The writer of last week’s letter “Administration is a Threat” [Ronald Piretti] can crawl out from under his bed, now. Things are not nearly as scary as he thinks.
First of all, no one wants to take away his guns. Many Americans would like to see some sensible guns laws enacted, but President Obama has signed only one bill that pertained to firearms. It was a bill, which he signed into law, that relaxes restrictions on guns in national parks — not exactly tyranny. And as for the completely false story about the Gabby Giffords tragedy (that innocent lives were “saved last year when Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was shot”), anyone can look up the facts of the incident (NBC report “Armed Giffords Hero Nearly Shot Wrong Man”). As for the Colorado massacre, if anyone thinks that even more guns blasting inside a dark, tear gas–filled theater would have resulted in fewer deaths, I must ask, “When was the last time you had a rational thought?”
The claim that Catholic hospitals must perform abortions is also completely false. (Read the law.) As for the issue of birth control, 98 percent of American Catholic women use or have used birth control; however, the president has made a concession to the church: “Church-affiliated universities, hospitals and charities would not have to provide or pay for such coverage.” Instead, the White House said, coverage for birth control could be offered to women directly by their employers’ insurance companies, “with no role for religious employers who oppose contraception,” according to the New York Times.
The assertion that we have lost our right to gather in demonstration against government is another lie. There is no such law. No one has removed the First Amendment.
The “right to work” comment is also utter nonsense. It has been the Republican-led states that have lost 600,000 public-sector jobs since 2009. The governors of Tea Party–led states have eliminated public-sector jobs (teachers, firefighters, cops, engineers, etc.) while under the Obama administration, 4,267,000 private-sector jobs have been added to the economy, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Not enough, but compared to the 750,000 jobs per month that were being lost under the Bush administration, it’s a definite improvement. And if the Republican Congress would pass the president’s jobs bill, unemployment rates would drop significantly. But they vowed to do nothing that would help Obama get re-elected, and that’s exactly what the Republican-controlled House of Representatives has done — nothing.
It’s crystal clear to anyone who’s paying attention that Republicans cannot win without obstructing the duties of our government, denying their fellow Americans (college age, senior citizens and minorities) the right to vote, taking billions in corporate bribes to run dishonest ads, and without false rhetoric and outright lies. If Republicans prevail in November, I’ll be the one under my bed.
Gwynne Chesher
Wellington
I apprreciate the opportunity to set the record straight. After all we are all interested in the true facts.
This is from official EXXON, not from fatcheck.org or is it factcheck.org
Less than 3 percent of ExxonMobil’s earnings are from U.S. gasoline sales. ExxonMobil’s earnings are from operations in more than 100 countries around the world. The part of the business that refines and sells gasoline and diesel in the United States represents less than 3 percent – or 3 cents on the dollar – of our total earnings. For every gallon of gasoline, diesel or finished products we manufactured and sold in the United States in the last three months of 2010, we earned a little more than 2 cents per gallon.
Any well-read, intelligent person knows that oil has been priced in dollars, and the weaker the dollar the higher the price of crude. So if the FED keeps printing money to support government handouts the price of gasoline from crude will necessarily skyrocket.
Instead of spending all of your time writing down propaganda, why don’t you go to Factcheck.org? Pretty much everything you claim has been debunked by this reputable, nonpartisan organization. I don’t have time to argue with someone who makes up his own facts.
I took your advice and searched factcheck.org. I would call it hearsay. I go to original documents. So I don’t agree that your sources are reliable. But I understand now why you believe what you believe.
I also wanted to comment on public sector jobs. The Federal Government is broke. It borrows something like forty cents on a dollar to operate. Saying that Republicans lost jobs by cutting public sector jobs is true but that is a good thing given the unsustainable national debt. I’m sorry but saying that it was good for Democrats to create public sector jobs belies an adequate understanding of basic economic theory. The fact is that public sector jobs do not create wealth. For every dollar paid to a government employee one dollar is taken out of the private sector. That is one less dollar to invest in private enterprise.
