Another view

To the editor:

This is a rebuttal to the letter from the Catholic woman from Smallwood who believes abortion is a choice, not a crime titled, “A concern for life that ends at birth.”

A real man does all to care for and protect his family. At 20 years old, I paid for my girlfriend to have an abortion. Abortion is murder of the worst kind and I am guilty! But, by the grace of God, I am also forgiven.

Abortion must never be used as birth control. The fact is like it or not a woman who is pregnant is already “mommy.” Whether the baby inside the protection and care of that mother is wanted or not is a spiritual issue and that is where faith comes in. It is also where people in the church and community can step up and provide various resources and helps and love that person and her baby.

The Supreme Court is completely wrong on their pro-death decision and the back-alley butcher and coat-hanger idea is as ludicrous as thinking that if a sad person wants to commit suicide he or she should have the right to have a Medicare or Medicaid paid doctor to do it for him or her because that person might mess it up and become disabled rather than dead: pure, real evil is behind that thinking.

Jesus said, “Therefore whoever humbles himself like this little child is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven. And whoever welcomes a little child like this in My name welcomes Me.” (Saint Matthew 18:4.)

Please, I lovingly urge you to not kill your baby within you or vote for anyone who thinks that is a choice. Here is an early “Merry Christmas.”

Baker supports referendum on water infrastructure

To the editor:

On November 4, Pennsylvania voters will have an opportunity, through ballot referendum, to decide whether to authorize $400 million in new borrowing for the construction, rehabilitation, and improvement of community drinking water and sewage treatment systems. Additional funding is critical to protecting public health and our environment, and to creating a stronger economy.

This plan is a good start to address some of the problems facing our aging, inadequate water systems. Much of our water infrastructure is outdated and does not meet modern environmental standards. Residential and commercial rehabilitation and development depend on modern facilities. Quality water and sufficient sewer capacity are items high on the shopping list of families and employers making a decision on where to locate.

Publicly owned water systems that have not deteriorated are facing even tougher federal and state requirements to reduce the amount of nutrient pollution in streams and rivers. Complying with these mandates requires significant investment. As a result, the grants and loans made available through PENNVEST, if this referendum is approved, would not only be directed at plant upgrades, but also toward water conservation and reuse efforts.

State funding is crucial because it is very difficult for municipalities to come up with the funds to make necessary capital improvements, and costly upgrades could be passed on to consumers through increased fees. Even with $400 million in new funding, Pennsylvania’s infrastructure needs are so great there will be considerable competition for available dollars.

When you vote in November, please make sure to look for this question on the ballot, and consider what it means to our future.

Food pantry in distress

To the editor:

I have worked at the Ecumenical Food Pantry in Milford for 12 years, and I have never seen families suffer as much as now. We get more calls every week from families who are struggling to make ends meet. From around 1,584 families a year ago, we now have 1,745 families who depend on our ecumenical food pantry to get by.

Government officials just passed a rescue package for Wall Street. Who is going to rescue these more than 1,745 families who are suffering? How long will it take for the $700 billion to trickle down to Milford?

The confounding rural vote

To the editor:

For about a hundred years, corporations have brainwashed most of the rural population. What you hear is an automated answer that says, “No big government.” It is a partial truth. And in some cases, it has exacerbated the very problems rural voters face. It is misguided blanket anger for all regulations, whether of Wall Street, food, energy or intolerance. Sarah Palin is alive and well in this misguided rural dilemma. We all have the given right to vote for whomever we want. Still, I have the right to be disappointed in a middle and working class who votes for a party that favors the less than one percent wealthy. Three times in a row.

Frangipane a true Democrat

To the editor:

In his Letter to the Editor in the October 16 issue, George Hathaway makes several allegations concerning Denise Frangipane, the Democratic candidate for the Bethel Town Council.

