State-Journal.com - Your letters

The State Journal encourages readers to submit letters to the editor for publication by noon Wednesday for the following Sunday’s paper. All letters must contain the writer’s full name, mailing address and telephone number for purposes of verification. The State Journal will not withhold the name of a writer. Any letter received without a mailing address and phone number will not be published. The State Journal will not publish thank-you letters, obvious form letters or letters addressed to third parties or to the public at large. Any letter may be rejected at editors’ discretion. All letters submitted for publication are subject to editing for length, form and content. Letters may be no more than 500 words long. Letters may be mailed to Letters to the Editor, The State Journal, 1216 Wilkinson Blvd., Frankfort, KY 40601; or e-mailed to rherron@state-journal.com.
‘Persons’
of power
To the Editor:
Well, they’ve gone and done it. Mark Jan. 20, 2010, as the day that American democracy died and a permanent aristocracy of (international) wealth was created. As I “predicted” in a letter written a few months ago, the Supreme Court decided 5-4 (just as they “decided” Bush, not Gore, would be president) to overturn more than 100 years of state and federal election laws restricting corporate campaign contributions. In the name of “free speech” they relied on the legal fiction of “personhood” for corporations. This fiction was created by a “railroad man” and court reporter named Bancroft Davis in 1886. Since then it has been used increasingly to give the same rights (but not responsibilities) to corporate “persons” as to real people.
Corporations may now use unlimited corporate funds, revenue and shareholder profits to provide unlimited donations to the (read Republican) candidates of their choice. The most radically right-wing, politically partisan and judicially activist Supreme Court in our nation’s history tilted the electoral system almost as far as it can go toward and advantage for (corporate) wealth. The court’s radical majority took a narrowly defined case before it this past summer and, at its own discretion, insisted on broadening it to include the entire constitutionality of corporate-related election law. Why address the larger (and settled) constitutional question, 100 years of established law and judicial precedent? Why the haste? Think 2010. The answer is suggested by the fact that every Republican (except the hapless John McCain) thinks giving corporations unlimited influence in elections is the greatest idea since sliced bread; a resounding victory for “free speech.”
On the other hand, Democrats are enraged and scared senseless. Over in Louisville, John Yarmuth must wake up thinking, “How should I vote on health care reform now that Humana can donate, say $15 million, to my (primary and general election) political opponents?” Remember how the Lexington government got jerked around by the German-owned and euphemistically named “Kentucky American” water corporation during the “condemnation” process, and how the governments and citizens of Franklin County and Lexington and the Public Service Commission got jerked around again by the pipeline fiasco? Think what foreign corporations can now do to our elections in the future. Think what a chilling effect it will have on legislative governance after a few incumbents are knocked off by multi-million-dollar donations from multi-billion-dollar multinational corporations. It won’t take but a handful of defeats to get everyone else in line with their interests. Still, I doubt Democrats can do very well regardless of how they try to toe the line. Corporations will always regard their motives with suspicion. Corporate wealth may hear a Democrat “say” he is bought and paid for, but they will always know that the Republican “is” bought and paid for, and quite pleased to be so.
The corporate “person” has now achieved near-total control over the nation’s election process and thus, real people (yes, even you Tea Party people). A legal “fiction” has become a catastrophic lie.
Mark Henry
Frankfort
It’s called
fornication!
To The Editor:
Great New Jersey news you sneaked in on page D3 last Sunday: three N.J. Democrat Senators abstaining from legalizing gay marriage. Yea! In New Jersey that takes guts. They must have opened the dictionary at “marriage” and seen what that very old English word means – so, not only brave were they but bright too! Give ’em an A! The New Jersey article (and you by your choice Mr. Editor) gave them an F - Boo!
For unmarried people, friendships – decent caring friendships – deserve all the support society can offer. Friendship is precious, like marital faithfulness. The new “gay” refers not to friendship but to fornication. Fornication (see dictionary) is simply bad news – and so popular is it, hetero or homo, it’s not even news. We want to move the culture onward and upward, not backward and downward, don’t we? We’re gonna have to fight our wusser halves, aren’t we? Could we gird the loins? – especially perhaps?
Mark L. Thornewill
Frankfort
Americans
see the light
To the Editor:
Massachusetts voters have fired the shot heard across the USA and possibly the world. Once again the people of the Boston Tea Party have made a statement about the policies of the puppet President B. Hussein Obama, Emanuel, Axelrod and the Democrat government. The voting citizens of America have been given a chance to save the USA from the socialist spending policies of the Obama administration.
BO has been slapped on one cheek by Virginia voters, slapped on the other cheek by New Jersey voters and punched in the nose by Massachusetts voters. My spirits are lifted because the American voter is waking up and seeing the light at last. Who could have imagined that the voters of the most Democrat state in the union would fill the seat held by the Kennedy family since the 1970s with a Republican candidate? It appears that even the Democrat voters are beginning to see that BO and his administration are hell-bent on the destruction of this nation.
When BO stated, “I will fundamentally change this country,” apparently very few listened. Let’s look at his great accomplishments to date:
>He signed into law a massive so-called “stimulus bill” to push his socialist positions such as controlling our banks and other financial institutions, and taking control of two of our American auto manufacturers and then closing many of their dealerships across the USA.