I’m really sorry if I may offend anyone, but I have decided to be the truth meter in this opinion section as long as the editor allows my comments to stand. The writer made a comment that Republicans are denying people the right to vote. This was totally unsupported by any facts. The facts are that Democrats do not want to prevent illegal voting. By that I mean Democrats object to verifying the identity of voters. In Florida and in most other states in order to obtain a library card a person has to prove his residence, in order to by alcohol a person has to prove her age, in order to obtain a drivers license a person has to have three forms of identification. Does any rational thinking fair-minded person believe that the right to vote is less important than a library card? I don’t think so.
“Exxon Makes $104 Million In Profit Per Day So Far In 2012, While Americans Are Stuck With A Higher Gas Bill”
By Rebecca Leber on Apr 26, 2012,
“Last year, ExxonMobil, one of the world’s most profitable companies, earned $1,300 in profits per second. As consumers paid record-high springtime gas prices, Exxon posted first quarter profits of $9.45 billion.”
Gwynne, if I may call you by your first name, yes Exxon is a very well run company. They have a cash reserve and don’t need government to keep them afloat.
Check me if I’m wrong but I believe that Exxon makes about 5 cents a gallon profit and the government taxes a gallon of gasoline at 50 cents a gallon. That is ten times the profit that Exxon makes. http://www.bankrate.com/finance/taxes/gas-taxes-by-state.aspx
I totally agree with you that gas prices are way too high. But if it is true that Exxon makes a nickel on each gallon they can only lower the retail price by five cents, whereas the government can lower the price by ten times that amount.
I also remember looking at the Exxon yearend report. What I found was that Exxon pays an enormous amount in taxes. In fact unless I am mistaken Exxon paid more in taxes than it earned in profits. Since you are good at research, check me on this to make sure I’ve got it straight.
There is a video that I did that you can watch on drilling for oil if you want. It is pretty much a reenactment of a conversation I had at an Allen West gathering of the Tea Party. There was a small group of paid opposition carrying signs against Allen West’s candidacy. I hope you won’t find it offensive. It was as close to the truth as I could recall.
http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/13314589/oil-drilling-is-safe
God Bless you Gwynne and God Bless America
A quick internet search proved that old adage: “If it’s too good to be true, it probably isn’t.” I found out that Switzerland has a system called conscription, which requires every male Swiss to endure 21 weeks of basic military training beginning between the ages of 19 and 25 and lasting up until the age of 35 or 50. More strict than the U.S. Military Reserves or National Guard, under conscription, the Swiss will spend “the next 22 to 32 years…[in a] succession of two- to three-week training camps…until he’s accrued 300 to 1,300 days of active service.” I think that the real point here is that in Switzerland, these young men are as well trained in firearms as any soldier or cop. In this country, it’s easier for anyone off the street to buy a gun than it is to vote (at least in red states). We require a vision test, a written test and a stack of documents proving that you are who you say you are in order to get a license to drive a car. But God-forbid we should require any training or ban any type of killing machine!
Thank you, Gwynne, for doing a quick internet search. I know what you mean. Just because it is on the internet does not mean it is accurate. I would appreciate any correction of the information in any of my posts. We all want the truth. I will be reading your posts in order to be better informed about history, and current events.
I believe that countries like Germany may have the same military service requirement. Isn’t it interesting that the U.S. has so many of our military personnel in foreign countries. I mean considering that they are perfectly capable of protecting their own people.
I think you also make an excellent point if I understood you correctly. I believe what you are saying is that in those foreign countries that give every individual military training they become responsible citizens and are much more likely to protect the population than commit murder. Also they are well trained and tend to have courage and can protect themselves. I’m thinking of the great American hero and patriot COLONEL ALLEN WEST who as you know is a fine U.S. Congressman from the Great State of Florida.
We seem to agree on more than I expected. I also agree that criminals are very adept at obtaining illegal firearms. That is a very good point. I agree that no matter what the law is regulating the purchase of guns, people with criminal intent will obtain guns and if not will use homemade bombs, or knives, or bottles filled with gasoline.
You make another excellent point. Getting a drivers license does take three forms of identification, picture, passport, etc. I did a quick internet search and found that not everyone can purchase or possess a gun. The following is a short list of who cannot purchase or possess a gun in Florida:
•any convicted felon to have in his or her possession any firearm or to carry a concealed weapon unless his civil rights have been restored.
