By his "die quickly" remark, Florida Congressman Alan Grayson suggests that many Republican congressmen appear to be indifferent to the plight of Americans. Regardless of whether you agree with his choice of words, he makes a valid point.
It is a fact that bad things happen to a significant number of Americans every day, either because they have no health care, or because they are financially ruined because of health-care costs despite having insurance of some sort. Knowing this, why are Republican congressmen doing nothing to move the health-care debate forward? All they do is shoot down everything Democrats come forward with, without putting forth any alternatives.
Americans can only conclude that Republican congressmen simply don't care that people suffer under the current health-care system. It is a fair question to ask whose interests Republicans are protecting, as it certainly does not appear to be the interests of the American people.
Regarding the Pope's visit to the Czech Republic: I commend Pope Benedict XVI for condemning communism and for illustrating, during his visit to the Czech Republic, how such systems that chase power and deny God are bound to collapse. The Pope's warning has special relevance to the Obama Administration and its communist-socialist agenda.
Communist governments falsely present themselves as the authentic spokesmen for the aspirations of the people. Under such systems, every affirmation of faith or of theology is subordinated to a political criterion.
In truth, atheism and the denial of the human person, his liberty, and rights, are at the core of Marxist belief, which requires a total subordination of the person to the collectivity. Communism ultimately subsumes the autonomous nature of all spheres of existence: religious, ethical, institutional, and cultural.
In a democracy, it is the state that conforms to the society it serves - not the other way around. Otherwise, you end up with dictatorship and totalitarianism.
I find it disturbing that every letter I read protesting health-insurance reform is written by someone worried about personal cost, spouting numbers that they cannot confirm because not everyone has the same coverage.
A recent writer claimed to pay $13,200 because illegal immigrants were being covered. Many have already reported the obvious fact that we all pay for noninsured people and that includes Americans. We pay in taxes and premiums. Duh!
Shouldn't underpaid and unemployed people also have the opportunity to join "buying groups" to receive better coverage for a better price? Shouldn't poor or incapacitated Americans have some small chance at getting coverage? What about pre-existing conditions?
We already pay for these people when they go to the emergency room for a cold and the hospital charges Medicare $80 for two Tylenol that cost $1.49 at any gas station. Don't forget the $1,000 that they charge to get into a room, and for the exam. If the same people had access to a regular doctor it would cost a fraction of that.
If the insurance industry isn't willing to deliver results, then why shouldn't we? What ever happened to "All men are created equal"? Or is it "Do what I say, not what I do?"
In the Sept. 27 Business section, there was an article that belonged on the front page:"Battery maker in Fremont to expand."
This private companypurchased a Mexicanfirm and is moving the work to Fremont. They are adding a $1 million expansion andare hiring 30 new employees. What makes it even more impressive is they neither asked for nor received any government assistance. Those companies receiving tax abatement should hang their heads in shame.
Far too often,welfare, for both individuals and corporations, acts more as an enabler and less as a helper. In the long run, both individuals and corporations are too oftentrapped into an even more helpless position by the very assistance they received from government. Families may (certainly not always) discern the difference between help and enabling. Government categorically cannot.
So now, according to Johnathan Ross' essay, "Health care can't stand half-measures," insurance companies are "mobsters," and "unintentional serial killers." His solution: Baptize Congress as a godfather and, "in the best godfather tradition," generously bribe them with $20 billion to "go away."
Or perhaps itself be an "unintentional serial" killer? Thus it is that he would save the nebulous "50 million uninsured," out of more than 300 million Americans, and expand the Medicare program, which has dubious notoriety for efficiency and thrift.
Dr. Ross' premises are difficult to challenge, as he does not list sources. But he mentions "more than 20,000 Americans" dying "from lack of insurance alone," but fails to mention the more than a million annual deaths by abortion that are paid by someone or another, and perhaps soon by the government itself. Also, one cannot audit/verify the spreadsheets Dr. Ross has used for his health-care math.
Sane health-care reform is quite desirable. It should not be attained by the radical and rash propositions offered by Dr. Ross, which just may be taken up by President Obama's coterie of czars and advisers with less than clean-cut backgrounds, but by patient, intelligent analysis and solutions devoid of rage and naivete.
Johnathan Ross, in my opinion, is a strange latter-day John the Baptist shouting in the wilderness.
SYDNEY O. FERNANDES, M.D.
The Humane Society of the United States opposes state Issue 2 for good reasons. This bill perpetuates horrific practices inflicted on farm animals for the purpose of maximizing profits.
Issue 2 is nothing more than a power grab by meat producers and big agri-business interests. It will perpetuate inhumane conditions for farm animals that include confinement so extreme that chickens, veal calves, and breeding sows cannot stretch their legs or move an inch for most of their miserable lives.
Do not be fooled by the benevolent-sounding name of the issue, the pretty photos in their direct mail, or the slick Web site. These are carefully crafted to fool voters.
Endorsers of the bill include all meat producers and big agribusiness organizations. They are using their deep pockets to fund a well-orchestrated campaign to mislead the public into believing they care about animals. Nothing is further than the truth. The bill will ensure that profits will continue to be maximized while horrific suffering of Ohio's farm animals continues.
Who will you side with? The Humane Society or meat producers? The animals are counting on you to be on the right side of Issue 2. Vote no.
Am I the only one who finds it sad that the current and past leadership of the Ohio Turnpike since it was paid off have managed to increase the tolls more than 200 percent?
The turnpike leadership is a joke.