GOP champions democracy for all but those in U.S.
Republicans justify American involvement in Iraq by claiming America brought freedom to the region. Republicans point to the Iraqi elections and all the purple fingers proudly displayed by Iraqi voters, especially women, who voted for the first time.
Iraqi voters were required to dip their right index fingers into indelible purple ink as a security measure to prevent double voting.
Republicans equate freedom with the right to vote, so it was surprising to read this same party now wants to make it harder for some Americans to vote in Tennessee and throughout the South.
Is it possible that the Republican Party loves freedom for everyone — except Americans?
If the concern is preventing voter fraud, advocate using indelible purple ink here, but do not restrict voting. Maybe a visible sign of who voted would produce greater participation.
But greater voter participation isn't the goal. The goal is to restrict voting to only those who agree with the GOP agenda. So, set a minimum net worth requirement to vote. How does a million sound?
Everyone knows the poor and even the middle class don't really understand high finance, otherwise they wouldn't be poor or middle class. So why allow them to vote?
So much for the nonsense, "Give me your tired, your poor ... ."
Republicans want to re-create France of the 1780s under Louis XVI. Just remember that revolution didn't turn out too well for him and wife, Marie, or their followers.
James F. Wisniewski
We can't afford it
Not that it matters to our progressive politicians, whether in Washington or Frankfort, but I would suggest to citizens all around the United States: Take a good hard look at Greece.
We can't continue down the road of financing entitlements on the backs of our grandchildren.
Children do what feels nice. Adults devise a plan and follow it. Children have a difficult time understanding delayed gratification. Adults understand the responsibilities of only buying what you can truly afford.
Stop demanding that other people pay for what you want. As for those millionaires running around saying they aren't taxed enough: Nothing's stopping them from sending the IRS a check if that's how they truly feel. Why do they feel like the rest of us need to behave the way they want us to?
Really, it doesn't matter what you want. Throw yourselves on the ground and kick and scream. Listen to me: We can't afford it.
Go ahead, Gov. Steve Beshear, President Barack Obama and all other progressives, kick the can down the road. I'm going to do all that is within me to kick your can to the curb.
Cable cutbacks unfair
I live in the San Francisco Bay Area, but I was born and raised in Southeastern Kentucky up a holler in a coal mining camp.
I have been gone for a long time. But I stay in touch with my large extended family and visit every year. I talk on the phone all the time so that I still belong to them and am involved in their lives.
Recently, I talked to two of my relatives about many things, but one thing stood out. The cable company is cutting people off up the hollers. These are people who have been paying their bills; the company is just stopping service to certain areas.
For example, one family gets cable and the family next door will no longer be serviced.
I was under the impression that there were stimulus funds being used in rural areas across this country to upgrade Internet service.
The cable company in Southeastern Kentucky is the only one there. So why are they doing this?
If they are getting federal funding and they are a monopoly, shouldn't they have an obligation to serve all of the people and not in some arbitrary way pick and choose who gets cable and who does not?
San Anselmo, Calif.
Kentucky's 5th Congressional District is rich in resources being extracted from the area, but this does not translate into prosperity for the district's residents.
We have more counties on the list of the 100 poorest by median household income than any other district, so the argument could be made that we are the nation's poorest district.
Our demographics regarding infant mortality, quality of health and social risk factors are comparable to some developing nations.
U.S. Rep. Hal Rogers has, in the past, been known as someone who brings money back to his district. While he almost always sides with corporate power that uses the people of his district, at least he used to bring home a salve in the form of federal money for projects — sometimes needed and sometimes questionable — that provided jobs for the residents of his district.
Now, however, as chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, he has fallen in lockstep with the radical demands for cuts to programs that help people in order that the richest of the rich can have their tax cuts.
If, indeed, Kentucky's 5th is the poorest district, the people will be hurt the worst by any cut to support programs, including the House's cuts to the Women, Infants and Children program.
Rogers has betrayed his constituents, finding yet another way to extract resources from the poor for the benefit of the rich.
David K. Miller
Isn't it a God-given right for smokers to throw butts wherever they want in Kentucky? Guess it's everyone else's responsibility to clean up after them.
After conquering Kentucky, Rand Paul, our brave little Napoleon, charged to the Eastern Front (Washington) to wage war against Medicare, Medicaid, aid to families with dependent children, food stamps, family planning, environmental regulations, financial regulations, the Department of Education, malfunctioning toilets and the memory of Henry Clay.
Without debating the merits of his intention to severely reduce or eliminate such programs and regulations, it is a fact that if he is successful the economy of a poor state like Kentucky would be severely impacted.
I know of no policy he is pushing that would mitigate the harm to our economy his proposals, if adopted, would cause.
Based on his recent performance and breeding, which are important considerations in Kentucky, I would be willing to wager that in his six-year term he initiates no bill that becomes law that even marginally improves the lives of the middle class of this state.
Every time I hear Republicans declare, "It is time to take America back," it is apparent that they intend to take this country back to the Herbert Hoover era. History suggests that this era did not work out so well.
George W. Bush's campaign talked of "compassionate conservativism." For the Tea Party movement, it's "Conservative Without Compassion and Proud of It."