Stop apologizing for the ACA site
I'm tired of President Barack Obama mewling "mea culpa" about the health care website.
He should say to those states having problems signing up, "You were supposed to design your own website. If you couldn't, we said we'd design a federal one for you."
Hating the government as much as those red states do, why would they ever let the government design something they could do -- in fact, were supposed to do -- themselves? It's a self-fulfilling prophecy: "The government does a lousy job. We will refuse to design our own site, then complain when the government one is dysfunctional. Just like we knew it would be."
I actually think it was a tactic on their part. If those states had executed their responsibility under the Affordable Care Act, this problem wouldn't exist.
There is little discussion about the fact that the state run exchanges are working quite well. When will Democrats learn to stop apologizing all over themselves? The right never does.
Conference being ignored by press
For almost two weeks, the U.N. Climate Conference has been taking place in Warsaw, Poland. Yet, we are seeing virtually no coverage of this vitally important event in the daily press.
Amy Goodman has been broadcasting from the conference on Pacifica Radio: Reports from representatives of island nations of the devastation of their homes; eloquent appeals from young people to save the Earth; and reports from scientists on the effects of climate change.
Several days ago, representative of 133 poor countries walked out of the conference -- protesting the refusal of the rich nations to discuss compensation for damage from climate change caused by the emission of greenhouse gasses.
Why are the newspapers not reporting on this daily? In whose interest is this information being censored?
Response to a letter and column
I would like to respond to Claire Baker's letter, "Too many tragic gun accidents," and E.J. Dionne's column, "Is the United States becoming kinder, gentler nation?" both of which were printed on Nov. 19.
Baker ignores the fact that many more lives are saved by the lawful use of a firearm than are lost through the negligent use of a firearm. Also, most firearm accidents, which have been declining in the last few decades, occur when criminal activity is involved, such as gang activity or selling illegal drugs and a gun is present in the home of someone not legally allowed to handle a firearm.
Dionne's column ignores the fact that Australia's gun confiscation has done more harm than good, as shown by such headlines in Australia as, "New plan unveiled to tackle out-of-control gun violence" or "Is Australia staring down the barrel of gun crisis?"
We don't need unworkable ideas that only aggravate a situation and trample on the rights of innocent people.
Inherent right of a child's existence
To elect to have unprotected sex is a choice.
If the act results in incarnation, should the law have the power to veto what is a natural phenomenon? To render the occurrence null and void via abortion-on-demand?
The unborn child is a sovereign power, "For children, being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth ... The elder shall serve the younger." (Romans 9:11-12)
"As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the father's sake." (Romans 11:28)
Refusal to recognize the inherent right of the child to exist leads to annihilation of the youngster due to no fault of his or her own. Sadly, we've become a desensitized society.
The unborn should come with a warrant of security. Jesus said, "Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me; for of such is the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 19:14)