No matter how many times proof to the contrary has been proffered, he actually still believes the 2000 election was stolen. He cannot face the reality that hordes of anti-Bush reporters flooded Florida for weeks, counting every fly speck on every crumpled ballot as a vote for Al Gore and still, George Bush tallied more votes than his hapless opponent.
One has to ponder why he has not called Mr. Obama a liar for failing to close Guantanamo, for continuing the renditions program, for (at the behest of the Democrat Congress) continuing the wiretaps without warrants, for now agreeing that some terrorist captives will remain imprisoned without charges, continuing the Patriot Act and for endorsing a host of other "tools" used by President Bush to keep us safe. These are tools he swore every day of his campaign he would abandon. He also promised "transparency" - legislation would be hammered out in front of the public on CNN. A lie? Legislation would be posted on the Internet for all to see. A lie?
But Pitts seems to find excuses for the left at every turn. The anodyne columns he writes dealing with Democrat folly are legion. Remember the recent one on Woodstock? He characterized that exercise in futility as a noble gathering that changed society for the better when in fact, the great unwashed, stoned, crude and misguided long hairs changed nothing but the dress code for losers.
Now comes his latest foray into journalistic absurdity, claiming the terrorist trial in New York ordered by Attorney General Eric Holder will be a "defining moment" for our country. Pitts is truly as unhinged as Holder if he thinks it is to our benefit to have terrorists using a civilian courtroom as a venue for spewing their lies and hatred against our country.
These trials will only serve to "define" this administration's arrogant desire to rile yet again the cohorts of left-wing loons against every legal tactic President Bush employed to successfully keep us safe. The media will endlessly plow the parched ground of their discontent with the measures used by our intelligence community and will publicly expose sources and information-gathering procedures to the detriment of all who are trying to deprive those who are out to kill us of enjoying any success.
I'm just sayin' ...
Nancy C. Boyer
Kaplan/China deal hurts county taxpayers
To the editor:
Mr. John F. Barr, president of the Washington County Commissioners, you just don't get it, or do you?
It appears the recipients of 120 Chinese students per year at Kaplan University will be the 120 slots Americans will not have access to. Recipients of Kaplan and private living/rental accommodations will benefit, as well as the owner of Kaplan, a wholly owned subsidiary of the Washington Post Co., and other recipients of deals that might have been made.
And Mr. Barr you are quoted as saying, "The consensus was, if it didn't cost us (taxpayers, I assume) a lot, this certainly wouldn't hurt anything, and I think the potential opportunity for interaction and economic development is very unlimited."
Well, Mr. Barr, it hurts Washington County taxpayers, that's who it hurts. It hurts the unemployed, that's who it hurts. It hurts the taxpayers who built our infrastructure, schools and hospitals with taxpayer money, that's who it hurts.
No Washington County taxpayer money for this, not a penny.
A Social Security Lockbox law is needed
To the editor:
Congress' spending binge threatens the future of the Social Security system.
This money should be reserved to pay the checks of current and future beneficiaries. The last nine years, Congress has spent $1.70 trillion out of the Social Security funds and placed IOUs in it. This is very unfair to all people receiving Social Security.
We need to pass a Social Security Lockbox law to guarantee they can't use the money that was not intended for Congress to spend for its use to benefit them instead of we, the people, who put them in Congress to represent us.
The Republican and Democratic Congresses have both raided the trust fund over the years to help them get re-elected. We don't need any legislation designed to raid, reduce or risk your Social Security, Medicare and veterans' benefits. A Social Security amendment to the Constitution is needed to grant seniors and all Americans an unbreakable legal right to their benefits.
Congressional spending is irresponsible and very unfair. They are stopping our cost-of-living adjustment, which doesn't give us enough to keep up with rising prices. We must fight for the lockbox law.
Anna Lee Burker