Letters To The Editor, June 17, 2009
GOP Coverage Was Out of Dems Playbook
Editor, Times-Dispatch: Regarding the newspaper's coverage of the Virginia Republican convention, "Cuccinelli, Bolling Join GOP Ticket": In recounting Bob McDonnell's acceptance speech, the first item mentioned in the news story is McDonnell receiving applause when he commented on "innocent human life" and the right to bear arms -- as if that was the main thrust.
McDonnell's speech covered many pressing issues. He talked about taxes, energy, bailouts, tourism, small business, jobs, retirees, card check, and the skyrocketing cost of college tuition. Every speaker at the convention talked about the Republican belief in individual liberty and self-reliance as contrasted with the Democratic belief in social welfare and government dependence. There is not one word about any of this in the news article.
The article tried to convey the message that the convention attendance fell short of expectations. The 8,000 attendees were the most to attend a Republican state convention in Virginia in the past 15 years -- far beyond expectations.
There is space in the story to mouth the Democratic line that "Republicans turned down stimulus money for expanded unemployment benefits," but no space to explain the Republicans' stated reasons for doing this.
There was no mention of the remarkable speech by Adnan Barqawi, former Regimental Commander of the Virginia Tech Corps of Cadets, about his life and what it means to be an American. He received two standing ovations and the loudest applause. The paper didn't showcase this accomplished ethnic minority who is a proud Republican.
This type of biased, skewed coverage of Republicans to fit a template is a page straight out of the Democrats' playbook. So, congratulations to this newspaper for fulfilling its role as the propaganda arm of the Democratic Party.
Jessee Ring.
Pulaski.
Many Question Global Warming
Editor, Times-Dispatch: In a reply to my letter, "Climate Change Needs DeBunking," Rod Elser wrote, "Climate Debunking Was Bunk Itself." Let me assist him in understanding global warming.
I'll begin with the following from Science (http://www.theregister.co.uk/science): "Two authorities provide us with analysis of long-term surface temperature trends. Both agree on the global temperature trend until 1998, at which time a sharp divergence occurred. The UK Meteorological Office's Hadley Center for Climate Studies HadCRUT data . . . shows worldwide temperatures declining since 1998. According to Hadley's data, the Earth is not much warmer now than it was in 1878 or 1941."
On Jan. 14, 2008, John L. Casey, director of the Space and Science Research Center (http://www.spaceandscience .net) wrote the following: "The Earth has been in a long-term cooling trend technically for 11 years. The significant drop in global temperatures that also occurred between January 2007 and much of 2008 should have been enough for most observers to finally accept that global warming is over, except that this information was intentionally not passed on to the American people."
In a March 2, 2009 letter Casey sent to President Barack Obama, he expressed his concern about the uncertainties of attempting to regulate the environment, especially "now that global warming has ended, the attempt to legislate and then impose cap-and-trade schemes on the American taxpayer and their businesses can only be described as highly speculative."
Some additional facts: CO2 is not a pollutant -- it is necessary for all life on Earth. Human activity produces only .038 percent of the CO2 in the atmosphere, with 96.5 percent of greenhouse gases derived from the oceans -- of which water vapor is the largest amount. Last, during the past millennium, levels of CO2 were often at higher levels than the current levels.
William Ryan.
Midlothian.
Can the Government Beat this Health Care?
Editor, Times-Dispatch: Two months ago, I wrote letters to Sens. Mark Warner and Jim Webb, and to President Barack Obama.
The letter outlined my health-related issues over the past two years which have included two surgeries, an extended stay in intensive care, numerous tests, X-rays, doctor visits, and hospital visits for pre-admission and other testing. During this time my care was tremendous. All of my doctors, health care professionals, administrators, even the insurance companies, have been great.
My question to my legislators and president was: How would the new health care plan suggested by the Democratic Party improve my health care? To my great disappointment, none of these men gave me the courtesy of a return communication. Either they don't know the answer -- or they don't want me to know. So much for transparency.
Ed Nugent.
Chesterfield.
Advertisement
Reader Reactions
We often hear “thousands of Canadian citizens that come to this country every year for TIMELY and quality care”, but never is provided documentation via major news of such, as though the word-of-mouth comes from a thick fog. Anyone with concrete evidence of such?
I am really concerned about the government getting involved in our lifestyle choices such as what to eat and whether or not we can smoke. Once the government starts down that road, it dictates what behavior is acceptable and what isn’t. It starts off with the usual stuff, no sugary foods, no smoking and then it gets REALLY touchy - like no unprotected homosexual sex because of the high risk of HIV/AIDS. If you can see just 1/10th of a mile down the socialized medicine road, you can see what a problem this mess will be.
“Every speaker at the convention talked about the Republican belief in individual liberty”
Sure, they talked about it. Talk is cheap my friend.
I hail from Europe and still have many friends and relatives there that I keep in touch with on a weekly basis.
Their experiences with the UK system are not nearly as rosy as your next door neighbor’s seems to have been.
The Canadian system evidently has fairly good success in certain provinces. But there are “private” hospitals and clinics popping up all over the place and a great deal of them are staffed by doctors conscripted from overseas.
