I called Greg Walden's office to ask about the SCHIP program for sick children that the congressman voted against. I asked the gentleman that answered the phone in Medford why the congressman voted against the bill. I was told to read the statement Mr. Walden has on his Web site.

I told him that I had read the statement and I still had some questions for the congressman. He proceeded to call me "stupid" and said to me "here's the answer to your questions, tough luck." And I was hung up on.

I was stunned, so I called Mr. Walden's office in Washington. I asked the woman who answered the phone the same question. She also directed me to the Web site and when told I had read it and still had questions she said, "Sorry." And hung up.

I'm a farmer in the Applegate. I'm a taxpaying American citizen. Greg Walden represents me in Congress and I have legitimate questions for my elected representative. Apparently that's not enough. If Mr. Walden is not accountable to his constituency, then it's time to get rid of him and find someone, whether they are Republican, Democrat or independent, who is. — Robert Key, Applegate

There are those who decry President Bush's commutation of Scooter Libby's jail sentence. I'm glad Libby's jail sentence was commuted, and here are the reasons.

First: Libby deserves a new trial because the jury was tainted. Proof: I saw one of the jurors interviewed after the trial saying, "Where's Cheney, where's Karl Rove — this sucks!"

So, this juror was ready to convict both Cheney and Rove without a trial. So, what were Libby's chances with this juror and possibly others?

Second: Given the conviction, Libby's sentence should be the same as Clinton's sentence. After all, both were convicted of perjury. Clinton's sentence was to lose his law license for five years, and he can no longer argue before the U.S. Supreme Court.

I don't know if Libby's a lawyer or not, but the net result of the sentence would be the same for Clinton or Libby because Clinton will never use his law license again and would never appear before the Supreme Court. The same punishment for the same crime is just. — Richard Laquess, Talent

Drew Hymer recently wrote a letter in which he discussed how we can film unborn babies in the womb using a tiny camera. I've seen the video and it's breathtaking.

At about 2 months, you can see the fetus — a beautiful human being — swimming around inside the womb. You can see her head and face, her arms and legs and her fingers and toes. She swallows the amniotic fluid. You can see her tongue when she opens her mouth. She's truly a wonder.

The thought that this beautiful human being (fetus) is at the standard age for abortion makes me shudder. One moment, she's moving around in the protective environment of her mother's womb, doing what babies naturally do; the next moment, her body can be ripped apart by an abortionist.

I wish that all women considering an abortion would be required to watch a video of their child, and I hope they would then choose life. — Sally Steele, Ashland

Share This Story