Letters to the Editor for Sunday, October 11, 2009

» 57 Comments | Post a Comment

McDonnell will protect gun rights
Bob McDonnell has proven through his actions as Virginia’s attorney general that he is a strong supporter of the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens. 

In February 2008, he was one of 31 state attorneys general to sign the amicus brief in the historic District of Columbia v. Heller case, supporting an individual’s right to keep and bear arms.  His opponent, Creigh Deeds, were he elected governor, would attempt to restrict those rights. Deeds has already attempted in 2008 to pass a bill to restrict gun sales at gun shows and has stated that he does not believe that civilians should have access to semiautomatic rifles.

I believe that Virginians are justly proud of the rights their forefathers have fought to protect and they want a governor who will protect, not restrict, those rights. Bob McDonnell, as governor, is the man who will protect the constitutional rights of Virginians.
GEORGE W. LUEDKE
Lynchburg

 

For Valentine
I was intrigued by Scott Garrett’s statement in the article last weekend concerning the candidates’ sparring about taxes. That certainly was a quick grasp at taking the facts and spinning them to fit his personal position. If he has seen any of the biennial budgets, he would know that the question is not “to tax or not to tax.” It is how do we manage the resources we have to achieve our goals.

There is little question about the need to improve transportation. We witnessed a large crowd of people last week cheering the arrival of the new train service through Lynchburg. Everyone wants to join in making transportation more efficient from both a cost and an energy standpoint.

The desire to take and make sound bites about Del. Shannon Valentine does not play well on the local level, especially for those of us who see her and work with her in the neighborhoods, at the schools and in the civic arena. Valentine is a doer, not a political spin-doctor. I want a thoughtful, committed, hard worker representing me at the General Assembly.
LAURA DUPUY
Lynchburg

 

Whose values?
After reviewing Del. Shannon Valentine’s voting record for the past two sessions of the General Assembly, I was wondering if her values line up with the values of the majority of Lynchburg voters.

Her voting record is 60 percent on family-friendly bills. Although it is better than 43 percent of her fellow legislators, is it good enough for you? There were 46 of our 140 Virginia legislators who voted 100 percent pro-family on the above bills.

Check out the bills which she voted against. With her vote against defunding abortions, she is definitely for choice. She also voted against defunding Planned Parenthood and bringing abortion centers up to normal clinic safety standards. She did, however, vote for the bill requiring a center to tell a woman that her baby would feel pain during an abortion.

By voting against the eminent domain bill she doesnt want to protect your property rights. And, is she fiscally conservative? Will she limit government spending? Her vote against limiting budget increases is evidence that she is a tax-and-spend legislator.

She does want to protect our religious freedoms and those of the Virginia State Police chaplains, a good thing!

We can know our candidates’ true values by their voting records, and we all know that elections can have dire consequences. We must value our vote and definitely vote our values.
JANET F. STASULLI
Forest

Advertisement

 
View More: No tags are associated with this article
Not what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
 

Advertisement

Reader Reactions

Flag Comment Posted by Randolph Knipp on October 11, 2009 at 6:42 pm

I agree, Clare.  There are many good practices we should (IMHO) follow.  Wash our hands, flush the toilet, refrain from profanity, try to be courteous to others, ...  The list is long.
I get nervous when one says, “You MUST ...“  I much prefer proper training and personal choice.  There are times when profanity seems so right!  I want the option!

Flag Comment Posted by Clare378 on October 11, 2009 at 6:33 pm

Hmmm…Global warming may or may not exist and it may or may not be our fault.  Everyone is entitled to their opinion on that, I suppose. 
But isn’t there enough evidence of other types of damage that we should change some of our habits?  Even if you don’t believe in global warming, wouldn’t you agree that exhaust fumes and smog are hurtful?  Plastic grocery bags and other trash are destroying our scenery and hurting our water supply, so isn’t that enough to re-evaluate our habits?
Reduce, reuse, recycle - regardless of how big (or small) you think the problem is.

Flag Comment Posted by Fred on October 11, 2009 at 4:25 pm

CS,

Of course I could not agree with you more.

