Click here to subscribe today or Login.
Voter weighs in on fiscal ‘flakes’
It took only a few seconds. On Fox News, on June 26, anchor Chris Wallace asked Congresswoman Michele Bachmann: “Are you a flake?” The next day Bachmann announced her candidacy for president.
Webster’s defines “flake” as an oddball. Is Bachmann a flake? Let’s see.
Bachmann is a mother of five, foster mother of 23, has been married for 30-plus years and is a small-business owner with 50 employees. Check.
Bachmann is intelligent, well-educated and holds a law degree and a master’s degree in tax law. Prior to entering politics, she was a successful practicing tax attorney. Check.
Bachmann is a three-term U.S. congresswoman and also served in the Minnesota state Senate. Check.
Bachmann won’t vote to increase the federal debt ceiling without tying any future increase to a serious reduction in spending. She will cut federal spending by 25 percent, repeal “ObamaCare,” kill capital gains taxes and cap personal income taxes. Check.
Bachmann said: “I am a Christian, as is my husband. I gave my heart to Jesus Christ and since that time I’ve been a person of prayer.” Check.
Was Wallace attempting to discredit a fiscally conservative Christian woman seeking higher office? You decide.
In November 2012, we’ll be asked to vote for a fiscally conservative “flake” such as Bachmann or, based on his economic policies, arguably the worst president in U.S. history, Barack Hussein Obama.
For U.S. senator, our choices will be Bob Casey, who voted for more than $2 trillion in government boondoggles or a fiscally conservative Republican “flake.”
For U.S. congress person from the 11th District, our choices will be fiscally conservative “flake” Lou Barletta or a Democratic challenger who probably will say we need to rein in spending, but like former Rep. Paul Kanjorski and Sen. Casey, would continue to bankrupt America.
I’ll be voting for the flakes.
Bill called risky to state’s forests
A congressman from California wants to put some of Pennsylvania’s wildest forests at greater risk.
U.S. Rep. Kevin McCarthy’s hostile bill targets millions of roadless acres of American wildlands, including some in Pennsylvania. The bill, H.R. 1581 (the “Wilderness and Roadless Areas Release Act”), would strip protections for 25,000 pristine acres in the Allegheny National Forest.
As someone who has spent countless hours hiking through the Allegheny’s backcountry, I find this bill to be an insult to the region. Not only does the Allegheny provide anglers with a great place to fish, it also provides families with a great atmosphere for canoeing and outdoor recreation. The region’s older oak, black cherry, hemlock and white pine forests provide hunters with ideal habitats in which to hunt for deer and other game.
Four Allegheny forest tracts that qualify for wilderness designation under the Wilderness Act of 1964 – Allegheny Front, Clarion River, Cornplanter and Tracy Ridge – could be stripped of protections.
Even if you are not concerned with protecting Pennsylvania’s wildest places, you might be interested in protecting its bottom line. In 2006, more than four million Pennsylvanians went hunting, fishing or wildlife watching, which generated more than $4 billion for the state’s economy.
This attack on our wild lands is also an assault on Pennsylvania’s conservation legacy: the late Republican U.S. Rep. John P. Saylor of Johnstown was an original sponsor of The Wilderness Act that has conserved land throughout the country.
Readers should urge their representatives in Congress to not strip the Allegheny’s wildest places of protections, so that future generations can enjoy some of the commonwealth’s most beautiful outdoor recreation areas.
For more information on protecting Pennsylvania’s wilderness, visit www.pawild.org.
Pringle burn plan ignites a dispute
I am fuming too, fuming that a non-resident such as Ron Ashton of Gouldsboro (“Pringle’s trash burning gets reader fuming mad,” June 29) would stick his proboscis into the subject of burning in the borough where I live and vote!
Mr. Ashton suggests that the council in this town permits the burning of “trash.” Let me enlighten him. Pringle does not permit the burning of trash. It does permit the open burning of paper and paper products.
As for pollution, Mr. Ashton must ride a bicycle to work. Heaven forbid that he drives an auto that spews pollution!
Permitting the burning of paper and paper products reduces the pollution from a truck that makes several trips to a landfill – that is the epitome of pollution itself. An increase in loads of additional bags means more carbon monoxide pollution from additional landfill trips, not to mention an increase in disposal fees and the cost of plastic bags, and the additional cost of fuel for the truck.
Mr. Ashton should keep his proboscis in the area where he resides, not in the area where other people reside and are familiar with the subject at hand.
Send us your opinion
Letters to the editor must include the writer’s name, address and daytime phone number for verification. Letters should be no more than 250 words. We reserve the right to edit and limit writers to one published letter every 30 days.
• E-mail: [email protected]
• Fax: 570-829-5537
• Mail: Mail Bag, The Times Leader, 15 N. Main St., Wilkes-Barre, PA 1871 1