Letters - Thursday online

Government action needed to fix economy

The Republican Party appears now to be in even more trouble than we had thought. Now GOP leaders are kowtowing to a daytime radio comedian, Rush Limbaugh, the Don Rickles of politics. He's the master of fatuous insults and invective ("Republican leader apologizes for Rush Limbaugh spat," The Gazette, March 3).

Now the GOP seems to be reduced to its leaders maligning the attempts by the new administration to get some control of an economy in free-fall. Almost unanimously they vote against Barack Obama's proposals to rescue an economy wrecked by eight years of reckless, greedy, unregulated, free-market speculators cheered on by Republican profiteers, including the president. Look around at what that did to us.

The great American philosopher John Dewey pointed out that all societies have a choice: We can put control of the nation's economic system in the hands of unrestrained, unregulated private entrepreneurs, over which we citizens have no power at all, or we can put control in big government, over which citizens have at least some control via the vote. Take your choice. And look at what the private profiteers have wrought over the past eight years.

And Limbaugh doesn't seem so amusing.

Larimore Nicholl, Colorado Springs


Good thing GOP not in charge

How low can the Republican Party sink? When their chosen national committee chairman is forced to publicly kiss the bloated backside of a drug-addicted, anti-American blowhard such as Rush Limbaugh, real Americans are grateful this party is not running or representing our nation. What an embarrassing spectacle this is for the Grand Old Party.

Joan Simoff, Colorado Springs


City should keep guns off street

The Police Department recommended against auctioning seized firearms ("Public safety, buses won't escape trims," The Gazette, Feb. 19). Maybe they fear the consequences of five fewer officers coupled with more weapons on the street. Why was Jan Martin the only City Council member to agree with the police?

Vice Mayor Larry Small's justification for gun sales, "I think that's an item that has value, just like the automobiles we sell," raises questions. Why not sell confiscated crack cocaine and heroin too? Does the city really think it's a good idea to be in the munitions business?

What message does this decision send to citizens about council's commitment to public safety?

Bruce Hamilton, Colorado Springs


Refs biased toward YMCA teams

I agree that it is terrible that a parent feels he needs to take matters into his own hands, but I also feel that if the coaches, parents and YMCA staff would stand up for what is right, this parent would not have taken matters into his own hands ("Dad detained in fight at game," The Gazette, Feb. 22).

My children played basketball with the YMCA four years ago and I refuse to allow them to play with the Y again. They have played with the Police Athletic League since then and the referees at the YMCA games are still extremely biased toward the YMCA members and very unfair to all involved.

For example, two years ago, one of my sons teammates was pushed by a YMCA team member and fell head-first into the cement wall and the refs didn't even call the foul. Last year, my son's team played in the YMCA Championship Games and whenever his team had more points, the refs would start calling invalid fouls against them. Just two weeks prior to the "Dad detained in fight at game" incident, the refs were not calling blatant fouls (pushing and tripping) against the YMCA team, but were calling all the fouls against my son's team. During this game, one of my sons teammates was pushed so hard that he flew into the bleachers. The following week at my other son's game, the same thing. The YMCA team was not being called on blatant fouls (pushing, elbowing and pulling on jerseys at suggestion of the YMCA team coach, which was overheard by some parents), but my son's team was called on every foul.

I believe that the point of this incident has been missed and I am honestly surprised that more parents and coaches have not reacted in the same manner. I do not believe what this parent did was right, but after so many blatantly missed calls and so many unnecessary calls that are made by these refs, can you seriously blame this parent?

Rebekah Gostnell, Colorado Springs


Too many insiders doing well

Please tell me because I don't get it. How is it that Congress can outlaw pet chimps within a week or two of an assault, but they can't outlaw Credit Default Swaps (CDS), despite the evidence of how these are destroying our economy and months of publicized information. CDS (the equivalent were banned about 100 years ago by Congress) were legalized during Bill Clinton's reign, with the guidance of Alan Greenspan.

Of course, the reason CDS have not been made illegal is because the Washington insiders want "their share" of the wealth. So while they bankrupt the world and the taxpayer, they pocket and have pocketed millions. We will continue to bailout AIG with billions while it pays millions per insider in CDS to millionaires.

Aren't we lucky?

It's time to write and call your congressman.

Marilynne Moose, Colorado Springs


It's time to clean house in the House

We probably still have a chance to avoid becoming the United Socialist States of America, but we have to get busy.

Next year, all members of the U.S. House of Representatives will be up for re-election, and we need to have a new one from the 5th Congressional District. We need a representative who will not shovel our tax money to his campaign contributors with earmarks, and will work to repeal all the insane spending bills this Congress is passing.

We also have a chance to replace one of our U.S. senators. Both of the ones we have now value their loyalty to the Democratic Party far above any loyalty to the citizens of Colorado and our nation.

If we can have a nation-wide campaign to replace our existing Congress, we may be able to save our nation.

Donald W. Erickson, Colorado Springs


No one's kicking Obama's hind end

James Spieth's comparison of Congress to cheerleaders, was apt, though hardly new ("Obama leads cheers," Letters, Feb. 28) If Spieth were to go back and watch videos of 50 years of State of the Union speeches, he'd find members of Congress have been morphing into pom-pom carriers for decades. But I am confused about Spieth's reference to "come from behind" and "getting their hind-ends kicked." Who does he see as challenging Team Obama right now?

Domestically, the Democrats are clearly in control of Congress and the president's approval rating hovers consistently around 70 percent. In fact, Obama has more to worry about with Democrats challenging aspects of his stimulus package, than he does the largely irrelevant Republicans.

If Spieth is talking about global politics, there is not a single nation that can take advantage of our weakened economy. If he hasn't noticed, this is a global recession, and many nations in Asia and Europe are suffering a lot worse than we are. It's true that China is positioned to make the most of a future upturn by leveraging its resources and relationships, perhaps better than we can, but it faces a monumental stack of environmental, health, and population problems. The day China becomes a global leader is decades away.

In short, the cheerleaders Feb. 24 were clamoring for President Barack Obama to move the ball up the field. It would be good to see some principled opposition bring up challenges to aspects of his stimulus and bank-bailout plans, but right now the opposition hasn't even put points on the scoreboard, let alone moved to a conquering position on the field.

Loring Wirbel, Colorado Springs


Government takes before it can give

It has been said that where there is smoke, there is fire. A more apt description of President Barack Obama's tax breaks is "where there is smoke, there are mirrors."

Next year's budget includes a tax cut for the poor and middle class. The budget also includes increased taxes for utility companies, increased taxes for off-shore drilling, and cap-and-trade fees that will substantially affect utility companies. Obama's chair of the Council of Economic Advisers Christina Romer admits this will result in significantly higher utility costs for everyone, but explains that these will be offset by the tax cuts.

In other words, the government will give people money they will then have to use to pay for higher utility fees the utility companies will have to charge to pay increased taxes and environmental fees to the government. A nice, simple example of regressive taxes.
The government gives with one hand and takes away with the other.

Michael Schmidt, Colorado Springs