Put a woman in the Senate
Elections are on Tuesday, and South Carolina is in danger of becoming the only state in the nation with no women serving in the Senate. Approximately 52 percent of the population is female. Surely we should have at least one qualified woman serving us in the S.C. Senate.
I believe that Mandy Norrell is uniquely qualified to serve and would continue to work on issues that I believe are of paramount importance to families across the state: education, health care, early childhood and, of course, jobs and finances. Mandy's experience as a practicing attorney are a real plus. (No matter what you may have heard, the General Assembly is made up of only about 18 percent attorneys, not enough in my opinion!) I hope that the residents of District 16 will send Mandy to the Senate to fill the open seat. She is extremely well qualified and is believed by most to be the only woman with a chance at being elected on Tuesday!
Linda H. Short
Never miss a local story.
S.C. Senate, District 17
'Rich' pay most of the taxes
According to Barack Obama and Joe Biden, the "rich" are not paying their fair share, but let's look at some data. The top 5 percent of wage earners, those making more than $153,542, pay 60 percent of all federal income taxes. The the top 1 percent of wage earners, those making more than $388,806 a year, pay 40 percent of all federal income taxes. The top 1 percent's taxes comprise 17 percent of the federal government's revenue from all sources, including corporate taxes, excise taxes, social insurance and retirement receipts.
A recent poll found that 36 percent of Americans thought that the "rich" contribute 10 percent or less of all federal income taxes. Another 15 percent thought the "rich" pay between 10 percent and 20 percent, while another 10 percent thought the "rich's" share is between 20 percent and 30 percent. Americans think that the "rich" pay less -- far less -- than they actually do. One has to wonder where they get this idea and why is it not challenged.
Thirty percent of American voters pay nothing in federal income taxes. I never hear Obama, Biden or Friedman referring to these people as being unpatriotic. Wonder why? I guess one doesn't want to insult those whose votes they are trying to buy with government handouts that cost them nothing. Class warfare appears to be a winning strategy as, not too surprisingly, compared with taxpaying voters, nontaxpayers are more likely to support the candidate whose spending will benefit them.
Austin G. Abercrombie
We're headed for socialist takeover
Many of us are scared to death of the outcome of Tuesday's presidential election. The polls are reporting that Obama is going to win. His positions, background and associations show that he is a very radical person who will drive us very quickly to a socialist country. What is in store for the country if this happens?
The Congress will be overwhelmingly liberal, and with his Supreme Court appointments, we will have a liberal court. That gives the three legs of our government over to the liberals. Next, the major media and universities are very liberal and will be teaching even more strongly the liberal socialist cause. Therefore, there is no chance that a dissenting opinion can ever be heard. This will be followed by the most socialistic movement that can be imagined because his majority position will be supported by Congress and promoted by the media and universities. Does no one remember Cuba and Castro?
Short of a major revolution, this country will never return to the concepts that made this country it once was. It will never be the same!
It is one thing if an election is based on the public being fed objective balanced positions. It should not be the result of distorted views and voter fraud.
Warren B. Rogers
What does Obama mean by 'change'?
I have been asking myself and others what this "change" is all about that Barack Obama is touting. I certainly cannot explain exactly what it is, and no one I have talked to can explain it, either.
I believe change is important in our government. Honestly, I cannot think of anything that is needed more. But exactly what changes need to occur? I believe that real change in our government must start with changing the people that have been in Washington way too long -- the Ted Kennedys. John Spratts, Joe Bidens and, yes, the George Bushes all need to be removed and replaced with individuals who have this country's best interest at heart (not their bank accounts).
I also believe that a large part of the problem in Washington has to do with the lobbyists. Is there anyone in government who has not been lured or baited by lobbyists' money and greed for power? Even though I believe that there are some lobbyists that provide a good service, the majority of them are self serving.
These people are followed very closely by the media. Whatever happened to reporting the news without comment and bias?
One last comment: I have heard several commentators use the term "half truths." There is no such thing. Everything is either true or false; there is nothing in between.
Obama would make insurance affordable
Barack Obama has not said that his health care and college plans are free, contrary to what Charles Blackwell said in a recent letter.
He is saying he want to make it affordable. Where is the word free in that statement?
Blackwell does not say anything about how his Republican friends want to privatize Social Security. They call it reform. I am a senior, and I know that Republicans have always been against Social Security.
Mulvaney supports public education
I am the former head of the Republican Party in Lancaster; I have worked closely with Mick Mulvaney's campaign; my support for his candidacy is no secret. I am also the sitting chairman of the State Board of Education, the group charged with overseeing policies and procedures for public education in our state. So, at many levels, I have been on the front lines of the education debate for several years.
While good schools can be found across our state, and teachers regularly overachieve with the resources provided them, anyone who thinks that things are just fine is sticking his head in the sand.
I am proud to say that our own Rep. Mick Mulvaney stood with state Superintendent Jim Rex, Rep. Ted Pitts and Rep. Bill Cotty and co-sponsored a bill that would require all public school districts to implement elements of choice. Mick had seen the positive impact that choice has had on the students and teachers in Lancaster and Fort Mill, and he agreed with Rex that all children in our state should have options available to them in their local public schools.
Mick has been a strong supporter of expanding choice, including charter schools, virtual schools and magnet schools. Mick took the lead in the House to reform the EAA and replace the PACT test. He also supports a plan called the "65 percent solution," which would ensure that at least 65 cents of every tax dollar spent on education gets directly to the classroom.
I have been a strong supporter of public schools, and I am not an advocate for statewide vouchers. Vouchers or tax credits are far from being the major issue in public education in South Carolina.
Mick has proven to be open-minded to trying new things to help improve education while supporting the tried and true. And he has done it not as a Republican or a Democrat, but as someone who understands that public education is the foundation of our economy, our society, and our state.
Competition would help public schools
As a resident of Sun City, I would like to share some interesting things that occurred at the recent debate by state House and Senate candidates.
I think Fred Thomas was a little over the top in pursuing Deborah Long about her out-of-state contributions, as she had already returned them to the contributor. I would like Fred to share how many people in teachers unions and the DNC were supporting him.
As for school vouchers, shame on public schoolteachers for letting the public schools in South Carolina get to the level they are in this state. A little competition goes a long way in raising the standard of school districts.
War on terror comes with a cost
Maybe America needs to rethink all this rush to kill around the world. Because Osama bin Laden is definitely winning this round. It was bin Laden's plot from the beginning to have America and the world have a total economic breakdown. And lo and behold, there it is.
None of these nations bothered to consider that the slaughter of so many people would not come free. The cost of the wars and invasions by America and other nations is the main cause of the crash on Wall Street and around the world.