Nov. 16 Letters to the Editor

Baird is 3 for 4

Congressman Brian Baird is three for four in my book. He voted against the invasion of Iraq. That was good. He supported the continuation of the occupation. That was bad. He opposes the Israeli occupation of Gaza and sympathizes with the plight of the Palestinians. That is very good. And he voted against a health insurance bill which would lock us in to the failed and unjust profit-driven system we have now.

He obviously can’t please everybody, so, as you say, he votes according to his principles, as he sees them. The question is, does he listen to his heart and make a sincere effort to discern the truth and follow wherever it leads him? Hard enough for anybody to do, but it must be really hard if you’re an elected official.

Would he support real health care reform that would actually lower costs and cover everybody, like Medicare for all? We don’t know, because the powers that be in the Congress won’t allow that plan even to be discussed.

Elizabeth Sheppard

Longview

The real ‘Party of No’

Democrats are nothing if not proud of their ability to coin a slogan.

Lately, their inability to ram every facet of their outrageous socialist agenda through Congress without challenge has prompted them to denounce the Republican Party as the “Party of No.” You know what they say about people who live in glass houses.

The real Party of No (Dumbycrats) say no to responsible federal spending; no to limiting taxation; no to defeating terrorism; no to the Second Amendment; no to energy, to drilling, to mining and no to nuclear power. They also say no to fair and honest elections; no to reforming Social Security; no to tort reform; no to securing our borders; no to the truth about climate change; and no to limiting Congress to the same health-care plan that they are trying to force on the masses.

Steve Holden

Kelso

What if?

Since we’re still reading and hearing, “It’s all Bush’s fault” from some, it seems appropriate to ask a few “what if” questions. What if Bush had:

• Appointed a czar who cut the pay of executives in private business 50 percent to 90 percent?

• Appointed a czar to restrict CNN, ABC, NBC or any other non-friendly station?

• Appointed a czar who praises Mao and other dictators?

• Appointed a czar who is an avowed Communist?

• Proposed legislation to take total control of our health care with a panel of non-medical experts to make decisions about our care?

• Announced plans to bailout failing newspapers so he can then control what they print?

• Gave school children materials to promote the singing of praises for the president?

• Proposed a national police force?

• Taken control of the nation’s banking system?

• Taken control of much of the nation’s automobile industry?

I’d bet our news media and nearly everyone else would be very concerned about these and many other issues that we are now facing.

Judith Schwindt

Silver Lake

It’s a patriotic duty

Another response to Matt McClung (Nov. 7 letter). Is McClung just trying to sound as inflammatory as possible, or does he seriously believe that dissent is tantamount to treason? Didn’t our founding fathers believe that dissent was our patriotic duty?

Every president in my lifetime has been subjected to criticism, several during war time, from every quarter. It comes with the job. Only a naive rookie would throw his or her hat into the ring and expect to be exempted.

On what basis should we elevate President Obama to the status of a sacred cow? Has McClung an argument more convincing than racism (hackneyed) or hypocrisy (laughable)?

Dave Rickerman

Longview