The Bulletin Online - Letters December 2007

FRONT PAGE

OPINION
Letters to the Editor

FEATURES
Local Calendar
Local Restaurants
Local Entertainment
Movie

MEDIA KIT
click here

CLASSIFIEDS
click here

SUBMIT AN AD
click here

ARCHIVES
(by pub. date)
click here

E-MAIL US
Editor
Advertising
Publisher
Webmaster

The Bulletin
(NEW ADDRESS)
P.O. Box 20
Montgomery, TX 77356
Phone:
(936) 539-2200
©2007
The Bulletin Online
newspaper is published Thursdays - Conroe, Lake Conroe, Willis, Montgomery, The Woodlands, Oak Ridge, Tomball, Magnolia, Porter, New Caney and Spring

Letters from our Readers - December 2007

Ruthie Foster
I don't know about Ms. Foster, I'm not much of a folk fan, but when Aretha Franklin's second album was called "The Electrifying Aretha Franklin," it was because music critics, nor Columbia Records had heard anybody like Miss Franklin before. She was certainly "electrifying" and was fresh out of her father's Baptist Church, where she got her experience as an exciting singer and performer. She had learned well, traveling with her dad, all during her teen years, to churches all over the country, where she competed with those churches' very best soloist.
As a matter of fact, Rev. Franklin would request the BEST they had to offer to appear right before he presented his daughter. And, there were singers who were just as good as Aretha and gave her a "run for her money." It seemed unfair that the Rev. would put her through such paces, but it was wonderful training for her. Gospel singers are always in competition to "shout the church."
One young singer in Kansas City was requested to sing right before such artists as The Caravans, the Staple Singers, the O'Neal Twins, James Cleveland, Mahalia Jackson, Alex Bradford, Aretha Franklin, etc. Her name is Arvanna Rowe and she is still singing at Barker's Temple in Kansas City, MO. She and Aretha battled to the end as teenagers. Arvanna was such a great singer/performer, she often stole the show from the stars, some of whom stopped requesting Rowe and her three sisters. Rowe's singing, heighten by incredible screaming and histrionics were hard to follow, but she had been "shouting churches" since she was six years old. She actually told me regarding Aretha: "She was very good, but I've gave her a run for her money, honey."
Ralph
NYC

Operation Wetback
Many of our citizens believe that we cannot get rid of the millions of illegal immigrants we now have in our country and eliminate the cost and problems they cause. Fortunately, President Eisenhower showed us how to do it in 1954 and it worked for many years.
Eisenhower appointed retired General Joseph Swing to head the program called Operation Wetback. Because some immigration officials had political connections with special interest groups, Swing transferred them away from the border. Then officials conducted sweeps that rounded up many illegals. This caused many more illegals to leave our country voluntarily.
Illegals that were rounded up were not released at our border where they could quickly re-enter our country. They were put on buses and trains and released many miles into Mexico. Many others were put on ships and released at a Mexican port more than 500 miles south of our border.
All we need is the political will to do the same thing today. This means that we must get congress to repeat what Eisenhower and Swing did. This includes enforced penalties for those who hire illegals. Without jobs, illegals won’t enter. It can be done! Go to www.thenewamerican.com for more information.
Larry William Bradbury
Reseda, CA

Sickened by the Hypocrisy
On November 15, 2007, U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton announced the arrest of Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila on drug smuggling charges. Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila, the drug smuggler that testified against Border Patrol Agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean, was finally arrested for smuggling drugs at a U.S. port of entry. It’s Aldrete-Davila's third arrest.
After appearing in federal court in El Paso on Friday afternoon, Aldrete-Davila now faces two counts of possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance, one count of conspiracy to import a controlled substance and one count of conspiracy to possess a controlled substance with intent to distribute. The alleged offenses happened between June 1, and November 30, 2005. (According to http://thenewamerican.com/node/1664 , federally imprisoned Border Patrol Agents Ramos and Compean met up with Aldrete-Davila at the border in February of 2005; at that time he was trying to smuggle $1 million worth of marijuana into the United States.) Aldrete-Davila could be jailed or heavily fined or both for his latest smuggling attempts. Unfortunately, Johnny Sutton will be the prosecutor, which certainly seems like a conflict of interest in this case.
Incredibly, in the press release concerning Aldrete-Davila's arrest, Sutton points to the supposed "crimes" of Ramos and Compean with this statement: "Just as Aldrete's alleged illegal conduct did not excuse the crimes committed by Compean and Ramos, likewise, their crimes will not excuse his."
I am sickened by the hypocritical attitude of Johnny Sutton for prosecuting the law enforcement agents that tried to arrest the same criminal that he is prosecuting now.
Frank M. Pelteson
Las Vegas, NV

