Maryland's elected officials are ruining the state

Re: "O'Malley: Maryland referendum process too easy," Nov. 8

As a conservative in Maryland, the referendum process is one of the few ways I can influence policy decisions since the legislature is dominated by the Democratic Party. So it galls me that Gov. Martin O'Malley thinks the process is "a little too easy." Making decisions that we believeare the best for us should not be difficult, contrary to what O'Malley may believe.

I was even more amazed when University of Maryland elitist Paul Herrnson said he thought Maryland voters were too ignorant to make these kind of decisions, and that they should be left to elected officials.

The proof is in the pudding. Look at what our elected officials have brought us thus far. But for the largesse of the federal government and the enormous number of federal employees in the state, Maryland would be a basket case and in the current condition of Baltimore, our largest city.

I'll take my chances with the people for now.

Gary Duncan

Lusby, Md.

If you don't like The Examiner, don't read it

Re: "Examiner

is out of touch with D.C.-area residents," From Readers, Nov. 9

I found J.K. West's letter amusing. West pleads with The Washington Examiner to replace the "angry white men" on the editorial staff with "bipartisan, level-headed journalists who can write without prejudice."Two questions. If West doesn't like The Examiner, did he/she ever consider reading another newspaper? The New York Times or the Washington Post would be thrilled.

Second, did West also write to the Post, asking them to replace their liberal writers "with bipartisan, level-headed journalists who can write without prejudice"?

Do tell.

Stanley Sargol


Thomas' decline is my progress

Re: "Four more years of decline," Nov. 7

I can't help but puzzle over Cal Thomas' alarm about the rejection of religion by Americans, somehow causally coupled with adoption of "European socialism," both of which he clearly regards as self-evidently negative.

Abandoning belief in elusive Judeo-Christian-Muslim gods as well as adopting a more European economic/cultural lifestyle offers huge benefits to most Americans and the country as a whole by allowing advances in social mobility, tolerance and freedom to more people over time.

And his strange assertion that Americans are coming to see the government as a replacement for an imagined god is a baseless attempt at fear-mongering.How is it that belief in an apparently small-minded "jealous" Christian god who condones slavery, misogyny, homophobia and genocide (as well as being a couple of thousand years late for his triumphant return) is better than a more tolerant society that rejects this emotionally insecure god and encourages the participation of all of its people in building a prosperous and equitable nation?

What looks to him like a problem to me looks like progress.

Gordon Clay