Zealots’ smokescreen disguises terrorism
Early in my pastoral career, I discovered that the easiest place for the antichrist to operate is in Christian disguise. So it is with the zealots of the anti-abortion movement, most recently epitomized by Scott Roeder in the heinous murder of Dr. George Tiller.
While groups like Operation Rescue are trying to convince us that Roeder acted alone, there is ample evidence that he moved with the open encouragement of militant anti-abortion groups and incendiary voices like Bill O’Reilly, Alan Keyes, James Dobson, Randall Terry, Mark Crutcher, Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh.
Most of the above have one thing in common: They employ Christian language to justify the holiness of their cause and the righteousness of their deeds. To hear them talk, they are driven by a godly desire to protect the unborn – even to the extent of sanctifying blatant acts of violence.
With zealots like Roeder and their vociferous cheerleaders, I suspect that “the sanctity of life” is mostly a smokescreen. It provides a convenient springboard for encouraging and committing hate-filled acts of oppression, not only toward abortion-rights advocates but also to all manner of convenient scapegoats (women, Jews, Muslims, intellectuals, homosexuals and so-called “illegals”).
Roeder and his compatriots have shamed our nation by compromising the very moral code they claim to uphold. Until ordinary citizens are willing to stand up to these terrorists, the antichrist will continue to enjoy a field day in America.
THOMAS E. SAGENDORF Hamilton
Government awards billions to failing banks, blames them for the economy, then takes them over. Government demands change from private companies, and when they fail to live up to expectations, government takes over them, too. As a result, hundreds of thousands are losing their jobs.Mr. Johnson, I'm going to be blunt: Shut the fuck up. Shut your tantrum-throwing whine-hole and sit down. Your desperation is showing.
The killing of the unborn is redefined as decent, and those who would protect the innocents are labeled as radicals.
Former officials who acted to protect the country are now being hunted down and prosecuted as war criminals while those that sought to destroy the country are awarded rights, safety and civility.
Government authorizes the spending of trillions of dollars that does little to stimulate the economy while the citizenry is told to give back and cut back.
In my company, employees who perform like this would be fired. Our company could not survive with such behavior and results. But I’m not describing my company or yours.
Welcome to America! You get what you voted for.
JIM JOHNSON Fort Wayne
I peruse the opinion page with an eye for interesting topics and seek out differing points of view to challenge my own thinking. Donna Volmerding’s essay, “Obama policies veiled socialism” (March 17), certainly caught my attention.For every one of these letters, the J-G prints about twenty "BAMATERRISTSOSHULISTLIBRUL" screeds.
It is time to ask Congress to request that President Obama, Vice President Biden, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Leader Harry Reid to resign. If they don’t, then it is time for impeachment of all four.For the love of all that is good and holy, please, please, PLEASE let this letter be some kind of bad joke. The idea that someone can be this abnormally, irredeemably stupid and still be able to breathe without being re-taught every two seconds is unbelievable.
President Obama campaigned on change, and we sure are getting it. He signs the stimulus package without even giving anyone in Congress time to read what was in it. He made the statement that there was no “pork” in it. Frankly, 90 percent of it is pork.
On Oct. 10, 2007, the Dow Jones hit a high, closed at 14,164.53. Who was president then? On Nov. 20, 2008, the Dow was 7,552.53. Who was elected president just before that?
And they say it isn’t done yet. Who was the president who just signed the stimulus package?
This is a sure sign that we have elected a president who was this country’s biggest mistake over the last 100 years. Every time Obama speaks out or promotes something, the markets take another big drop.
I heard an economist make the statement that the next election, the Democrats will lose 40 seats in the House and possibly many more.
Why did people elect our present president? This is a question I heard quite often. He made many promises to the poor just to buy votes. When more than 90 percent of the black population voted for him along with the welfare people, whom he promised all kinds of help, what would you expect?
I hope those of you who helped put him in office will soon see just what you have done. President Bush had a lot of problems with the help of the Democratic House the last two year, but we now have more problems and debts that we will never got out of. President Obama has done more damage in 30 days than Bush did in eight years.
It is time to contact your senators and representatives in Washington, asking for their resignations. The final nails are going into the U.S. coffin, and we will soon be buried.
DALE BIBERSTEIN Bluffton
Christians will pick up the pieces
With Barack Obama’s election, progressives, secular humanists and every other stripe of liberalism have won the right to remake the world into their own image.
It is time not to oppose the insanity the left wants to impose upon America but rather to embrace it. These fools are going to destroy the economy and degrade civil society to the point where Americans will warmly embrace the Judeo-Christian values and principles that were once embedded within the founding documents and instruments of the United States.
Let us give the left its way and prepare to pick up the pieces. When the real crisis comes, we can emulate our Founding Fathers and institute a second Christian, American revolution.
When the inevitable failure of the left’s socialist experiment arrives in a national crisis, God’s children must be prepared to promote, create and maintain a Christian, values-based framework that protects God’s sacred civil gifts of life, liberty and the pursuit of property.