We are Not Your Enemy
Let's start with the price of gasoline. If the wind blows, it goes up. If the season's change, the gas blends change and the price goes up. If a refinery is shut down for a storm, the price goes up. Why has our Federal government allowed the price of gasoline to remain so high?
CEOs' of several large companies were invited to Congress to speak about high gasoline prices. However, they weren't required to swear in on a Bible. Nothing definitive was explained by the CEOs', other than that's just the nature of the oil business.
So let's look at something definitive. All companies netted the LARGEST profits EVER. How could their environment have been so bad that such HUGE PROFITS were made?
Why can't our FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TAX the oil companies until they become MORE REASONABLE. If they don't comply, TAX THEM AGAIN. The USA'S spending is MONUMENTAL. That is know as LEVERAGE!!! It would certainly appear that our FEDERAL GOVERNMENT would rather support and reward BIG OIL and not their OWN CITIZENS. WHY? WHY do WE allow them?
One oil company is advertising how the profits they made are being used for research on fuels. No time limit as to when something will be developed and in use. Aren't we so fortunate for that explanation. They have perfected manipulation on us.
Why don't they convince environmentalists that they need to increase the size of their refineries or build new ones? With all of those profits, why don't they reward the buyers of Gasoline (us) with permanent price reductions? So you say, we are in Iraq, what about their oil? Can any one answer that question? I don't believe they have a refinery in Iraq.
What immediate benefit are we receiving from the oil companies? None. What has our Federal government done? Well sometime in two thousand and what, autos will have to get more mileage per gallon. YIPPEEEE! What does that do for us now?
What can our State, County, and City governments do to help us? They have forgotten about how easy it used to be to place a tax on gasoline and reap the rewards.
If gasoline prices were rolled back to $1.88 a gallon and held steady, the State could add a .35 tax increase per gallon and the coffers would fill up in no time. Even the Counties and Cities could benefit. It would probably enable us to eliminate Property Tax all together. Things might be WONDERFUL AGAIN.
What does our Federal government do about this? They keep on letting BIG OIL MAKE TONS OF MONEY and destroy our CASH COW.
What does the state do? Turns loose the DOGS (the Florida department of revenue). If you do not set the tax meter on maximum, we will DESTROY YOU. If you question us, we will DOUBLE YOUR TAXES. If it moves, TAX IT! If it's nailed down. TAX IT! If it's not nailed down. TAX IT! Let's tax business computer networking, remember that?
Why don't the States, Counties, and Cities take this same aggressive posture with the Federal government and get back our CASH COW? Then the Florida Department of Revenue would be a HERO. REMEMBER, WE ARE CITIZENS OF THE USA AND THE STATE OF FLORIDA, NOT ONLY DO WE DESERVE BETTER TREATMENT AND REPRESENTATION, WE DEMAND IT!!!!
Let's be realistic. None of this will happen because we won't get involved and we will continue to be trampled by all forms of government. This doesn't have to happen, does it?
One more thing, Let's shut down CITGO (Mr. Chavez, I hate America). Better still, Let's bring back US GAS AND OIL. Stand up and be counted. Uh that goes for our government too.
Robert Raney
Youngstown, FL

