LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Don't run young people out of town. The young across our nation are showing more moral strength, backbone, courage and grit than you or I have!

The young are calling for equity for Americans who have been cheated, trampled upon, hungry, ignored, families needing food, clothing and shelter. Women giving birth to children, working as women do for healthy families.

Across this globe, we see, regrettably, a world in decline. Young people around the globe have changed many Arab countries and the people within. The young in the USA are fighting corruption on Wall Street, banks, brokers, corporations, government and politicians. What's wrong with that?

Some American millionaires are stepping in front of TV cameras saying, in essence to tax the wealthy more. Do these Americans see a declining American society, as perhaps some "experts" do? — John G. Grimm, Medford

It is not surprising to see the Democratic Party's support for anarchy in the streets when you consider objectives vocalized by Obama's former green czar, Van Jones.

Support of the anarchists acquiesced to by Obama and vocalized by Pelosi and other Democrats enforces the objective of Van Jones, who openly voiced the desire to overthrow the American economy and form of government. Jones says the way to do this is from the bottom up and the top down. Anarchy in the streets would reach such a degree that the federal government would be required to crush the anarchy and while doing so suspend many American liberties and assure Obama's power position. Obama was forced to remove Jones from his czar position.

Obama's support of the anarchists by silence, doing nothing to stop the anarchy, allowing it to run rampant is proof of his allegiance to "street organizing" for radical causes. Democratic mayors in major cities have taken the position of allowing the anarchy to continue, in protection of "freedom of speech." Since when did freedom of speech include the destruction of our cities and way of life?

Democrats, supported by the leftist media and anarchists and led by unions, will destroy America. — Gary Endicott, Shady Cove

Webster's dictionary defines rational as "able to reason in a sensible or sane manner." When this definition is applied to two recent letters to the editor, one has to wonder what the definition of rational is.

First, although the "occupiers" have some legitimate concerns, the admonition of Cynthia Zavatski (Nov. 17) that "we must all join them" redefines "rational." It is doubtful that most Americans would support illicit drugs, murder, wanton property damage, millions of dollars for cleanup operations, and the list goes on. Sorry, most Americans would pass on the terms "bravo" and "heroes," and call most of the occupiers criminals and/or an embarrassment to this country.

Secondly, Lindsay Earl Paulk (Nov. 18) also redefines "rational" with his belief that only himself, Democrats and persons who believe the GOP and tea party are fools are capable of "rational thinking." Although it is reassuring to know that Mr. Paulk and the Democrats are able to pass judgment from their pedestal of perfection, it is also reassuring that current polls show most Americans are dissatisfied with a president who globally apologizes for this country, calls Americans "lazy" and is responsible for the current negative economy. — John Mittendorf, Medford

Regarding your editorial on Friday, Nov. 18, who says that if all Americans are required to purchase health insurance that the cost will be lower for everyone?

I remember when auto insurance was made mandatory. My premiums went up twice as high. What a joke! — Ila Bartels, Medford

Share This Story