MICHAEL LEWINSKI Auburn
I read with extreme amusement Damian Hood’s letter, “Letter parrots right-wing dogma” (Aug. 4). Richard W. Burridge’s letter, “Obama too liberal to be president” (July 22), was based on factual evidence. The source? None other then the U.S. Senate Archives and the senators’ own voting record contained therein ( http://www.senate.gov).
Since when is using a person’s full name a smear? If so, then millions of people in history have been and continue to be smeared every day in history lessons in our schools.
Do you really want the same people who run the IRS telling you that you have to pay a bad employee the same wages as an outstanding employee? You need more money, then either get another job or make yourself invaluable to your employer by updating your skills. I worked three simultaneous jobs for five years until I found a good one and was able to quit the other three, and I retired from that one after 20-plus years. If I can do it, then so can most anyone else.
The “right wing” (the National Journal and others) are just parroting what the “left-wing” media (MSNBC, NPR, Mother Jones, CNN, ABC, Media Matters and the Washington Post) have stated and documented – that Barack Obama is the most liberal senator. Now, either they or Hood are correct.
In closing, Hood’s whole letter is proven farcical by his last statement: “Rebellion against an unjust authoritarian government is a liberal issue.” No, it’s a freedom issue, as history has shown time and time again. Hood needs to triple-check his “facts” before trying to speak on issues he’s sorely lacking knowledge of.
DANIEL E. GRAY Defiance, Ohio
Why be squeamish about ‘liberal’?I literally did a facepalm when I read this. In fact, I actually slapped my forehead hard enough to send myself reeling backwards a step.
Regarding the letter, “Letter parrots right-wing dogma” (Aug. 4), Damian Hood lists several typical right-wing “sins,” including using Barack Obama’s middle name, employing scare tactics relating to partial-birth abortion, the “death tax” and minimum wage, and then tops them off with the apparent unforgivable sin of calling Obama “the most liberal member of the U.S. Senate.” I didn’t realize that liberals regarded that label as being a smear.
Actually, it always amuses me how often candidates of the Democratic Party seem offended when they are tagged with the dreaded L-word. While Republican candidates often seem to be arguing among themselves as to who has the most conservative credentials, I don’t ever recall seeing candidates from the other side fighting over who is the “true liberal.” In fact, it seems quite the opposite. Why not loudly and proudly proclaim that status if one is truly proud of the liberal agenda and “dogma”?
The answer probably isn’t too hard to figure out.
BILL QUEGAN Bluffton
Letter parrots right-wing dogmaIt's damn good to be back, though. Damn good.
If ever I wondered whether this election was going to be more of the same garbage, then Richard W. Burridge’s letter, “Obama too liberal to be president” (July 22), gave me my answer:
Yes, yes, 1,000 times yes. Each and every one of his points is taken verbatim from far-right demagogues and recited without one iota of thought as to the truth of any of them.
First, Burridge refers to the senator as “Barack Hussein Obama,” a disgusting smear tactic that has been sworn off even by the Republican National Committee.
Burridge immediately lists a slew of stances Obama supposedly supports, without any evidence backing any of them. He uses the right-wing scare terms “partial-birth abortion” and “death tax” to try to evoke emotional responses instead of rational thought. He even goes so far as to demonize the idea of making the minimum wage into a living wage, as though the concept of someone being paid enough money to get by were some horrible evil.
To top off his screed, he repeats the far-right myth of Obama being “the most liberal senator,” a claim that has never been proven true, though the talking heads of the right love to repeat it breathlessly. At the end of his tirade, Burridge claims that the senator doesn’t share the Founding Fathers’ vision. That seems an odd thing to say, considering the very concept of rebellion against an unjust, authoritarian government is a very liberal concept.
DAMIAN HOOD Garrett
Obama too liberal to be president
Before you cast your vote this November for Barack Hussein Obama, here is a partial list of his accomplishments: He voted against banning partial-birth abortion and supports affirmative action in colleges and government. He says he will deal with street-level drug dealing as a minimum offense. He supports universal health care. He supports granting driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants. He is opposed to any efforts to privatize Social Security. He wants to make the minimum wage a “living wage.” He voted against repealing the alternative minimum tax and the “death tax.”
He voted with Democratic Party 96 percent of 251 votes. He is ranked as the most liberal senator in the Senate today. Most of his record sounds like government control and socialism to me. You might want to reread the history, policies and philosophy of Karl Marx and compare them to Obama’s record, then reread what the Founding Fathers had to say and then choose. I will choose the Founding Fathers’ ideas anytime.
RICHARD W. BURRIDGE Fort Wayne
Ronald G. Ross in his letter of Feb. 22 takes me to task for stating what the law is, as I understand the law to be, from the results of a U. S. Supreme Court ruling in the Grutter v. Bollinger case. The decision given in that case on June 23, 2003 was that an open position should go to a black male who had less opportunity than a white woman who had more opportunities. I did not make that ruling. It was the U.S. Supreme Court that made that ruling. If Mr. Ross wants to make the case that Mrs. Bill Clinton, as First Lady of the United States had less opportunities than a senator from Illinois, have at it.