Mr. Hathaway’s assertion that Frangipane is not a “true-blue Democrat” is erroneous. His statement that “Frangipane had only been a Democrat for one day” before the 2007 Democratic caucus is simply not accurate. What is correct is that Frangipane, unaffiliated at the time, had been asked by members of the Bethel Democratic Committee to consider running. This prompted her to register as a Democrat. However, because she registered very close to the caucus meeting, she was prohibited from entering the caucus and speaking to the assembled voters. Nevertheless, she lost the nomination in 2007 by a mere six votes: not bad for someone who is “not a true-blue Democrat!” The fact remains that Frangipane won the 2008 Democratic caucus. Evidently more people consider her a “real” Democrat than do not. As a result, she is the official Democratic nominee for this election.

The real point, of course, is not when Frangipane registered as a Democrat, but the fact that she did, and that she has been a loyal party member ever since, abiding by local, county and state party rules that prohibit her from attempting in any way to undermine a legally nominated candidate for any office.

Mr. Hathaway’s statement that “Frangipane has set out to vilify the Democratic Committee and the current town board and to split the Democratic Party,” is simply not true; and is obviously based on second-hand information. I can tell you for a fact that after the Democratic caucus, Frangipane requested a meeting with the Democratic Committee in order to find out exactly what their role would be in her upcoming campaign. Both Frangipane and her supporters have consistently taken the high road and resisted any opportunities to cause dissension among the Democratic ranks.

Frangipane has consistently insisted upon avoiding any opportunity to engage in “negative campaigning” and has asked that voters judge her fitness to represent them by listening to what she has said in public and asking her about any concerns they may have. She is dedicated to public service, has new exciting ideas, a youthful enthusiasm and a great deal of experience in matters that concern the town of Bethel.

We need informed voters who do not respond to “negative campaigning” but who demand openness, fairness, honesty, and commitment on the part of the nominees for public office. Denise Frangipane offers just these qualities.

‘Morning Glow’

To the editor:

A line in the song “Morning Glow,” from “Pippin” goes: “Winds of Change are set to blow and sweep this whole land through… ” This is exactly the feeling I have about the coming Presidential election. Despite the present political, social and economic maelstrom engulfing our country, we have real cause for optimism and a tremendous opportunity to restore America to its past greatness and full potential. This opportunity is embodied in Barack Obama. With no disrespect to Senator McCain, a courageous and authentic individual, I am convinced that Senator Obama possesses the right blend of vision, intelligence and skill to inspire us past the pettiness and partisanship that have held us back and that will lead us to a more thoughtful, respectful and accountable government for all.

Please remember to exercise the privilege on this most important election of our lifetime.

Needed: a new style of leadership

To the editor:

Finance ministers of the G7 nations met with President Bush to devise a global economic stabilizing plan. United effort is critical. Future situations (terrorism and global climate change high among them) will mandate that world leaders collaborate for success and survival.

Which Presidential candidate can do this best? Obama and McCain’s opposite leadership styles were compared in an October 9 USA Today article. Highlights include:

Fred Greenstein, author of “The Presidential Difference,” says McCain is impulsive, emotional and “breaks a lot of china along the way.” Ronald Heifitz, leadership professor at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, says McCain uses collaboration only when he has to swallow the pill of being with people he doesn’t like. He fires senior people, gets into altercations and feuds and has a confrontational style.

Senator Chuck Grassley (R) IA says McCain didn’t talk with him for two years after a disagreement on a bill, three years for Senator Bob Kerrey (D) NE. Senator Trent Lott says their differences were sometimes close to “mortal combat,” that people allow McCain’s style because of his former POW status and as President he would be “unpredictable. It’ll be a wild ride.”

Recently, McCain has been counseled to tone down his divisive campaign rhetoric that has gotten the crowds yelling “traitor” or “kill him.” And we saw McCain’s bristling style in the debates, even calling Obama “that one” in a derogatory tone.

By comparison, Heifitz says Obama would bind and repair relationships among Americans and the rest of the world, which is a “practical foundation for governing.” With trust and respect people “can withstand the forces of division as conflicts break out.” After the loss of America’s standing in the eyes of the world we desperately need that.