There is also the ticklish matter of the thousands of Canadian citizens that come to this country every year for TIMELY and quality care.
And granted there are many Americans as well as Europeans who have ELECTED the Medical Tourism route.
There are few to no options if Mr. Obama’s plan reaches its ultimate goal of socialized medicine….
If we let the greens have their way and cut out all uses of energy - fossil fuels, wind farms, nuclear and solar - how much effect will that have on global warming?
Mr. Ryan, your information is so wrong that I had a good laugh at your expense. In particular your claim that “during the past millennium, levels of CO2 were often at higher levels than the current levels”, here is an actual reputable link that contradicts your claim.
http://climate.jpl.nasa.gov/evidence/
Feel free to explore NASA’s site so maybe you can educate yourself a little better.
“all you have to do is look to the UK and Canada to see the variations on a failing system”...failing systems? Not according to my next door neighbor who moved here from England and heralds their combo National Health Service and private insurance system as better than U.S. 100% for-profit system. Not according to my Canadian friends, including my last manager in Toronto, who all voice approval of their system.
Also, World Health Org ranks U.K. & Canada’s health care higher in quality than ours. We are #1 in one key area; COST; thus, we directly & indirectly subsidize health care companies at our financial trough.
Ponder this: A few pioneering American insurers like Blue Cross Blue Shield of South Carolina and self-insured employers like the Hannaford Brothers supermarket chain (based in Maine, with 167 stores, 27,000 employees) sent American doctors to evaluate foreign hospitals. Favorably impressed, they now offer payment for travel expenses and cash incentives as high as $10,000 for choosing offshore hospitals.
Mr. Nugent’s question was a perfectly
legitimate one.
More citizens should be asking questions about all of the programs that arem being bulldozed through at warp speed.
“Keep your own plan and doctor” etc.
One of the basic problems with that claim is that the vast majority of health plans in this country are employer based.
The government will offer a plan that at least iniatially will be cheaper than the private sector. Does any thinking individual actually believe that their employer will be willing to pay higher premiums than a govt. plan?
No they will not. Everyone will end up on the government plans (which is the desired result) and all you have to do is look to the UK and Canada to see the variations on a failing system….
One gigantic Medicaid. And we all know how efficient that is…
The term “global warming” has virtually vanished from the popular lexicon because the worst nightmare of the alarmist enviros has occurred, there is no warming.
To counter Studebaker’s post somewhat, there is an environmentalist based think tank that reports to the present administration on current trends. It is called ecoAmerica and recently and accidentally had one of its reports released to the press.
“Global warming “ is out and “deteriorating atmosphere” is in.
Drop “carbon dioxide” and adopt “moving away from the dirty fuels of the past.“
And instead of the much touted Waxman/Markey “cap-and-trade” my personal favorite “cap-and-cash-back.“
You get the idea.Watch for the new terms calculated to sway public opinion in a media outlet near you.
One “inconvenient” fact about Co2 as demon global warmer is that it has an 800 year lag between temperature and carbon dioxide. Temperature in every case, the ice core data shows (this is how they measure CO2) rises precede rises in CO2 by, on average 800 years.
When that fact became painfully apparent the “science” changed to claim that where CO2 does not actually cause the warming the periods of warming were amplified by the CO2. They are still working on that debatable one
The debate is definetly NOT over on this subject.
An interesting source for some of this information is of all places the Daily KOS. Not nexactly a skeptics paradise.
“Mr. Gore:Apology Accepted” Harold Ambler-Jan.2009.
Also WATTS UP WITH THAT and GLOBAL DEPOT and REAL CLIMATE for balance.
NASA and the EPA and GISS and the solar research sites are reader friendly sources.
Happy reading.
“Washington takeover”
Frank Luntz & the Republican PsyOps campaign against health care reform:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22155.html
Dr. Frank Luntz, a top Republican consultant on the language of politics, is warning the GOP that the American people want health-care reform and that lawmakers need to try to avoid directly opposing President Barack Obama.
“You simply MUST be vocally and passionately on the side of REFORM,” Luntz advises in a confidential 26-page report obtained from Capitol Hill Republicans. “The status quo is no longer acceptable. If the dynamic becomes ‘President Obama is on the side of reform and Republicans are against it,’ then the battle is lost and every word in this document is useless.
“Republicans must be for the right kind of reform that protects the quality of healthcare for all Americans. And you must establish your support of reform early in your presentation.”
Instead, Luntz says Republicans should warn against a “Washington takeover” of health care, and insist that patients would have to “stand in line” with “Washington bureaucrats in charge of healthcare.”
Luntz, the author of the bestselling book “Words That Work: It’s Not What You Say, It’s What People Hear,” has been involved in creating much of the language Republican lawmakers used from 1994 through 2004, but was tossed out by the House leadership in 2005. One of his coups was popularizing the phrase “death tax” for “inheritance
Post a Comment(Requires free registration)
- Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
- Respect others.
- Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
- See the Terms and Conditions for details.


Advertisement