Liberal states, cities show higher taxes not answer
In response to the Dec. 26 letter, "Thank the Democrats," I find it hard to know where to start. First of all, how is it "fairer" to take money from a person earning it to give to a crooked politician in Frankfort or Washington, who then redistributes it for votes?
The letter says Republicans are the party of money; well, I agree. If a person has any money, Republicans believe that person should have the right to spend it, and indeed will spend it more effectively than some fat bureaucrat hundreds or thousands of miles away.
People seem to think the government could solve all our problems if we just paid more in taxes. They forget about how griping and moaning politicians and their private special-interest groups ruined the economy and drove our nation off a cliff of perpetual debt.
Digital Access For Only $0.99
For the most comprehensive local coverage, subscribe today.
Our state and country do not have a revenue problem; we have a spending problem, and although I would love for everyone to live in a mansion, drive a Mercedes and have everything their heart desires, that is just not realistically possible. After all, someone has to pay for it.
Rhode Island, for example. The most liberal state in the nation, with taxes on just about everything, is in the worst financial shape of any state. In fact, the worst 10 cities in the United States for fiscal viability have been dominated by Democratic city councils for 20 years.
Could it be?
Is George W. Bush going to be right about his call for citizens to demand democracy in the Middle East?
Where did coyotes go?
I am a Herald-Leader carrier, and one of my favorite parts of my route is the wildlife I see in the wee hours. It is rare to see foxes, owls, deer and coyotes in our city, but they do come out at night.
When I began my current route last September, there was quite a population of coyotes at the new Coldstream business development on Citation Drive. They were beautiful and gave me a lift when I was privileged to watch one working its territory.
I remember thinking that, as the development progressed and more and more businesses opened, the coyotes would probably not be allowed to continue living there.
As I suspected they would, the coyotes disappeared in late November. I have not seen any since then. I'm just wondering if anyone out there knows how this was accomplished?
I hope it was done by relocating them to another territory. I hope whatever was done was humane.
Unfortunately, I do not trust that this is the case. After all, progress is more important than an animal some would consider vermin.
Would anyone connected to the development be willing to answer my inquiry?
Maria F. Madden
On Jan. 28, the Herald-Leader published a letter from an individual who is obviously disturbed beyond political correctness regarding people who smoke.
I appreciate that your newspaper presents readers' views that are sometimes very contentious, but this was way over the edge.
For someone to say, "If I were ever to get mad enough to kill, it would be over tobacco smoke, and I have come close a few times" can only be interpreted as a veiled threat to society.
Statements such as this display a visceral hate for a specific group of people and are very dangerous in our current environment, as the recent violence in Tucson demonstrated. The latter part of this man's statement implied that he tried to or did hurt someone in the past.
I find it totally irresponsible for the Herald-Leader to publish the work of an angry and disturbed individual willing to or already having committed the ultimate illegal act over a legal product.
Terrence J. Hayes
I find it ironic that Toyota would reach out into the community to hire people with disabilities.
Toyota could just pull up the Occupational Safety and Health Administration list of current and former employees with Toyota work-related permanent disabilities.
God had hand in ark
A letter in the Feb. 2 Herald-Leader tried to cast doubt on the Bible story of Noah's Ark. The writer admitted having a doctorate from a theological seminary, and yet he leaves out the one ingredient of the Genesis account that is the most important: God.
God is the reason the animals came into the ark, and God is the reason they had food to eat and God is the reason the animals behaved.
Why would anyone spend enough years in a seminary to get a doctorate and leave out God? All those years in school wasted if one didn't believe in the inerrancy of the scriptures and the God who wrote them.