Give ‘Spin’ a Chance
These have been difficult times for Republican “spinmeisters.” How do you “spin” it when President Bush weighs an issue like insurance company profits versus health care for little kids and comes down proudly on the side of the insurance companies? Or when Vice President Cheney declares himself a fourth branch of government, accountable to no one?
Not that Tony Snow and his Fox TV adjunct press office isn’t up to the task (though the Cheney disclaimer was so weird that Snow sent out the blonde ditz, Dana Perino, to stifle questions with a smile and a giggle). On most issues where the administration is totally at odds with common sense or decency, the response is either to blame Bill Clinton or suggest the questioner isn’t supporting our troops.
The latest “spin” heroes for the GOP have been true believers Bill Kristol and Fred Barnes, shining lights of what the right-wing calls journalism (as it is practiced at both Fox News and the Weekly Standard). Kristol recently wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post in which he claimed the Iraq war was a great success, causing sane people to cry and the blogosphere to crash and burn.
Not to be outdone, Barnes wrote a story in the current Weekly Standard titled “An Unusually Effective Minority” in which he praised the Republican minority in Congress for bringing representative government to a halt. “Democrats are stymied, foiled and frustrated. Republicans have hindered or obstructed them at almost every turn” wrote an admiring Barnes. He concedes, almost in passing, that polls show “Democrats are more popular than Republicans, and their stand on most issues is preferred.” But the point is those issues that people want are going nowhere, thanks to the Republican opposition!
Next to blocking efforts to get our troops out of an Iraq civil war, Barnes writes that congressional Republicans have had their greatest success in killing Democratic bills that expand funding for stem cell research, making it easier for workers to join unions and allowing the government to negotiate lower drug prices.
Nothing is more important to this dogged GOP minority than maintaining the Bush tax cuts for the very rich. This dedicated effort to widen the gap between rich and poor is attracting world-wide attention.
In a recent issue of the London Observer, Paul Harris reports that in 1985 the U.S. had just 13 billionaires – now there are more than 1,000. “America’s super-rich have returned to the days of the Roaring Twenties. As the rest of the country struggles to get by, a huge bubble of multi-millionaires live in their own world of private education, private health care and gated mansions. Their world has a name: ‘Richistan.’ There, every dream, but the American Dream itself, can come true.”
That’s the world the Republican minority in Congress that Fred Barnes admires so much is working to preserve and maintain.
Surely someone in Karl Rove’s office must worry how that “success” is going to play in the 2008 elections. Blocking Democrats in Congress from passing legislation that people want is going to take a lot of spin, or as Ricky Ricardo would say to Lucy, someone’s got some ‘splaining’ to do.
Victor Kamber

Where Is the KKK When You Need Them?
I'm sure you've heard about the shooting in Pasadena, 2 weeks ago, the man shot 2 men that was robbing a house.
This week-end Quanell X is suppose to protest outside of the man's house that shot the 2 men. I want to know where if the KKK? Why aren't they protesting against Quanell X and his people?
Name Withheld

Alcohol Free
A couple of days ago while stripping some “hostile” wallpaper my mind drifted away.
I remembered my stupid actions as a young drunk. Then I thought of the three sober years of owning and operating a neighborhood bar and witnessing the “wheeling and dealing” plans made on bar room napkins.
My final thought surfaced to be thankful that President G.W. Bush is alcohol-free.
Mike Sawyer
Birmingham, AL

Desperate
Much is being made of the upcoming presidential elections. Many people are desperate for change and in the frenzy the issues are bypassed by multi-million dollar campaigns and who can buy the most media time. After the hype, we all want the candidate that best represents our vision.
I’ve decided to approach the elections the way I approach any major purchase. Using a car for example: I would not buy a car based on appearance, or the biggest price tag, or media blitzes, and I would definitely not buy from a dealership that received most of its funding from an auto repair shop. I would look for a car that has consistent quality, safety, and dependability, that will save money; one designed for the driver. I would buy it from a dealership funded by the very drivers it hopes to sell to.
Using this common logic, my candidate is Dennis Kucinich. He has a consistent voting record, is funded by the people, not big corporations, has a plan for single-payer universal health care, a plan to get us out of Iraq immediately and keep us out of Iran, a plan for education, a plan for the economy, a plan for the environment moving away from dependence on foreign oil, a plan for immigration, and most important – a plan to restore the U.S. constitution and the values it puts forth to American people. Dennis Kucinich may not be flashy or receive any contributions from corporate giants, but he does represent the people’s hopes and dreams, and he has viable plans to get us there. On an internet poll of 197,000+ people that asks solely about the issues and their importance, Dennis Kucinich ranks number ONE with consistently over 85% of the people.
Tomi G. Phillips
The Woodlands, TX

