Letters

Editor
Northern Virginia Daily

Sir:

Your editorial in this morning's issue blasts Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky., for asking that Congress actually pay for a measure to add yet another extension to unemployment benefits. You attack him and Republicans in general as being cold-hearted, inflicting pain on people.

How have we gotten to the point where the American public and their politicians believe that it is the responsibility of the federal government to pay people to remain unemployed indefinitely, with money that doesn't exist?

Human nature suggests, and studies confirm, that people collecting unemployment don't become motivated to go out and get a job, any job, until their benefits run out. The longer the government pays people to stay out of work, the longer they do.

What has become of the American values of honest work and self-reliance? Or the value of paying for what we spend? Is it compassionate to reward people endlessly for not supporting themselves? Who is actually going to pay for the reckless largess of our governments at all levels?

Republican and Democratic politicians alike keep falling all over themselves to shovel out more and more non-existent taxpayer money to assuage every misfortune in their constituents' lives.

We are raising a generation who believes their every need, from lunches to health care, should be automatically provided by "the government." When Jesus told us to "feed my sheep," I doubt he meant to turn them into sheep first.

Guy E. Miller
1587 Patmos Road
Woodstock
March 3, 2010

Editor
Northern Virginia Daily

Sir:

I am extremely concerned about the health-care legislation before Congress today.
My main problem with the bill is that it does not contain a complete ban on abortion funding. Speaker Pelosi has only confused the matter by her misinformation: There is little doubt that the bill, in its current form, would ultimately allow for government-funded abortion.

Without a complete, rigorous, exception-free ban of abortion funding, this legislation will, under President Obama's administration, serve to create an abortion mandate that our legislators -- and hence, we -- will no longer be able to check.

As Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said in a Washington Post column Tuesday, "This use of reconciliation to jam through this legislation, against the will of the American people, would be unprecedented in scope."

I recommend that every concerned citizen write your representative and ask him to vote no on this health-care bill.

Sylvia Smith
883 Wildcat Drive
Front Royal
March 4, 2010
Editor
Northern Virginia Daily

Sir:

Next month will mark the first anniversary of my son Christopher's death. He died from respiratory failure, which ultimately resulted from a motor vehicle accident five years ago. For those that do not know, Christopher was paralyzed and became a quadriplegic at the scene.

For four years, he struggled while being locked inside a body that did not respond. As his mother, I say thank you to God every day for giving his family and friends four years to spend with him. Why he did not die at the scene remains a question.

Because of the proposed change in speed limit on Interstate 81 I have been questioned numerous times regarding my opinion. I travel the interstate daily during the work week. I pass by Christopher's accident scene daily.

Speed is often a factor in accidents on the interstate, but inattentiveness was the main factor in "our" accident. The driver of the car hauler was fiddling, according to witnesses he passed. Even though his vehicle was higher than the cars surrounding him, he did not see or look that traffic had stopped. He hit Christopher's truck doing about 70 miles per hour. To add insult to the injury, the driver was not charged in the accident.

Every day I see drivers talking and texting on cell phones and I follow truck drivers who weave off the road. Recently a teenager was apparently texting and was driving down the middle of the interstate totally oblivious to surroundings.

Yes, speed is a factor, but in my opinion, I think we need to make accidents where inattentiveness created by cell phone usage, etc., a crime against society -- society that has to pick up medical bills and monthly disability because of someone's lack of responsibility.

Random simple fines are just not enough.

Rhonda Jones
2041 Readus Road
Edinburg
March 4, 2010

Editor
Northern Virginia Daily

Sir:

As a woman, I have been following the debate regarding condom usage in combating HIV/AIDS. After comparing the information offered by John Fusto and Dr. Brian Clowes vs. Gene Rigelon and Al VanDeGriek, I would like to commend the Fusto-Dr. Clowes letters for their revealing citations and rare firsthand experience.

I observe that Fusto offers numerous experts on the subject -- who are authoritative, but not politically correct -- while Rigelon and VanDeGriek seem to depend on "opinions," conflict-of-interest defenses and parroting of the current politically acceptable agenda. (VanDeGriek was part of the FDA bureaucracy, which has a terrible record and culpability for endorsing "medications" that are recalled due to appalling side effects, including death. Why should we trust his alleged "research" on condoms?)
Fusto, moreover, even cites authorities like Dr. Helen Singer Kaplan of Cornell University Medical Center, who said, "Counting on condoms is flirting with death." Unfortunately, VanDeGriek's latest letter conveniently ignores these (and many other) authoritative citations that contradict his theories. But he lamely says, "I have seen no scientific data" against condoms. How bogus and arrogant.

It is painfully obvious that VanDeGriek's FDA allegiance prevents him from being objective in a condom discussion and from accepting information that defies his establishment background. It also explains his alleged inability to find or accept any research that contradicts the status quo. The FDA history of numerous catastrophic approvals, evidenced in repeated recalls after injuries and death, discredits VanDeGriek's input and gives cause for concern.

Thank you, Mr. Fusto and Dr. Clowes, for daring to reveal research and realities that are not politically correct. Thank you for revealing references (and experience) that were not paid for by powerful and wealthy corporations or promoted by government bureaucracy. Thank you, Dr. Clowes, for working for a nonprofit organization dedicated to trying to stop death everywhere -- death by abortion, death by AIDS and death by propaganda. And thank you, Dr. Clowes, for going to Africa and for sharing your conversations with the dying AIDS patients who realize now that they were fatally misled by the condom lies that are everywhere today.

Susana Tyler
107 Kingsland Court
Winchester
March 4, 2010

Editor
Northern Virginia Daily

Sir:

On Oct. 20, 2009, after 23 years with a local company, my employment was terminated. As a requirement with the Virginia Employment Commission, I was required to participate in a "teleconference" with VEC on Dec. 8 to determine if I had been fired as a result of "misconduct."

The deputy at VEC ruled overwhelmingly in my favor. Therefore I have been receiving benefits. The company chose not to participate in the teleconference.

On Feb. 19 I received a notice that the company wanted to "appeal" the decision in an attempt to keep me from receiving VEC benefits. So today I was once again required to participate in yet another teleconference.

Why would the company want to keep me from receiving benefits after having drummed me out of my job the first time?

Virginians need to know that unless they are willing to fight for drastic and immediate legislation for themselves and their children, we will continue to wallow in this cesspit of draconian laws and loopholes that are all in favor of the corporation, whereas individuals in this commonwealth have no rights. Especially in the workplace you have to endure abuse, dangerous working conditions and often overt harassment just to keep a job.

Tom Haun
195 Jessica Place
Toms Brook
March 10, 2010

About letters

Letters to the editor about current events or topics of general interest are welcomed.
They must not exceed 350 words and must be signed and include the writer's complete address and telephone number. The phone number, which is for verification, will not be published.

Letters should be sent to 152 N. Holliday St., Strasburg 22657. They may also be e-mailed to jhoran@shentel.net or jhoran@nvdaily.com. E-mailed letters do not have to be signed, but a phone number is necessary for verification.