Mrs. Bill Clinton is making every effort that she can to become the president. of the United States, the Chief executive of The United States and, just as important, the chief law enforcement officer of The United StatesShould a person who does not accept the letter or the spirit of the law be elected the chief law enforcement officer? Should a person who brings trumped-up charges against people in the White House travel office be our chief law enforcement Officer? Should a person who illegally orders 1,200 to 1,500 raw FBI files be delivered to her in the White House? Should a person who was co-president at the time that our nuclear secrets were transferred to China for campaign cash ever be allowed any where near the White House again?
Fremont Stewart
Rome City
Invoking ‘Nazis’ admits defeatNow who's the clever fellow who wrote that?
Regarding John Strathmore’s letter, “Ban reminds one of Nazis” (Feb. 1): Is this how devoid of argument the smoke-lovers are that they have to resort to the ultimate ad hominem attack of calling those they don’t agree with “Nazis”?
In the world of online discussion, there is a phenomenon known as “Godwin’s Law,” which states that as a discussion continues, the probability of someone comparing his or her opponent to Hitler or the Nazi Party rises to the point of inevitability. As a corollary to Godwin’s Law, there is a long-standing rule that any person making this comparison has, in essence, admitted defeat, as it proves he or she is out of logical arguments.
That Strathmore would compare those of us who want to breathe clean, smoke-free air to a fascist regime that murdered millions because of the delusions of one wholly insane man proves that he is either incapable of arguing in good faith or that he has so little regard for those who suffered through the actual Third Reich or lost family members to the Holocaust that he should rightfully come off as heartless.
DAMIAN HOOD Garrett
Ban reminds one of NazisI don't even have to waste my time pointing out how utterly stupid this man is. The fact that he Godwined himself does it for me.
The Journal Gazette published several articles regarding smoking the week of Jan. 13. This concentrated blitz is surely an effort to influence the City Council as it prepares to consider modifying that oppressive piece of legislation commonly known as the smoking ban.
People who go to bars and clubs go there to smoke, relax and have a few beers and socialize with like-minded friends.
Now, the smoke Nazis are encouraging people to inform on their fellow citizens. They have even come up with a special 311 number to make the process easier, and they have enlisted the pledge of the police department and fire department to enforce their edict.
I resent that my tax money is being used to police the city for people who want to have a cigarette when that tax money could be used for better purposes.
This whole debacle reeks of the same tactics that got the Third Reich started, i.e.: unreasonable laws, people informing on each other, businesses going broke, people out of jobs and so forth. For those too young to remember, maybe the words “Adolf Hitler” and “Nazi Germany” will have meaning.
JOHN STRATHMORE Fort Wayne
Where in the world were all the conservative Republicans? The recent debates were run strictly by the liberal Democrats and the media. There were no questions on morality at all. There was one question on the chief justices’ appointments and was laughed off with a big joke, “dead or alive?” Everybody laughed.Ah, nothing like another far-right screed to make the day complete. And this one's complete with that favorite dogwhistle of the hatemonger movement, "morality". For sane people, morality connotes the ability to do what's right in the face of temptation. For this guy and his ilk, morality really means "gay-bashin', woman-hatin', brown-person-killin' bible-thumpin', white, male, evangelical hate".
Moral questions were not asked: abortion, stem-cell research, Social Security, Medicare, same-sex marriage, “In God We Trust.”
Sen. John McCain had the true answer on border control and the Iraq war; it’s a just war and we cannot quit when things look bad. Al-Qaida would rejoice if we left the war. We must look way ahead. Wars are costly both materially and bodily. Think of what a hydrogen bomb would do. Al-Qaida must be destroyed.
The moral majority is sleeping again. And if they don’t wake up, the most important election will again be lost.
DICK MILLER Fort Wayne
Regarding Richard Cohen’s column “Huckabee is the face of religious intolerance” (Dec. 6):Wow. That a functioning human being could be this stupid is amazing. Not even getting into his "science and gay rights are religions" bullshit, this guy understands nothing, NOTHING, about evolution. Not one goddamn thing. My guess is that he gets all his "information" abotu anything scientific from "Godly" sources - like the ignorant pseudoscience of William Dembski or Michael Behe. This is the argument of someone who has never even cracked a science book, for fear he might be exposed to "worldly" things. That this kind of ignorance is even present in the modern day should be a great weight upon the hearts of every good person in the world.
The big-bang theory, evolution, atheism, gay rights, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism and many others are all religions. They are someone’s overwhelming beliefs. Why, then, are only Christians considered intolerant?
Everyone knows and science can prove that things evolve to survive the changes on the Earth. But, no one can prove (including science) that a species will evolve into a different species. A dog stays a dog, a bird stays a bird, a monkey stays a monkey, slime stays slime, and a human always was and always will be human (man). No amount of theory can change this fact.
I do not endorse Mike Huckabee or any other candidate at this time. I do, however, praise Huckabee for being honest about his beliefs in Jesus Christ and intelligent design.
