GOP should also stop supporting corporate welfare

Re: "GOP should go back to defending individual rights," From Readers, Jan. 31

I couldn't agree more with Lawrence Marsh's letter imploring the GOP to put emphasis on individual rights against the tyranny of Big Government during this time of reflection and soul-searching.

One tangential downside to an ever-expanding government is its relationship with Big Business. As government grows, it allocates more and more money to well-connected private-sector special interests. This leads to bailouts, subsidies and all manner of redistribution from taxpayers to Big Business. We call it "corporatism" or "cronyism."

The Examiner's Tim Carney does an excellent job exposing the unhealthy relationship between Big Government and Big Business in his weekly columns. GOP leaders would do well to read his writings and move away from the practice of spending our money on well-connected friends in corporate America.

Lastly, to my friends across the aisle who are so quick to label the GOP as the party of Big Business, the Democrats are just as guilty, if not more so.

Matthew Hurtt


If a child isn't born, nothing else matters

Re: "Bieber's mom undermines conservatives' case," From Readers, Jan. 29

Liberals constantly deride conservatives for seeing issues only in black and white.At the same time, they ceaselessly praise themselves fortheir supposed ability to understand the nuance in every situation.

Dino Drudi is guilty of the first and oblivious to the second when he accuses pro-lifers of a logical fallacy because heinterpretstheir ideal of children needing a mother and father as a hard and fast rule rather than the best option that should be encouraged by both the private and public sector.

Drudi then states that "praising" Justin Bieber's mother for not aborting him and raising him in poverty as a single teenage mother contradicts that ideal.He apparently doesn't understand that the perfect is the enemy of the good.The nuance he fails to comprehend is that if a child is not allowed to be born, nothing else matters -- including family structure.

Conservatives understand that life trumps everything even when the situation is not ideal. As for the leaders of the mainline Protestant churches that still favor abortion as the right and moral choice when confronted with an unwanted pregnancy, I wouldn't want to be in their sandals when they face God after death.

Robert Gellert

Glen Burnie

Defense of Citizens United ruling disingenuous

Re: "Free speech and Citizens United, three years later," Jan. 27

Sarah Lee makes many interesting points. However, her statements that "the Citizens United and decisions allow for-profit corporations and unions to spend on political activity from their general treasuries," and "Citizens United had nothing to do with the legal concept of 'corporate personhood' " appear disingenuous.

While most of these funds may indeed come from individuals, corporate funds really belong to shareholders, and union funds derive from their memberships -- neither of whom may necessarily endorse the activities supported.

Considering the obscenely generous pay and benefits allowed to some corporate and union officials, compared with the large majority of their rank and file, the "law" appears unfavorable to the latter while primarily benefiting the former.

Perhaps some shareholder and dues-payer lawsuits to gain some voice in their organizations' political funding would benefit society at large by representing real people instead of artificial ones?

Jonathan Myer