Kenneth Mack said Obama, as president of the Harvard Law Review, was “good at heading off controversies before they got started. He got us doing the things we needed to do,” even though it was a contentious, politically and racially divided time. Brad Berenson, Republican White House counsel, said Obama won trust by being “fair, a good listener, inclusive, and by not aggressively taking sides.”

The choice seems clear to me. I hope it is for you as well.

McCain and Palin mud

To the editor:

In their final three weeks of campaigning, John McCain and Sarah Palin, even Cindy McCain, are grabbing anything they can reach and flinging it at Barack Obama. They claim Barack Obama voted not to fund the troops. Barack Obama voted against a bill to fund the troops because it did not have a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq. They didn’t mention that John McCain voted against a similar bill to fund the troops around the same time, because it did have a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq.

For the past 18 months, Barack Obama has been on TV daily communicating with the American people. There is no mystery about Barack Obama. Every word and position of his has been exhaustively dissected by the media. Every lie against him has been debunked. Barack Obama continues to inspire and touch American hearts and minds. Whatever stale and recycled mud John McCain and Sarah Palin are flinging at this late stage, it is not sticking. Dry mud turns to dust and blows away. At this moment of economic crisis, the American people want a leader with a vision, not mud-slingers.

A calm hand on the tiller

To the editor:

Here is one reason why I will not vote for John McCain and Sarah Palin on November 4. I am alarmed at John McCain’s increasing signs of aging. I do not think he is physically and mentally up to the grueling job of the presidency. So, that means I have to seriously consider how Sarah Palin would be as President. Palin reminds me of a loose cannon on a ship in a hurricane. Her inexperience coupled with her braggadocio or cockiness is potentially very explosive.

We need a strong, steady hand and a bright mind at the helm. We also need someone willing and able to use diplomacy. That is Barack Obama. He is a deliberate thinker, has strong moral character, and has empathy for others. I think he cares about you and me and future generations. For those who might not want to vote for him because of the color of his skin, remember that he is just as white as he is black. How’s that for bringing the country together?

And, I am comfortable with Joe Biden in the wings.

Palin as stealth candidate

To the editor:

Sarah Palin is the stealth Presidential candidate. This is because John McCain has cancer. He has had four malignant melanomas removed since 1993. The cancer of greatest concern: the Stage II melanoma on his cheek.

There is a 66 percent 10-year survival rate with such melanomas. It has been eight years since his diagnosis. This leaves a 34 percent chance McCain may die of melanoma in the next two years.

Should we be concerned? Probably, since younger people have a better prognosis than older people; women a better prognosis than men; and melanomas on the limbs have a better prognosis than those on the face.

Treatment can be incapacitating. This may be what conservative Republicans hope for: that McCain is incapacitated during treatment, and Palin takes over; assuming the Presidency by stealth.

I congratulate the right wing for engineering Palin’s path to the Presidency knowing she could not have won it otherwise.

A disservice to our country

To the editor:

Election Day is near. In prior letters to The River Reporter about Sarah Palin, I’ve pointed out reasons why a vote for her (via a vote for McCain) would be a disservice to our country.

Even if you agree with John McCain’s policies, the fact that he chose this running mate should disqualify him from consideration as our next President. We must seriously question his judgment in picking a person who has shown herself to be eminently unqualified as a public servant in any capacity. She is an accomplished liar, vindictive, self-dealing and a proven abuser of the powers granted to her as Alaska’s governor.

The few unscripted interviews she’s given since being named as McCain’s running mate have exposed her as at best, stumbling, fumbling and foolish and at worst, a spectacular nitwit. We’ve already had plenty of that with our sitting President and it’s enough. It’s now time to make a brighter future for ourselves.

I know that, sadly, some voters find it hard to get past Barack Obama’s race. I ask them to think about all this and try to put country above prejudice. How very scary it is that, if McCain were elected, Sarah Palin could be ushered into the Oval Office as our President on a moment’s notice. Common sense and patriotism scream at us to avert that possibility.