>He issued an executive order to close the Guantanamo prison for terrorists and bring the terrorists to the homeland so they can recruit from the criminal base here in the continental USA. This also grants them all the rights guaranteed all citizens under the constitution.
>He has weakened our position on the world stage by apologizing to the world for our being a strong nation while bowing to leaders of radical Muslim nations assuring them that we only want to talk and will take no action.
>Putting on trial naval personnel engaged in defending the USA while protecting the Muslim who attempted to blow up an airplane on Christmas Day. He was too busy playing golf to attend to the nation’s defense.
Do we really want this puppet and this Democrat administration? I think more Democrats should get BO to campaign for them. This would help the people regain control of the USA by voting for leaders who listen to what we need. We have our vote so we need to use it more wisely than in our last election. Our first chance comes in November. Let’s vote the Socialist Democrats OUT!
William Rice
Frankfort
We’re not
all brothers
To the Editor:
Bob Gullette told us in a recent letter that faith exists to “unite people, not divide us.” Not so.
The purpose of religion is not to unite. True, the Latin word religio, means to bind together, and “religion” signifies binding together people who share a vision of the highest good. However, in truth religion divides even as it unites. Recall these words of the Christ: “Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword.... Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation...” (Luke 12; Matthew 10 (Douay)) So while unity is a necessary attribute of religion, it is not its purpose, any more than government is the purpose of the state.
A vision of the highest good, with whatever this entails, is the purpose of religion.
Ironically, people who preach tolerance today are often those who demonstrate the greatest intolerance. That is, they will only tolerate other tolerant people. In asserting the supposed common ground of all religions, Bob in reality only imposes his own grounds of value and meaning. For him, any supernatural highest good is personal, but humanity is a universal.
The brotherhood of man is not my religion. And to paraphrase English journalist G.K. Chesterton, the only just conflicts are religious conflicts. Indeed, indirectly, all wars are religious wars, as they all imply what men truly value, at least what they are willing to kill for, and maybe even to die for.
Anyway, demanding unity is most surely the best way to kill the peace. If I would consider something a sin if done by me, and man is one great brotherhood, then the fact that you commit the sin condemns me as surely as it does you. To answer that question, “And who is my neighbor?” as the moderns have – as every homo sapiens indiscriminately without regard to the highest good – is to condemn the world to endless wars in pursuit of endless peace. See the bloody ideological (not religious) shenanigans started by the previous U.S. administration.
Knowledge and understanding of other religions is fine. It is essential in our leaders (despite the claims of Fox News). However, it simply is not helpful to the cause of peace to minimize the real differences between religions and peoples, and in effect throw up a new religion of man to which all are required to pay respect.
Robert Salyer
Frankfort
City, county
lobbyists safe
To the Editor:
The General Assembly wants to impose additional screening for the Kentucky Association of Counties and the Kentucky League of Cities. Can you imagine?
That is one of those “Close the barn door” statements!
KACo and KLC probably are the most powerful lobbies in the state. Administrators and board members allowed several million dollars to be misappropriated (that’s a kind word) stolen and now the General Assembly, at the request of State Auditor Crit Luallen, has suggested some changes.
Now the barn door closes.
If you are a member of the General Assembly, either KACo or KLC has been buying your lobster and steak dinners for several years, not counting the cocktails and entertainment. The conventions held by KACo or KLC are always attended with enthusiasm. Now we know why.
If anyone believes the General Assembly is going to do anything to impair the vote-getting lobby of either, then please leave me a quarter for the tooth fairy.
KACo and KLC are the outbound voter organization programs for incumbents in both city, county and state politics. They do have influence in the state. Even with more oversight, eventually the same thing will occur again. Money and politics are best buddies. Greed is their daddy!
Jim Anderson Stivers
Frankfort
Some people
really do care
To the Editor:
May I relay to your readers a nice story about individuals in our hometown going out of their way to help another?
On Sunday morning Jan. 24 on East Main in a hard driving rain, a vehicle pulled up next to me, opened their window and waved to tell me that in front of Kentucky State University I had lost a hubcap. Not only did these kind ladies flag me down, but they had driven out of their way to follow and let me know. They then turned around to lead me back to exactly where the wheel cover lay off the side of the road. I would never have found it without them.
While this kindness was in no way earth-changing, it was a great example of people helping each other. This kind action by these ladies was testament to how going out of your way a little bit can improve situations for other people. The philosophy of helping others and random acts of kindness can improve every aspect of our lives. From Haiti to health care to hubcaps, we should all help those in need.
And one more thing that really doesn’t matter but that might impact one/more of your readers is that the unknown ladies that went out of their way were black and I am not. I know I’d have done the same thing for another, or at a minimum tried. If we would all try to help each other more, it would be a much better world for everyone. Kindness is blind to race, as we should all be.
Ceci Mitchell
Frankfort
Government
care no answer
To the Editor:
It was interesting to see the return of our local liberal who pled his case for health care reform in the most recent issue of this newspaper. He spoke of “facts” yet none were presented. He seems to feel that the government should take over the health care system but as a patient at the Veterans Administration Medical Center, I know that this does not guarantee satisfaction. Everybody I know wants to improve our health care system but any solution must include tort reform and a definite plan to pay for it. In the meantime, perhaps the concerned writer would feel better if he adopted an uninsured person or family and paid their health care costs.Matt Shuy
Frankfort