• The following persons to own, possess or use any firearm – drug addicts, alcoholics, mental incompetents, and vagrants.
•For persons to have in their care, custody, possession, or control any firearm or ammunition if the person has been issued a final injunction that is currently in force and effect, restraining that person from committing acts of domestic violence.
•To sell, give, barter, lend or transfer a firearm or other weapon other than an ordinary pocketknife to a minor less than the age of 18 without his parent’s permission, or to any person of unsound mind.
I know you probably like to consult ehow.com. I copied this from that website:
Gun retailers and dealers must be registered with the state and follow Florida’s recording and reporting laws. In addition, they cannot sell a gun to any minor under the age of 18.
Gun carry procedure: Obtaining a permit requires a clean background check, in addition to paying the necessary licensing fees
When a gun is sold a permanent record is kept of the rifling signature so that if it is used in a crime ballistic tests can determine precisely what gun was used in the crime and who the registered owner is.
But you are absolutely right. I think you are implying that guns do not kill, people do, and if we had a more moral society there would be fewer crimes of all types. I also suspect that if more people had manufacturing jobs making steel beams and drilling for oil that they wouldn’t be out on the street starving. Hunger is a big motivator as you know from the character of Jean Valjean in Victor Hugo’s 1862 novel Les Misérables. I also think that closing the borders to drug trafficking is a good idea because I bet if we search the internet we might find a lot of gun crime. I mean drug gangs killing each other, drive by shooting.
You are precisely correct if we could just do away with all guns completely the only murders would be by strangulation, or beating a person to death, or running them over with a car, or knifing them to death, or even burning down homes with the occupants inside.
You know what Gwynne I hope you read on beyond the first paragraph and I’d love to know your comments on the rest of the facts that I noted. I certainly would appreciate your correcting all the errors in the list.
May God be gracious to you and shine his light upon you.
In countries where only the government had gun there were 56 million people murdered in the 20th century.
Simple facts:
SWITZERLAND ISSUES EVERY HOUSEHOLD A FULLY-AUTOMATIC RIFLE.
SWITZERLAND ‘S GOVERNMENT TRAINS EVERY ADULT THEY ISSUE A
FULLY-AUTOMATIC RIFLE. SWITZERLAND HAS THE LOWEST GUN RELATED
CRIME RATE OF ANY CIVILIZED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD.
A LITTLE GUN HISTORY:
IN 1929,THE SOVIET UNION ESTABLISHED GUN CONTROL. FROM
1929 TO 1953, ABOUT 20 MILLION DISSIDENTS,
UNABLE TO DEFEND THEMSELVES, WERE ROUNDED UP AND
EXTERMINATED.
GRMANY ESTABLISHED GUN CONTROL IN 1938 AND
FROM 1939 TO 1945, A TOTAL OF 13 MILLION JEWS
AND OTHERS WHO WERE UNABLE TO DEFEND THEMSELVES WERE
ROUNDED UP AND EXTERMINATED.
CHINA ESTABLISHED GUN CONTROL IN
1935. FROM 1948 TO 1952, 20 MILLION POLITICAL
DISSIDENTS, UNABLE TO DEFEND THEMSELVES, WERE ROUNDED
UP AND EXTERMINATED
IN 1911, TURKEY ESTABLISHED GUN CONTROL.
FROM 1915 TO 1917, 1.5 MILLION ARMENIANS, UNABLE
TO DEFEND THEMSELVES, WERE ROUNDED UP AND
EXTERMINATED.
GUATEMALA ESTABLISHED GUN CONTROL IN
1964. FROM 1964 TO 1981, 100,000 MAYAN INDIANS,
UNABLE TO DEFEND THEMSELVES, WERE ROUNDED UP AND
EXTERMINATED.
UGANDA ESTABLISHED GUN CONTROL IN 1970. FROM
1971 TO 1979, 300,000 CHRISTIANS, UNABLE TO
DEFEND THEMSELVES, WERE ROUNDED UP AND
EXTERMINATED.
CAMBODIA ESTABLISHED GUN CONTROL IN 1956.
FROM 1975 TO 1977, ONE MILLION EDUCATED PEOPLE,
UNABLE TO DEFEND THEMSELVES, WERE ROUNDED UP AND
EXTERMINATED.
DEFENSELESS PEOPLE ROUNDED UP AND
EXTERMINATED IN THE 20TH CENTURY BECAUSE OF GUN
CONTROL: 56 MILLION.
IT HAS NOW BEEN 12 MONTHS SINCE GUN OWNERS
IN AUSTRALIA WERE FORCED BY NEW LAW TO SURRENDER
640,381 PERSONAL FIREARMS TO BE DESTROYED BY THEIR
OWN GOVERNMENT, A PROGRAM COSTING AUSTRALIA TAXPAYERS
MORE THAN $500 MILLION DOLLARS. THE FIRST YEAR RESULTS
ARE NOW IN. LIST OF 7 ITEMS:
AUSTRALIA-WIDE, HOMICIDES ARE UP 3.2 PERCENT.
ASSAULTS ARE UP 8.6 PERCENT,
ARMED ROBBERIES
ARE UP 44 PERCENT (YES, 44 PERCENT)!
IN THE STATE OF VICTORIA ALONE, HOMICIDES WITH
FIREARMS ARE NOW UP 300 PERCENT. NOTE THAT WHILE
THE LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS TURNED THEM IN, THE
CRIMINALS DID NOT, AND CRIMINALS STILL POSSESS THEIR GUNS!
WHILE FIGURES OVER THE PREVIOUS 25 YEARS SHOWED A STEADY
DECREASE IN ARMED ROBBERY WITH FIREARMS, THIS
HAS CHANGED DRASTICALLY UPWARD IN THE PAST 12
MONTHS, SINCE CRIMINALS NOW ARE GUARANTEED THAT
THEIR PREY IS UNARMED.
THERE HAS ALSO BEEN A DRAMATIC INCREASE IN
BREAK-INS AND ASSAULTS OF THE ELDERLY.
AUSTRALIAN POLITICIANS ARE AT A LOSS TO EXPLAIN HOW PUBLIC
SAFETY HAS DECREASED, AFTER SUCH MONUMENTAL EFFORT, AND
EXPENSE WAS EXPENDED IN SUCCESSFULLY RIDDING
AUSTRALIAN SOCIETY OF GUNS. THE AUSTRALIAN
EXPERIENCE AND THE OTHER HISTORICAL FACTS ABOVE
PROVE IT.
YOU WON’T SEE THIS DATA ON THE US EVENING NEWS, OR HEAR
POLITICIANS DISSEMINATING THIS INFORMATION.
GUNS IN THE HANDS OF HONEST
CITIZENS SAVE LIVES AND PROPERTY AND, YES,
GUN-CONTROL LAWS ADVERSELY AFFECT ONLY THE
LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS.
TAKE NOTE MY FELLOW AMERICANS, BEFORE IT’S TOO
LATE! THE NEXT TIME SOMEONE TALKS IN FAVOR OF
GUN CONTROL, PLEASE REMIND THEM OF THIS HISTORY LESSON.
WITH GUNS, WE ARE CITIZENS.
WITHOUT THEM, WE ARE SUBJECTS.
DURING WWII THE JAPANESE DECIDED NOT
TO INVADE AMERICA BECAUSE THEY FEARED HOW
MANY AMERICAN HOUSEHOLDS WERE ARMED!
IF YOU VALUE YOUR FREEDOM, PLEASE SPREAD THIS
ANTI-GUN CONTROL MESSAGE TO ALL OF YOUR FRIENDS..
THE PURPOSE OF FIGHTING IS TO WIN. THERE IS NO
POSSIBLE VICTORY IN DEFENSE. THE SWORD IS MORE
IMPORTANT THAN THE SHIELD, AND SKILL IS MORE
IMPORTANT THAN EITHER. THE FINAL WEAPON IS THE BRAIN.
ALL ELSE IS SUPPLEMENTAL.
Frank –
You say that providing free contraceptives would cost more in premiums – this is totally false – insurance costs would go down because there would be less unwanted pregnancies – less births and or abortions means less medical costs!
Gwynne, bless your heart. “Crawl out from under his bed” is how you might described those of us who have guns to protect our families. Believe me anyone with a gun is not hiding under a bed. It is more likely that a person who only has a broomstick to defend themselves would be the one hiding under their bed.
Did you know that there were more gun crimes committed in England after banning guns from not only people but also police? But let’s not go there, because the logic is somehow flawed I’m sure you would agree.
Your argument is that no one wants to take our guns away. Ok let me use the same argument about the separation of Church and State.
I’m sure you would agree that none of we Christians want to convert all of the school age children into followers of Christ. We just want reasonable Bible laws enacted. Like allowing Christians to bring Bibles into School with them because someone might ask a question about God and the person with the Bible could reference some passage of scripture.
You see I believe in choice just like you do. I believe that a person who chooses to seek information about God should have that choice and that choice should not be denied simply because that person happens to be in a government building.
As for Catholics not having to pay for contraception, shouldn’t we be asking why pay for anyone’s contraception?
My dear Ms. Chesher I understand your argument that Catholic institutions do not have to hand out expensive drugs that prevent conception, but surely as smart as you seem to be you would agree that nothing is free?
Surely you understand that if your insurance company must pay for treatment that it will have to take that expense into consideration when establishing the premium for your policy? So Catholic institutions will pay more for their insurance.
And I’m sure you understand that only government can lose money year after year performing a proprietary function, whereas privately owned businesses have to earn a profit, so they can’t charge less for more. I know you might say that private companies are greedy, but Exxon mkes 5 cents a gallon on gasoline, and the state and federal governement makes 50 cents on each gallon. True that the 50 cents that govement takes is not tecnicaly a profit. I understand that.
Now I know that sometimes it takes some education in economics to understand my arguments, but you write much better than I do so I assume you are also smarter than I am and so I am quite sure that you can easily understand my points.
As for Republicans obstructing the “duties of our government”, I am a constitutional scholar with a Law Degree and 40 years of trial experience. I am licensed in four states, and I’m not sure what you mean by “duties”.
Yes we have the right to vote, and the argument that someone is too poor to obtain a free government picture ID is a Democrat position not a Republican position.
The Republicans want to limit voting to those who have the right to vote. Some say that your Democrat party apparently wants dead people and convicted felons and illegal aliens to vote. Why do they say it?
Because that is who they say composes the Democrat party. I don’t totally agree. I see that the Democrat party is also composed of people like you who want taxpayers to help the unemployed who want government subsistence, and free condoms.
Some might also say, although I do not agree, that Democrats fear Christians and protect Muslims. I wouldn’t say it, but they would say that you want to give out welfare checks because you have destroyed the manufacturing sector of the economy with all your fears that man is going to kill the environment.
I’m not going to say that envionmental zellots are hiding under their beds afraid of the next algae bloom forming in the canals. That would be hipocritical having said that your analogyof gun owners hiding under beds was not appropriate.
I think those kinds of allegations while they may be true do not bring us all closer together in loving harmony. I think Democrats are people who mean well and want government to help the poor, the disabled, the widows and orphans. Christians want the same only Christians donate their own money and only ask for contributions. Government is much more efficient. It can demand we pay or go to jail.
You know I understand Democrats want to do good, they just do it differently than Republicans. They want government checks to solve the problem, and Republicans want to create private sector jobs via a Free Market and Capitalism. I guess Republicans believe that people are better able to run a business without government help. Democrats and even some Republicans in Name Only beleive that following the 150,000 pages of government regulations are necessary.
I think it is also very unfair to blame Democrats for big government. Congress has its share of Republicans in Name Only who are progressive and who also believe that a government agency is the cure, even when it is a government agency that has failed. Or even when there is corruption in government, the big government type solution is to create an Inspector General’s office to weed out corruption in government.
I usually get it. Believe me I get it most of the time. But sometimes I just don’t get it at all. Like when I read your letter Gwynne.
Frank – Wow, you are “a constitutional scholar with a Law Degree and 40 years of trial experience”? Then you show know what a “fact” is, something lacking from your original letter and this one.
John thank for your reply. Please enlighten me. And God Bless you and your family