Letters

Editor
Northern Virginia Daily

Sir:

I have just read the electronic version of Bob Wooten's Feb. 27 column regarding the Bad Water Bill's arson case. In it, Wooten seems to present a particularly creative take on the idea of justice.

Wooten's article suggests that the rule of law should apply less to a crime committed against the former Bad Water Bill's, a legally established and operated business whose appearance and patrons he found unsavory, than it should to those businesses that he finds more pleasant.

While it's possible that the ghosts of Thomas Jefferson and John Adams et al. might, like Wooten, appreciate the throng of businesses that supplanted the former restaurant, I doubt that they would find his suggestion of unequal protection under the law very appealing.

One wonders what Wooten might say if a pack of so-called undesirables started hanging out at Denny's. Would he suggest that it might be nice if it burned down as well? One could always argue that the insipidity of its menu makes it deserving of such a fate, just like Wooten cites the former Bad Water Bill's "run down" appearance to mitigate the seriousness of its arson.

Myself, I find the presence of corporate mega-chains such as Denny's to be a blight on Strasburg, a community where there is a strong tradition of locally owned restaurants. While I can't say that I'd be unhappy if Strasburg's Denny's was lost to arson, it would be absurd for me to argue clemency for the crank who would burn it just because I happen to find the place aesthetically and gastronomically ugly. In the same way, it is ridiculous that Wooten attempts to justify leniency for the man convicted of destroying Bad Water Bill's simply because he found it repellent.

Happily, we live in a country where one's personal opinions and taste are secondary to justice. I earnestly hope that the arsonist's sentence is fitting to the crime -- and not fitting to Wooten's opinion of the crime's outcome.

James Lawonn
1390 Buskin River Road
Kodiak, Alaska
Feb. 28, 2010

Editor
Northern Virginia Daily

Sir:

When God created Adam, he did not create another man for Adam to live with. Why? Most people know that a man and a woman together can procreate.

A marriage contract is to make both man and woman to be responsible for raising their children.

Two women can live together, but if they intend to raise children who are not their own or belonging only to one woman by childbirth, the two may decide to raise the child of the birth mother as a team. A marriage contract can require the non-birth mother to pay child support if she decides she doesn't want to be responsible for raising that child at a later date.

If a man is looking for a wife to produce children, how can he find a worthy woman from lesbians?

Crossing over the line between homosexual and non-homosexuals could cause sexual diseases. In the Old Testament people of one nation avoided marrying the people of a different nation probably because of the possibility of spreading diseases.

Most sane people would not want to marry anyone who may be a disease carrier. Some people think a homosexual person may be a disease carrier in modern times. With modern medicine some people think people can have sex with anybody without getting a disease. Instead disease seems to be increasing in the human race.

Kenton Gambill
484 Walton St.
Strasburg
Feb. 27, 2010

Editor
Northern Virginia Daily

Sir:

Over the course of the last century, Americans have been subtly seduced into thinking that they can have "peace of mind" if they would just turn their lives over to the state.
If it wasn't Woodrow Wilson promising "a war to end all wars" and a progressive system of taxation, then it was FDR promising everything from jobs to recreation to Social Security through his so-called second Bill of Rights. LBJ told us we would eliminate poverty if only we would cough up billions of dollars and then imposed a surtax on us to pay for a war that he lost. In taking us off the gold standard and imposing wage and price controls, Nixon assured us that everything would be OK. Jimmy Carter came to power and we had long lines at gas stations, runaway inflation and high interest rates.
The Clintons promised universal health care and fortunately were discouraged by an electorate that sent them a message in 1994. George H.W. Bush promised no new taxes. George W. Bush in concert with the liberals gave us another huge medical entitlement that we can't pay for.

Now we have embodied in our current president all of the nonsensical progressive mischief of the last 100 years. We have reached the state of addiction. No one wants to give up his political drug of choice. Like the alcoholic and the drug addict, we need our "fix" of government help and money. This is a sickness that has reached epic proportions and it demands intervention.

As with the addict, we must enter rehab. Over time, we have to wean ourselves from Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and social welfare. These programs represent almost 50 percent of our national budget. They are unsustainable.

We must look to ourselves for these things. Unlike Faust, we must not sell our souls to the devil to achieve some utopian existence. In the process of doing this, we are selling our heirs down the river Styx.

Only through a massive program of rehabilitation can we achieve freedom from the tyranny of big government and usher in redemption.

JOHN W. LACAVA
23 Murchison Lane
Luray
Feb. 22, 2010

Editor
Northern Virginia Daily

Sir:

Re the Canadian women's hockey team: The IOC needs to loosen its girdle.

CHARLES HAMNER
712 Ross Ave.
Front Royal
Feb. 27, 2010

Editor
Northern Virginia Daily

Sir:

This week Congressman Frank Wolf sent a large postcard mailer to residents in the 10th District. He outlined his reasons for not supporting the president's health-care reform package.

I have been a recipient of "government-managed health care," which Congressman Wolf opposes, most of my life. First as the daughter in a military family where the federal government directly pays doctors, nurses and health-care personnel. Later I became a federal employee and Medicare recipient.

The federal government -- in both these instances -- establishes and manages the parameters for approved insurance programs. The two that I chose, Aetna (for profit) and Kaiser Permanente (not for profit) have served me well for more than 50 years.
Congressman Wolf has enjoyed similar government-managed health care but has made little or no effort to initiate a national effort to improve health care for residents of the 10th District. He is frequently commended for individual constituent assistance, but health problems extend beyond individuals as I outlined in my letter below:

"... You may also have lost touch with Warren County. We are trying to deal with a high level of unemployment and underemployment. In our schools, of 5,300 students, 1,748 (or about 1⁄3), require Medicaid support services. This number indicates that probably their parents have no health insurance. Add other residents under 65 who either are out of work or surviving on minimal incomes, and you have a significant and growing problem. In addition, about 1⁄2 of our students are on free or reduced breakfast/lunch programs -- their families may also need health assistance.

"... Don't you enjoy government-managed health care working for Congress? Please vote for the health care reform bill supported by the President. We can't wait another 30 years for change -- too many citizens will suffer and die needlessly."

I encourage you to contact Congressman Wolf (wolf.house.gov, 202-225-5136) and outline your concerns. There will be life-changing congressional vote within the next few weeks.

Tina Hobson
1045 Oakmont Drive
Front Royal
March 2, 2010

Editor
Northern Virginia Daily

Sir:

When I am forced to choose the lesser of two evils, where is the third option? (None of the above).

Has this country forgotten the reason it was founded? Where is freedom when you are forced to either eat garlic-flavored onions or onion-flavored garlic?

Benjamin Showers
P.O. Box 90
Rio, W.Va.
March 2, 2010