xml:space="preserve">

Concerned about divisive rhetoric, vandalism

I’m an 80-year-old naturalized citizen from the U.K. and for 60 of those years the wife of a career U.S. airman. Within a month, I had my flags, front and back of my home, stabbed and torn, and my car vandalized with car keys or other device down both sides of the doors. And why? Because I have a sticker on my car which reads, “I love Pres. Trump.”

One of my flags supports the Tea Party. The other, and more importantly, is the flag of the United States of America. My flags, which hang from my fence posts, were damaged last year also in a less obvious way which I thought could have been squirrels. The car damage happened during a visit to my doctor in Pikesville in front of a multistory physicians building whilst I parked for maybe an hour.

Advertisement

Is this the type of behavior most Democrats condone? The disgusting, belittling and divisive rhetoric emanating from the party toward Republicans and violent, destructive actions we have come to expect from supporting rioters and last but not least the attempts to bring down our president and family, nullifying the votes of the American public, is this now the norm? If not, where is the condemnation from Democrat leaders or supporters?

Democrats in the past have done much good and many, maybe most , have good hearts. Only they can purge the party of the hateful elements. What’s happening these days is not the way to a free, happy civilized society.

Meanwhile, I will buy new flags and continue to support President Trump, the Constitution and am more determined that ever to honor good, sensible politicians and policies that keep America great and free. I owe this country so much.

Lucille. C. Kerns

Westminster

Contrary to editorial, Medicare for All is not something for nothing

In response to your guest editorial of March 6 entitled, ”Medicare for All demands financial plan.” I would like to make the following commentary. Rep. Jayapal’s bill to reintroduce former Rep. John Conyer’s Medicare for All bill (H676) has 107 co-sponsors at its introduction. The former bill acquired 171 co-sponsors, but only after years of persuasion and debate. Jayapal’s bill is off to a much better start even without the support of House leaders Pelosi and Hoyer, who have never signed on to a single-payer bill presented in the House of Representatives. Although the editorial is riddled with distortions and exaggerations, it does present some very telling facts.

The United States pays more for health care with poorer results than any developed nation — all of which have some form of single-payer system. The editorial refers to a study prepared by a notoriously anti-government center at George Mason University. That center is funded by the Koch brothers who are always railing against governmental social welfare programs. The study estimates dramatic increases in federal spending for health care. This is absolutely true. Under a Medicare for All program the government would pay all your medical bills — no co-pay, no deductibles and no premiums (of which a large portion goes for administrative fees and excessive CEO salaries in the insurance industry).

Obviously Medicare for All is not something for nothing. We would have to pay for our health care through taxes; i.e., payroll and income, but the cost would be far less and the services far greater than those in the existing dysfunctional system. Presently we either overpay for our services and drugs with poor results, or we pay nothing and are left to chance or are totally forgotten. The editorial ends by saying that a compelling economic argument has not been made in support of Jayapal’s bill; however, the author overlooks that the economic argument has been answered by countries throughout the world. Most countries of Europe and Scandinavia have created programs that provide their citizens services with better results at far less cost than our present system. We need to recognize that Rep. Jayapal has looked at those programs and wants the United States to generate its answer as well.

Wilbur T. Wright Jr.

Uniontown

The writer is a member of Healthcare is a Human Right — Carroll County.

Clintons deserve criticism from balanced political cartoons

I want to congratulate the TIMES for showing more balance in their political cartoons. Some of the absolute hatred shown for Donald Trump which was shown day after day and actually began as soon as he was elected and no doubt began in Baltimore, was becoming somewhat unnerving.

The job of a newspaper is to disseminate legitimate news, not to join in the attempted destruction of one person or one group of people. The fourth estate seems to have forgotten this and it is disheartening. One of our most influential publications who used to have as a slogan “All The News That’s Fit To Print,” seems to have changed to a different slogan — “We’ve Got To Get Rid Of Trump.”

It’s also disheartening to see some of the responses to the more balanced approach of the Times in regard to political cartoons. In a word they are furious. They want our local publication to toe the liberal line and only the liberal line. The operative word now seems to be progressive since liberal doesn’t sell well anymore. But they’re fooling no one.

Advertisement

One letter writer was quite upset that the Times would have the audacity to criticize Bill and Hillary Clinton. If any pair deserves criticism it’s the Clintons — better known as Billary. I could belabor that point but I’m only allowed 400 words and we conservatives play by the rules, something the Clintons have never done.

Don Haines

Woodbine

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement