Letters to the Editor: News Coverage Isn’t Always Accurate

News Coverage Isn't Always Accurate
Editor, Times-Dispatch: You are to be commended for printing a letter by China's noted dissident, Wei Jungshen, who contradicted an earlier editorial, "Ghosts," concerning Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's recent trip to China and her presumed lack of emphasis on China's deplorable human rights record. Wei, who had read the official transcripts of the meetings Pelosi had with Chinese officials, noted that she had brought up the human rights issue, together with other important U.S.-China issues such as trade.

An important point is embedded in this story. News coverage seeks to find a hook for such events, usually the official opening comments from guest and host. Pelosi, following good diplomatic techniques, did not try to beat the Chinese over the head with their bad behavior in a public forum. Issues such as these are best discussed in one-on-one meetings where a range of issues are covered and proposals, counter-proposals -- and hopefully, in time, progress, -- are made.

It may make headlines (and some people happy) when our leaders meet with foreign leaders and lecture them on their shortcomings. Much more can be accomplished in the long run through quiet diplomacy rather than the chest-thumping, America-knows-best rhetoric that characterized the first few years of the Bush administration.

Phil True.
Glen Allen.

I served my country proudly for more than 28 years, including 56 combat missions over Vietnam. During that time I voted in every election -- but as a career military person, I remained nonpolitical so I would not compromise my principles and my support to my commander-in-chief.

When I see what is happening to our great country, I can no longer stand on the sidelines. Our political and economic systems are being challenged and we can't stand idly by and watch it happen. We must stand up now and reverse this progress toward socialism.

Virginians such as Thomas Jefferson and George Washington led the fight for our freedom and independence. Now it is our turn to carry on this great tradition. If we, the citizens of Virginia, don't stand up to stop this process, who will?

We have the opportunity to reverse this move toward socialism and take back control of our political process by electing a governor, lieutenant governor, and attorney general who know and understand Virginia. They will stand up against attempts by the federal government to usurp the powers of the states, and they will provide the leadership to get us through these tough economic times.

Join me in supporting Bob McDonnell and his team.

Albert G. Pianalto.
Chester.

A growing number of citizens, legislators, humane societies, and rescue organizations are replacing the term owner with animal guardian, recognizing that the term owner is outdated and doesn't reflect the human/animal bond that exists in our culture today. Guardian denotes a higher level of responsibility, caring, and respect to our animal companions. It sends a message that they are more than mere property. Guardian accurately describes the appropriate kindness and long-term care to one's family pet, teaching children respect, compassion, and kindness.

Studies show that children who learn compassion and respect for animals are more likely to become responsible adults. Seventeen cities, including St. Louis, Boulder, Beverly Hills, and the entire state of Rhode Island have incorporated the term "guardian" into their animal-related ordinances.

Carl Friedman, the former director of San Francisco's Department of Animal Care and Control, said, "Increased numbers of people thinking and acting as guardians of their animal companions will lead to fewer cases of abuse, neglect, and abandonment, and to fewer animals being killed in our nation's shelters."

The importance of language cannot be understated. It affects how we think and how we act. The dogs and cats who ask so little, and give back so much love and loyalty, deserve the protection and care the term guardian represents.

Warren Richards.
Mechanicsville.

I fault Gibson and Sawyer only for not calling President Barack Obama out and confronting his non-answers to many of the questions. Perhaps they were letting the television audience make up its own mind about the president's forthrightness.

Dr. Orin Devinsky asked, if Obama's wife or daughter could benefit from a treatment option that was not covered by the national health plan, would one "follow the greater good and sacrifice your loved ones for the good of insuring millions or would you do everything possible you could do for your family member?" Obama responded by discussing his grandmother's terminal cancer and whether her broken hip should be treated with hip replacement. He did not address the question.

Dr. John Corboy's question was also ignored when he asked, "If we could convince the American public that there are limits to what we can pay for with our health care system, who then will design and enforce the rules for the system?"

The bottom line for me is that I came away terrified that we are about to walk off a health care reform cliff. It appears the administration has not thought through many health system design questions and is totally motivated in changing the system to save it financially with disregard for the impact the changes will have on all consumers of the reformed medical services.

Michael B. Thompson.
Glen Allen.