‘Taking our country back’ isn’t a racist wish
A recent letter (“Take our country back? From whom, I wonder,” Readers write, Opinion, Jan. 22) aptly displays today’s norm: that any hint of disagreement with the political left must be branded as racism. The author did indeed play the race card — and I raise him a “Constitution card.”
As a Libertarian, the phrase “take our country back” has a completely different meaning to me.
I think about the concepts of limited government, federalism and individual responsibility that were foundations of this country.
“Taking it back” to me means a return to constitutional principles (particularly attention to the 10th Amendment) and to constraining the federal government as outlined in the enumerated powers.
Sadly, Republicans have been highly complicit in violating these principles — but they do talk the game, and a return to those principles is what they mean by “taking back.”
To impugn a racial motivation is simply another liberal stretch.
Mike Anthony, Duluth
The word ‘racism’ has become meaningless
A letter writer (“Take our country back? From whom, I wonder,” Readers write, Opinion, Jan. 22) claims racism is at work.
Our great nation was founded as a republic of small government. That government has grown to outrageous proportions, intruding into the private lives of its citizens.
Unless the reader is saying that one race is behind this intrusion, how is this racism? Those who have overused the race card have made the word meaningless.
Marcia Karon, Atlanta
Cartoon about chef was ‘beyond tasteless’
I am writing regarding the Mike Luckovich cartoon about Paula Deen (Opinion, Jan. 22).
I have often been offended by Luckovich’s cartoons in the past, but this one is absolutely over the top. It’s mean and petty.
Paula Deen is a Georgia treasure. She has never done anything but work very hard and bring a lot of joy into folks’ lives with her cooking, her personality and her classy representation of this state.
If folks don’t want to eat her cooking, they don’t have to —but to take cheap shots at someone over their health issues is beyond tasteless.
Michelle Davis, Marietta
Scholarship shouldn’t consider family income
Not surprisingly, the Democratic lawmakers of our state are inciting class warfare in the HOPE scholarship system.
Sen. Jason Carter’s recommendation regarding family income flies in the face of equality.
The HOPE scholarship is entirely merit-based — meaning that a student’s ability to pay for his or her own education is not a factor in determining if he or she receives it.
We (the Georgia taxpayers) fund the state colleges and universities — and all Georgia taxpayers or children of Georgia taxpayers should be able to strive to qualify for this merit-based award.
Anything less would be discriminatory.
Lynn Watson, Sandy Springs
President’s brand of medicine nauseating
President Barack Obama would like us to believe that it is Congress’ failure to act that is the biggest reason for Washington’s inability to provide solutions for our country.
This is the same person who (as a U.S. senator from Illinois) often voted “present” while in office. He could not even bring himself to take a stand on anything — but had the “audacity” to hope that his unwillingness to even vote would somehow get things done.
Now, we should give him more power to circumvent those legislators who disagree with him and make a public display of their disapproval by voting “no” to his government-building, social-engineering mantra.
I would rather get nothing from Washington for the remainder of his tenure in the White House than get the medicine that he is prescribing.
Paul Spencer, Marietta
No matter what Obama says, bailouts wrong
The president’s State of the Union speech was long and full of things to ponder.
His discussion of the U.S. auto industry was particularly shot with half-truths.
The phrase “some even said it should die” is one of his famous straw men. There were no voices seeking the death of the auto industry (except perhaps among his most ardent “green” friends).
Many thought that the regular market forces should work and the companies should declare bankruptcy.
Declaring bankruptcy worked just fine for other companies and it would have worked for General Motors as well.
The president’s praise of General Motors also neatly skirted the fact that it succeeded by making and selling more cars in China (not the United States). He also appears to be taking credit for the success of Ford during this period.
Since he stressed accountability so much in this part of his speech, perhaps he can tell us who should be accountable for the billions that the government will never be paid back as a result of the auto company bailouts.
Gary O’Neill, Marietta
Saviors
It has been claimed that J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter books “saved reading.” That they began appearing when many predicted that electronic entertainment had all but killed reading (except among a self-selecting few).
By issuing them separately, without any simultaneous releases of movie versions, Rowling may have introduced a new generation of readers to the happiness of books.
I wonder whether the same kind of argument may be made about Tim Tebow’s effect on Christianity: That he might be rescuing it from the extremists who exploit it for political power, status or financial gain.
Like Rowling’s books, Tebow’s religiosity has stimulated millions to emulate him and perhaps bring their values and actions more in line with his brand of Christian modesty.
Both have attracted lots of critics. Tebow’s detractors are many and vocal, criticizing him for displaying his personal faith in so public a setting.
Tebow’s and Rowling’s examples suggest that one can never underestimate the power of a compelling and un-chic personal witness (in literature or in athletics).
Now, may we hold out hope that such a genuine person might emerge in the political arena?
Ricks Carson, Atlanta
