I am surprised and disappointed at the trash people send to have published in the Open Forum column of this paper. Calling people "invertebrates," making broad statements equating liberal with socialist, belittling and devaluing the deaths of our troops in Iraq in comparison to crime, and accusing those willing to march in a parade, in front of a populace much of which will not embrace their cause, of being spineless, are opinions which belong in a newspaper only insofar as they are supportive of some reasonable argument. The Open Forum column of any newspaper is there for people to provide legitimate argumentation in support of their views, not so people can tout conspiracy theories and label groups of people with adjectives.
Furthermore, it seems to me that one cannot accuse a group of conspiracy because members or non-members of the community have written letters to a newspaper regarding circumstances surrounding that group, without accusing the newspaper itself of having a "hidden agenda" by publishing them. In other words, if one is going to accuse a group of subversive plotting, why not attack the fountainhead by which their plot is registered -- in this case, The Dispatch.
Seeing the disgustingly partisan nature of letters published in Open Forum, I find it difficult to not find a subversive element in the community, that is, the element that is undermining our intelligence by uselessly name-calling, generalizing, and failing to provide arguments that are valid, much less to provide arguments at all.
The New Plan
Reading a recent paper, the article re: Republican Party(read President Bush) plan to allow future retirees to put aside a portion of their Social Security retirement funds into private savings accounts, I had a vision of the future.
Like the sorcerer viewing his crystal ball I saw a future no one has spoken of. The New Plan:
Investments may very well be quite good the first few years with good returns and the entitled retirees will be doing quite well, in fact, better than the old system retiree, the folks who did not change to the investment system. Then the bad times arrive as they always do. Another Enron, or a Black Friday, a deep depression. Returns falter and the retirees during these years must take a much reduced pension. Oh the screams, crying,"why doesn't the government do something?" Oh be assured the government will help you. How you ask? Why just take a few percentage points from the those well off old system retirees who are doing pretty good,they can take a cut and help out their brethren. We haven't even considered those who did not make good choices at all in their investments. Share the burden, it's only fair. Isn't It?
We captured Saddam Hussein, and it didn't do any good, and it will not do any good to capture Bin Laden, either.
The morning paper
To the Brainerd Daily Dispatch and whom it may concern. I'm a resident of Brainerd and receive the daily paper. I've got wind of the new policy change, what I speak of is delivering the paper in the morning, instead of the afternoon.
I, and many others, prefer the paper in the evening after work, it's a relaxing tool, if you will.
What about the kids who now deliver the paper after school? Most will lose their job with the change because they have school and they don't have time before school. I used to deliver the paper as a child. When you're too young to work anywhere else due to the child labor laws act, delivering the paper is a good start in becoming a responsible adult. You learn a lot of skills: money management, collection, and responsibility of paying your bills on time in full.
The Sunday paper on April 4, 2004, was late when the adult delivery person wasn't responsible enough to deliver it on time, but the old paper boy, who is 12 years old, has always had the paper, rain or shine, delivered on time.
Monday night ABC-TV aired a three-hour special "Jesus and PaulThe Word
and the Witness." The program was hosted by Peter Jennings. It was very much like "The Search for Jesus," a previous ABC special Jennings hosted.
ABC-TV was unwilling to present a Scriptural concept of Jesus, choosing to
give a distorted view with the impression that the New Testament cannot be
trusted. Since (in their view) no reputable scholar trusts the New Testament, ABC elected to present modern day "theologians" whom they portray as more knowledgeable and trustworthy to debunk the New Testament account.
The program presented the "expert" analysis from liberal theologians and carried an underlying world view of distrust in Scripture and Jesus' divinity. According to Focus on the Family's Tom Neven, "Jennings repeatedly refers to "the Jesus movement" as if it were just another political party or faction. They also pit Paul against Jesus, as if the apostle taught things that contradicted Jesus, and some refer to Paul as "the founder of Christianity."
This account is totally biased and distorts the truth about who Jesus really
is and what He came to earth to do. I'm appalled at the poor journalism you are allowing to be broadcast on your stations.
David L. Greaver
Brainerd Dispatch ©2013. All Rights Reserved.