Ryan just kicks a smaller can down the road Re: “Obama’s budget, not Ryan’s, is ‘antithetical’ to history,” Editorial, April 6
I don’t know who wrote this Washington Examiner editorial, but it is one-sided and flawed.
I keep hearing that critical thinking is what creationists use to disprove evolution, but doesn’t anyone try to use critical thinking in the debate over the federal budget?
Because if you did, you would see that even Paul Ryan’s budget plan would increase the national debt.
But no one talks about that.
The most recent Republican “golden boy” is supposed to be our savior from the evils of the Democrats. The Republicans use the debt as a weapon to persuade us to not vote for Democrats, but then offer a solution that still “kicks the can to our grandkids.” But it’s a smaller can, so it’s OK.
Until the people wake up to the fact that we need to tie our budget plan to last year’s revenue, we will never tackle the debt problem.
Bottom line: if the government spends more than it brings in, it needs to borrow, and neither party wants to address that reality.
James G. Witte
Woodbridge
Anybody would be better than Obama
Re: “President Obama deserves a second term,” From Readers, April 5
Edd Doerr says that President Obama deserves a second term.
He must love $4-plus gasoline, the erosion of our religious freedom and trillions of dollars of debt placed on the backs of
our progeny.
Not to mention Obama’s attacks on the Supreme Court and the Congress, demonstrating his disregard for his oath to protect and defend the Constitution.
Obama is trying to force everyone into government-controlled health care which funds abortion, rations care for the elderly, and is an unworkable bureaucratic mess. Like the president, Doerr is a long-time supporter and promoter of killing the pre-born.
Anyone
would serve us better than Obama.
William Luksic
Rockville
New Testament says nothing about abortion
Re: “Ultimate judgment on abortion has already been made,” From Readers, April 1
Diane Hess cites “Thou shalt not kill” as the Biblical commandment, but a more careful translation from the original Biblical language is “Do not murder.” Numerous examples in the
Bible show that the Creator indulged in, and urged followers to indulge in, other killings — including mass human slaughter on a grand scale.
The New Testament says nothing about abortion, and the Old Testament has only two references in which abortion is peripheral to some other subject. In neither case is it prohibited.
In Biblical times, newborns often didn’t have full human status until they had survived for perhaps a week or more, probably owing to the high neonatal death rates of the age. Evidently, the Creator allows spontaneous abortion by miscarriage.
Those who want to avoid abortion on the basis of their peculiar religious dogma are free to do so, but they shouldn’t try to foist their dogma on others on the basis of bogus hermeneutics.
Hess’ attempt to support her position by citing The Declaration of Independence just begs the question. In forming her conclusion, she assumes as true that which is in question to begin with.
Jerry Caplin
Gaithersburg
