handsome, rich, articulate and a true conservative. The only reason former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee is still in the running is to take votes away from Mr. Romney.

It won’t make much difference if it turns out to be Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton versus Mr. McCain. Either way, the country will go down the tubes, and I would prefer to see this train wreck happen under the Democratic Mrs. Clinton than under the Republican Mr. McCain. Perhaps it has to get worse before it gets better.

I would not go so far as Ann Coulter to say that I would work for Mrs. Clinton if Mr. McCain is the nominee, but I certainly do not plan to vote, once again, for “the lesser of two evils.” That’s what got us into this mess in the first place.


Camp Hill, Pa.

Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide