Reader Comments

Editor: I just read Mr. Liebmann's article and it is heartwarming to find a member of the Bar so knowledgeable about constitutional issues. I am sure that if I had a conversation with him he would agree with my views on Article 1 section 8 of the Constitution. I am ashamed enough to admit to vanity but I looked at the "readers comments" section and found mine on the same subject published there. The positive thing is it tied in with Mr. Liebmann's comments. But I do hope that Bush can win in November nonetheless.

Tim Sullivan

Editor, Thanks. You do great work.

Lisa

Editor: Regarding the comment by one of your readers about the article, "The Real Problem with the Tax System" by Andy Obermann, we really should be looking at the overall tax burden, not just federal. We are taxed on so many things and pay taxes and fees to state and local governments for just about everything that I estimate we are losing between 40 % to 50% of our incomes to taxes of one form or another. It would be interesting to find out just what the figure really is. It always grates on me when some congressman or senator chides the American public for saving too little money. The biggest and best way to save is to eliminate the big spenders and drastically reduce the size of government at all levels. How about doing an in-depth article about taxes, fees, fines, assessments, etc. at all levels of government?

Earl Koenig

Dear Editor: Every school boy should know that the American system of government and
politics is based heavily on the cousinly example of the British. In Britain, a Prime Minister would be tossed out if he failed to go about implementing his election promises. And rightly so.

Is it an example of our national confusion that American presidents, particularly Republicans, govern in almost complete isolation from the platforms they were elected on; and do not seek to implement their party's unfilled promises from earlier elections? If the unfulfilled Republican promises since, say, Eisenhower were drawn up in a list there would be plenty of actions that still need to be done. Without having an adequate source to refer to I think it a pretty good guess that those ignored platforms would turn out to fit a certain pattern as well.

Compare the Democrats: they have been fighting for socialized medicine since Truman, (one of the most absurd, economically unjust and nonsensical of approaches.) While their folly condemns them on policy and intellectual grounds, their consistency does yield the fruit for good or ill that their word means something. Would that someone could bring a Foundation to fund an in-depth study so one might have the facts.

Timothy N. Hunter (Reagan Administration Appointee, 1982-1989)

Editor: Re. Jeff Crouere"s piece in your last edition, if Bush is in trouble it is his own damn fault.!!

Margaret

Editor: Lets look at the bright side of President Bush's approval rating in the Crouere piece. Even if President Bush's approval rating was only 1% John Kerry's would be zero.

Roger Williamson

Editor: Regarding the problems in Iraq, why can't we take back all our soldiers who are currently working for the UN in order to have them assist in the training of Iraqis? They can be replaced by other UN soldiers. Our GI then could be sent to someplace like Kuwait and the Iraqi volunteers could be sent there for training. As far as the UN goes we simply can no longer give them our troops as no one is willing to help us.

Sincerely, Joan B. Willenborg

Editor: In the past 25 years the U.S. has made much progress in reducing pollution in the private sector, automobiles and factories are putting out less pollutants than before. However there has been a huge increase in the number of gas and diesel powered vehicles, and pollution continues to be a real problem. Should we ban all vehicles? I don't think that is an option. There are alternatives and I think eventually we will win, but this can and should not be done so fast that the economy goes south or causes a severe hardship for the country. We need time to change and I believe the first thing we need to do is stop getting 58% of our oil from the East, China, Russia or any other country. We have more than enough oil in this country and we should use it until we find a replacement in sufficient quantity to meet our needs. Why do environmentalists think drilling oil in our country is unacceptable but don't mind if they drill in other parts of the world? Besides, we can bring it from Alaska without bothering the caribou! One other point I would like to make, why is the government by far the biggest polluter of all? Private and government need to be held accountable, having a fox watching the hen house is not a good plan!

Norman L Onstad, New London, MN

Editor: The reason Social Security will cost so much tax money as documented in the John Goodman article is because our irresponsible politicians spent the trust fund like it was their money. We paid enough in to cover the cost but they stole the money. Now you guys want to punish the recipients because we didn't pay enough in to cover the cost of spendthrift government too!

Ronald Webber

Email the Editor