Should I remind you that I invited you (in French, so you could practice) several days ago to have a drink together. No answer, so far.

If you were not the guy in front of me at the debate, then it must have been your uncle The Shadow (don’t you share the same last name?). I hope you are not like him: he is not interested in meeting me. I am distraught.

Flag Comment Posted by Cozmos Shadow on October 11, 2009 at 4:10 pm

Fred,

It would probably shock you to learn that I agree the world is getting warmer and weather patterns have changed quite a bit.

I think it is more complicated than simply blaming man 100%.  The Earth does warm and cool as part of a natural cycle, but you cannot deny man’s contribution to the issue.

However, all we can control is all we can control and we should cut back on these emissions. 

If you look at little ole Lynchburg you will find a public transit system - not mass transit.  Why you ask?  Less than 1% of the budget is allocated to this line item.  Where are the park & ride lots?

So, if the current people in power are really interested in making an impact - why don’t they fund that a bit more? 

Another thing is when you impact streams and wetlands the penalty/fee you pay does not stay locally to improve and preserve streams/wetlands in this area.  Why you ask?  Because there is not a local mitigation bank.  WHy you ask?  Because our leaders have not made it a priority.

I do not agree with the law, but there it is so why are we not taking steps to improve our own area?  Hmm?

Perhaps looking for common ground rather than calling entire groups of people stupid all the time there could be some friendships formed?

I bet you actually agree with the above.. 

Eh?

Flag Comment Posted by Fred on October 11, 2009 at 3:52 pm

Randolph,

Thanks for your references. They certainly look impressive.

I started looking into them.

The Wall Street Journal says:

“Joanne Simpson, the world’s first woman to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology, expressed relief upon her retirement last year that she was finally free to speak “frankly” of her nonbelief.“

I located a blog where, while acknowledging being skeptical, she added:

“What should we as a nation do? Decisions have to be made on incomplete information. In this case, we MUST ACT (my emphasis) on the recommendations of Gore and the IPCC because if we do not reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and the climate models are right, the planet as we know it will in this century become unsustainable.“

That reminds me of a poster who wrote that Blaise Pascal, the French philosopher and mathematician, declared that, based on inconclusive data and Probability Theory, it is “smarter” to believe in God, to achieve the best possible result. I remembered that in France we used to call this position “Le Pari Stupide” (The Stupid Bet). Sorry, Matt, I could not avoid it!

It would seem that, using the same logic, we should act on the possibility that Global Warming is real, because not acting will be catastrophic.

Flag Comment Posted by The Shadow on October 11, 2009 at 2:14 pm

In case people have not noticed - Fred always has an excuse for his actions and can justify them.

His attacks are not as bad as others, or his attacks are justified because of.., etc.

And Fred, no, I do not know who you are, I do not care to know you, and you need to get over yourself because you are not a household name.

I know that is a major blow to that Ego of yours but—that is how it is!

Flag Comment Posted by The Shadow on October 11, 2009 at 2:12 pm

I would have thought a collaborator would have said the BF109 grill.

Go figure.

Flag Comment Posted by Randolph Knipp on October 11, 2009 at 2:05 pm

in re Global Warming:
http://www.patsullivan.com/blog/2009/06/wsj-science-doubts-global-warming.html
Many articles such as the above contribute to my skepticism.  They, with my observation that the forecasts of the so-called experts fail so badly, assure my personal conviction that we don’t really know if there is really global warming, and certainly don’t know why!

Flag Comment Posted by Fred on October 11, 2009 at 2:05 pm

Indy,

What were those comments? Please refresh my memory.

If the people whom claim the Earth is 6,000 years old are the same ones who declare “Global warming is a hoax”, how would you qualify their attitude?

Got to go cut the grass before Betsy gets here, back from work, otherwise I will have to sleep with the parrots!

Flag Comment Posted by Fred on October 11, 2009 at 1:59 pm

In my previous post, please replace “some” by “most”, when referring to little dogs!

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.
Click here to post a comment.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement