Jews should reclaim their original home

In response to Shelley Miller (Letters, March 6): Why would I call you an anti-Semite? Palestinians are Semitic, so that really doesn't make sense with how much you're defending their right to murder. Why would I think you were against them? You just don't like the Jewish aspect, right?

I admit, I am a Zionist. I feel that Jews should be able to reclaim the home they were forcibly removed from by the Assyrians and the Babylonians. Prior to Israel's statehood, how advanced was Palestine? Were they bettering society or curing diseases like the Israeli Jews? If the Palestinians were such good, desirable folks, why did Jordan slaughter them by the tens of thousands? After years of making the most out of the land their God-given home is built on, while at the same time suffering through suicide bomb and mortar/rocket attacks, the Israelis will defend themselves like any other country would.

The U.S. would retaliate if Mexico attacked, even though we stole much of their country. I did like how you pretend to want what is best for Israel as well. Like I always say. The Palestinians were literally throwing candy and dancing in the streets on 9/11!

Brandon Webb

Carlsbad

Take broader view on S.D. airport plans

Re: "SANDAG endorses $3.8B airport plan," Feb. 28: Once again, San Diego ignores the real issue concerning this airport. Rather than concentrate, purchase and build a new airport in a much better location, they opt to spend endless money on things that'll run their course in a relatively short period of time.

An on/offramp connecting Interstate 5 is a great idea if it actually connects into the airport itself. Otherwise, why bother? A train station nearest the passenger entrances/exits is also a great idea. However, will this train serve the location 24/7?

Changing this place into a LAX clone is probably the best of the ideas. Separate levels for arrivals/departures. Wonder why they cannot think of that idea?

Bottom line is, they had the option of Miramar (oft-mentioned as a new San Diego airport) decades ago. However, true to form, they hedged and lost out.

Any new airport must have travel connections for the variety of methods to get to it. Freeway, trains and other modern conveniences. Otherwise, why bother?

In other words, spend the money wisely or not at all. We do not need another plan sitting on a shelf collecting dust. We have plenty of them already.

William Elder

Oceanside

Writer has his facts wrong

Letter writer Jack Fulton (March 3) lambasted Woodrow Wilson as "our most educated idiot" for introducing the graduated income tax "circa 1933." This would be a remarkable feat, indeed, as Wilson died nine years earlier in 1924. Fulton has all his facts wrong.

The modern income tax came into being in 1913 when a Constitutional amendment was ratified, with a top bracket tax rate of 7 percent during World War I, when the rate jumped to 73 percent to pay for the war during Wilson's administration. During the 45-year period from 1936-1981, the top tax rate was very high, never below 77 percent, and as high as 94 percent during the last years of World War II under Roosevelt, again to pay for the war. Can you imagine super-rich patriots paying 94 percent tax?

Then came Reagan in 1981, when the top tax rate began its downturn. George W. Bush made history, becoming the first president to reduce taxes during wartime. He reduced the top tax rate for the nation's very richest down to its present 35 percent, a near-historic low for the last 73 years. He did this to create an economic stimulus. It was a miserable failure, and left the nation in disastrous debt.

J. Howard Crews

Fallbrook

The politics of our government

This is an analysis of why the U.S. government is not providing its citizens with the kinds of programs that the average American needs, and why this country is in our current economic and financial crisis.

The politicians who determine the living conditions of our citizens are operating in a very corrupt system. In order to get elected to office and stay there, they must retain the financial backing of the big corporations, who in turn require cooperation on issues that affect their profits.

On many vital issues like the following, citizens have limited representation in Congress: No low-cost government-controlled health care as enjoyed in Europe and Canada. Both Republicans and Democrats offer the citizens health care insurance, not a true health care program. Prescription drugs are sold for half of our price in other countries. Millions of living wage jobs are given to cheaper foreign laborers. There are many other issues like illegal immigration, foreign worker visas, unfair trade agreements, lack of business regulation and 40,000 lobbyists.

Fewer than 100 members of Congress have signed a petition to install taxpayer financing of all political campaigns, but most politicians prefer their current financial gains.

Herbert Pairitz

Carlsbad

Why Congress wants President Obama to fail

I asked this question of a friend who has studied ruling powers of the U.S. government (executive, Congress and the Supreme Court). She told me that the Supreme Court watches over the executive branch and Congress' action in relationship to the Constitution and federal laws, and does not create laws or govern. However, the other two branches do, and Congress has continuously from the beginning tried to subjugate the executive branch to a less powerful position so that it can be the supreme ruling authority of the country.

The leadership of the major political parties is more concerned with getting more power than the welfare of the American people, and will only act in favor of the people when it serves its interest to do so. When a president is very popular (like Obama) with the American people, the leadership of both major parties in Congress jointly and continuously tries to undermine the president by creating problems, and then blaming the president for those failures.

The fact is, they look on the president as their enemy, who must be controlled or politically destroyed. This is why Congress wants President Obama to fail!

Gary Myers

Oceanside

Snail darter needs to exit stage left

It is sad that such a big fuss is made over the life expectancy of the snail darter and its ilk. That little guy has had his many "hours upon the stage," while those countless extinct species before him have come and gone, and humanity is none the worse for their departure.

Whether they had any purpose for being other than their own survival is a matter of conjecture. Darwin couldn't have explained the "system" any better â€"â€" the survival of the fittest. …

Melvin Barnert

Oceanside

Show some leadership

We cannot dump/fire the entire California legislative and executive branches of our state government and elect 122 new leaders (40 state senators, 80 members of the state assembly and the governor and lieutenant governor). With this in mind, it is time for our state leaders, and I use the term loosely, to show some leadership.

I say the above after hearing another story about teacher layoff notices and hearing that the state is already $8 billion in the red for the 2009-10 fiscal year.

For several years, there has been story after story that the California economy was one of the top 10 of all economies around the world, some indicating that if California were its own country, that as recently as a few years ago, it was ranked as high as fifth. I say this because many of these years have included significant fee increases for all of the post-secondary schools and most recently, a reduction in services.

Constantly we are told we need to sell bonds to pay for schools or roads, and to sell them, we are told the bonds are not taxes. Bull. A bond today is a tax for someone tomorrow. California politicians, show some leadership.

Andrew Gigliotti

Vista

School cuts are fantastic

I think the school cuts are fantastic! I drive by schools on my way home from work, and all I see is what looks like children of illegal Mexicans. Now I'm not a racist and I totally understand why they come here. But my tax dollars pay for them, including schools.

The United States should make Mexico pay for them, not me. I'm struggling like everyone else. I get no breaks from this government. I think they should close a few schools, or give me a tax write-off.

Frank Medici

Vista

Dog beach proponents are misguided

Sadly, Hugh Foley is misguided ("Put dog beach at river's mouth," Letters, March 12). His attempts to coerce sane public opinion are futile â€"â€" his arguments are spurious, his facts are wrong. It smacks of desperation.

The city has made it quite clear that a dog beach is unacceptable. How can Foley assert that seagulls are "the suspected culprits in the study"? Is he an ornithological biologist who has done serious work on this issue? Until the study is complete, which it will be, none of us will know the true answer.

Allowing dogs to roam freely in the river mouth will only compound the problem. Regular stiffer legal enforcement of this area by the Harbor Police is urgently required to ensure preservation of this environmentally sensitive area.

No, Oceanside will not reap the rewards Mr. Foley confidently expects. Conversely, many beach users, and especially those with young families, will be put off from using a "dog-friendly" pooping beach. The city does not, as he says, "come out a winner." The city, and all the Oceanside residents, as well as visitors, become losers with a dog beach!

William Cousins

Oceanside

Public needs state's media shield laws

Readers should not think that Jim Trageser represents even a small fraction of the news-gathering profession when he opposes laws to let other reporters keep their sources confidential ("Shield laws bad news for everyone," March 15).

The arguments he gave were heard from very few people when the laws we all benefit from were debated 30 to 40 years ago. Most were lawyers anxious to use every trick to defend criminals, or politicians who wanted to bury embarrassing information. Jim says "shield" laws should be referred to as "more secrecy in journalism" laws. The laws actually assure that more important news will be reported. Where would Watergate investigations have gone without both newspaper and grand jury promises of confidentiality?

When reporting on government and every conceivable kind of commerce and charity, it is routine for someone to tell a reporter, "Don't quote me, but …." I've been on both sides of that relationship. The public needs California's laws and should fight for a similar national law.

Howard Williams

Vista

Safety more important than profit

To those who have the power to save lives: Taxpayers are the FAA's customers â€"â€" not the industry that they are supposed to regulate!

Human life is more important than bailing out/supporting airlines (and other businesses) that are mismanaged by greedy CEOs (who stupidly wonder why crashes because of overdue maintenance, and continually abusing their customers, has led to fewer sales).

Save lives â€"â€" not weak corporations that should perish â€"â€" so that our economy is driven by "the survival of the fittest."

Repeating failed strategies not only does not help our economy, it causes greater harm. We need to try new solutions to reassure those who hold U.S. debt and to regain confidence in our economy.

Nora La Corte

Carlsbad

Change you thought you could count on

Up until the Democrats took over both houses of government in 2006, the economy was great! The Dow was up in the 13Ks and the jobless rate at around 5 percent. When the Democrats took over, everything went south. Since King Obama began his presidency, the Dow has lost 2,000 points-plus and the unemployment rate is near double digits (change you can count on continuing).

We are heading toward socialism (in Marxist theory). It is the stage following capitalism in the transition of society to communism. Communism was developed by, of all people, Lenin! Are you Obama supporters grasping this yet? Those of you who were told you were prejudiced if you didn't vote for Obama, is this the change you wanted?

Totalitarian states are dominated by a single party. … For your tax dollars in the pork-ulus bill … you will have paid $30 million for a mouse in San Francisco, an $8 billion railway from Dizzy Land to Lost Wages and Somewhere, U.S. and hundreds of thousands of dollars to find out why pigs stink!

Yes folks, this is change you can count on for at least until 2010, when the people say enough is enough.

Fidel (Jay) Jiron

Oceanside

Gays, lesbians out to destroy religion

The gay and lesbian community preaches to the straight community the woes of marriage, the divorce rate, spousal abuse, et al. Yet they want to marry and will stop at nothing to get what they want. Now they say they are a minority.

Nora Klynjan, Letters, March 11: Article 14, No state shall create laws that discriminate against any minority. Richard Weddleton (Letters, March 11) writes of an attempt to deprive a substantial minority of our population. That's kind of an oxymoron.

As a public works contractor, I regularly fill out paperwork regarding the minority status of my employees. I do not recall seeing gay or lesbian as a minority box to check. Steven Holman, Letters, March 11, has it close to right. The majority voted to protect their rights. The majority being people, not any one special rights group.

It is my belief that the gays and lesbians realize most religious organizations will never accept them, so they are on a mission to destroy organized religion by way of the United States government. After all, taking that tax-exempt status away (which I do not believe they should have done anyway) scares the hell out of them. To keep it, they will cave in to anything.

Robert DeRieux

Fallbrook

Outraged, but not in the intended way

Re: "Budget woes cut health care for illegal immigrants," March 15: I'm not sure how this article was intended to make me feel, or whether it was directed toward me at all. My wife and I are struggling, too, but we've always been expected to either pay for medical insurance (which we do), or else pay for medical expenses out of pocket.

If I were to go to the hospital without insurance, I'd be hounded relentlessly until the bill was paid in full. Period. And if I were to die before it was paid, my wife would inherit the bill. So, was I supposed to feel outrage that these folks would no longer be receiving free medical care? Do you mean to tell me that they've been getting it for free up until now?

I'm kind of outraged, all right. Just not the way that I believe the article intended.

Harvey Bell

Escondido