www.roanoke.com

Barack Obama would mean more of the same for America

Barack Obama promises to give 95 percent of Americans a tax cut. But the Tax Foundation reported in 2006 that 41 percent had no tax liability. Obama can't cut their taxes; but he can write them a stimulus check, which is what he will do. That's not a tax cut; it is increased spending.

He also promises change, wanting us to believe that change is putting a liberal Democrat in the White House to work with other liberal Democrats like Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Charles Schumer, Charles Rangel, Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein. He will not be able to resist the tremendous pressure a Democratic-controlled Congress will heave on him from day one.

This Congress has the lowest approval rating of any Congress in the last 60 years, lower than President Bush's rating. It did nothing last year. It's doing nothing this year.

Obama in the White House will be more of the same. Obama has voted with a majority of his Democratic colleagues 96 percent of the time during the current Congress. So much for the "change" message. An Obama administration will mean more government spending, higher taxes, income redistribution, government-controlled health care and a weaker military.

McCain will uphold moral values

We are less than 40 days away from electing the president of the United States. I must say I sincerely hope we can put our partisanship aside and vote for the person who is the most qualified to lead this country.

I have always considered myself neither Republican nor Democrat, but a conservative who believes that God should come first when selecting our commander in chief. I also am not ashamed that I am against abortion and same-sex marriage.

I will stand by those principles when I cast my vote for John McCain as our next president. I realize some do not consider moral issues that important. However, it is our duty to uphold those values in this upcoming election.

We should vote John McCain/Sarah Palin as our next president and vice president, respectively.

How has the last election worked out?

With the presidential election rapidly approaching, here is something for eligible voters to consider.

In the election of 2004, there were about 5,240,000 people eligible to vote in Virginia. Those eligible voters wound up in three groups. The 39 percent who didn't vote, the 33 percent who voted for Bush/Cheney and the 28 percent who voted for Kerry/Edwards.

The first two groups got exactly what they deserved. Which group did you choose to be in?

Webb needs to answer his mail

I've written three letters to Sen. Jim Webb in the last six weeks. I have yet to get an answer to my questions.

How can we vote for a political party when we can't get answers from our congressmen as to how they would vote on legislation in Congress?

With a popularity rating in the single digits for Congress, you would think that our representatives would respond more readily. This is poor representation.

The exploding debt

is hardly conservative

Re: "Virginia companies feel effects of banking crisis," Sept. 18 front page:

I saw that the Federal Reserve Bank was given permission to lend $85 billion to the AIG insurance group. My question is, where is this money coming from when our government owes $10 trillion?

How can anybody vote Republican when the Republicans have increased our debt from $1 trillion when Ronald Reagan became president to $10 trillion under George W. Bush and have the nerve to call themselves conservatives?

I can't understand why, when we are the richest nation in the world, we have any debt. We have to pay interest on this debt. A trillion is 999 billion plus a billion. A billion is 999 million plus a million. A million is 999 thousand plus a thousand.

Don't just repeat media clichés

It never ceases to amaze me, the number of letters to the editor from well-meaning people who write using the same clichés and words that they read or hear in the media.

Case in point: "This illegal war is about oil." OK, where is the oil we are getting? Why is gasoline $4 a gallon?

About this "illegal" war: Our army went into Iraq to remove a ruthless dictator who had no regard for human life. There are mass graves to prove this.

You want to talk weapons of mass destruction? How about a million-man army descending on villagers and farmers? The use of chemical warfare is banned in almost every developed country in the world. Saddam Hussein had no problem using it on his own people.

WMDs don't necessarily have to be nuclear. Since Saddam was deposed, the U.S. has not waged war against the Iraqi people. We have waged war on the side of and in cooperation with the Iraqi people to purge terrorists from their country.

I am not trying to condone the war, just question the media a little and maybe get others to do the same.

Glebe's residents are well protected

Little noticed in the lengthy news story by Jay Conley, "The Glebe faces a crossroads" (Sept. 7 front page), were positive statements in the last few paragraphs that bear repeating.

Answering his own question, "And what will happen to The Glebe's residents if the facility's finances don't improve?" Conley referred to two officials who indicated that current residents would see little or no change, even if management is different.

The first official, Sandee Levin, president of the Virginia Association of Nonprofit Homes for the Aging, said, "There may be something in the future that changes, but these residents would not really be affected." The other official was Ken Schrad, director of information resources for the State Corporation Commission.

In a telephone conversation with us, Schrad confirmed that current life-care contracts would most likely carry into the future with little or no change. In fact, residents are taking steps to ensure that their contracts are protected.

Regardless of the outcome of the financial restructuring that is underway, The Glebe continues to be the premier retirement community in this valley and an excellent choice for all those seniors still looking.

Residents, The Glebe

Others pay for Carilion's 'charity'

Cheating in a card game is something most people find despicable. In the Roanoke Valley, we have a major card game going on.

The players are the paying patients, doctors, health insurance providers, Carilion and now an outsider: The Wall Street Journal has pulled up a seat. Carilion has bristled at that, as well it should because it is clearly dealing cards under the table.

It has admitted it is overcharging one of the other players, the health insurance providers of paying patients, to pay for services it provides to those unable to pay, i.e., "charity cases." And yet its people write all these letters to The Roanoke Times bragging how they give health services to people who cannot pay.

Let's examine that a moment. Does Carilion have bragging rights when it is reaching over and stealing from the other player's pot to pay for it? Cheating is a good game if you can get away with it.