Do Legislators Really Comprehend the Medicare Program?
I am responding to Texas Congressman Joe Barton's editorial on the Medicare Prescription Drug Plan. Apparently, Barton is another legislator who is only mildly aware of the program's reality and how it affects recipients.
First of all, you must be a Medicare recipient to apply for the Prescription Drug Plan. That being stated, most of those on Medicare are on fixed income; consequently, few can afford the additional costs of another government health (Rx) plan. Also don't forget that Medicare does NOT pay for all medical, hospital and other related expenses.
Generally, it is a smart move for Medicare recipients also to acquire a Supplemental Health Plan coverage, one like the one provided by AARP.
However, when you're talking about eligible recipients paying for the Medicare Plan coverage, Supplemental Health Care coverage and then also Medicare Prescription Drug Plan coverage that must be paid as out-of-pocket expenses, how much do you think people over 65 and/or Disabled on fixed income are left with to pay for other living expenses? Not much, if anything!
The government does provide assistance for many of those on fixed income who earn up to a certain amount, which is based on the number of family members and the gross annual income of the family.
The government's assistance provides $38 per month for those applicants who are accepted. The problem is that most Medicare Prescription Drug Plans will charge more than that to provide the needed coverage. In other words, even those who get government assistance to become members of the plan will have to pay an out-of-pocket premium expense that most cannot afford.
In addition, drug plans do NOT cover ALL prescription medications so prospective applicants must be VERY careful to be certain that their prescription drugs ARE covered.
Furthermore, just because a provider does currently cover the specific prescription drug does NOT mean that the plan will continue to cover it in 6 months.
In fact, providers are notorious for eliminating various drugs from their plans and/or they may reduce the quantity allowed during the year. If this occurs, plan members will have more out-of-pocket expense that they cannot afford. Consequently, those who are covered must review their policy EVERY 6 months to ensure that no change has been made by the provider. And exactly how many Medicare recipients who are over 65 years old and/or who are Disabled can do that consistently?
There's yet another issue re: the Medicare Prescription Drug Plan. God forbid a member of the plan needs a "high-end" prescription drug every month (e.g., certain heart medication) for each year that falls into the category of a non-covered drug. What happens then is that there is an additional expense for the covered member that could be quite expensive.
While I'm in agreement with Congressman Barton that the Medicare Prescription Drug Plan is a good idea on paper and it is definitely needed by Medicare recipients, there are MANY changes that are needed to the program before it is truly deemed a successful program. Currently, the plan helps many yet also does NOT help many recipients.
Like so many of our elected officials, the congressman, as well as most of the public does NOT have all the facts regarding Medicare in general, and specifically the Medicare Prescription Drug Plan.
Peter Stern
Driftwood, TX

Pearl Harbor Day Should Live in Infamy and Be Remembered
There are only a few events in American history whose significance is so powerful that hearing the date instantly recalls its dramatic impact on our nation. For Americans of different generations, December 7, 1941 and September 11, 2001 represent tragic and historic dates in our history. In the words of President Franklin Roosevelt, December 7, 1941 is “a date that will live in infamy.” Today, 66 years later, we honor not only the 2,333 brave service members who lost their lives in the sudden attack on Pearl Harbor, but the 11 million Americans who fought and won the Second World War, and secured freedom for future generations.
During four years of warfare, young men from cities and small towns, and from so many diverse backgrounds, defeated the armies of two fascist empires, and liberated millions of people in Europe and Asia from the clutches of tyranny, and even genocide.
One of the greatest heroes of World War II was Audie Murphy, a farm boy from Kingston, Texas. Almost immediately after the attack on Pearl Harbor, 17-year-old Audie tried to enlist in the military, but the services rejected him for being underage. Then a few months later, he tried again, but he was rejected by the Marines and the paratroopers for being too short (5'5). But he refused to quit. By the time the war ended, Audie Murphy had become the most decorated soldier of the entire conflict - earning the Congressional Medal of Honor, and 32 other citations. Today, we remember Audie Murphy as one of the all-time Texas legends, becoming a famous actor after his heroic service.
About a decade ago, Tom Brokaw’s book “The Greatest Generation” reminded us of the sacrifices that so many others have made to keep our country safe and free.
After the book came out, I asked myself, “What would our generation do if we were called? If America was ever attacked again, would we, too, stand and fight for freedom?” And then on September 11th, 2001, it happened. A new “date of infamy” was marked on the pages of history. And a new generation of heroes has sprung to action.
The attacks of 9/11 were a 21st-century Pearl Harbor, and it has pushed America into a struggle that is just as important as any war we have ever fought: the Global War on Terror. Our enemies have already proven that they have no respect for human life. They have vowed to subjugate the world to their radical fundamentalism and to establish a global theocracy based on their corrupted version of Islam. We cannot allow them to succeed.
As the central front in the Global War on Terror, Iraq and Afghanistan is where the forces of freedom, tolerance and democracy are fighting to defeat the tyranny and oppression of Al-Qaeda and radical Islam. We know from our troops in the field that if we allow the terrorists to win in Iraq or Afghanistan, they will escalate their terror against America and other free countries.
This war has been costly for America in both lives and dollars, but under the leadership of General David Petraeus, our courageous men and women in uniform have made tremendous progress over the past year. In fact, General Petraeus has recommended a drawdown of troops because conditions on the ground merit such action.
We should never underestimate the ability of nations to change, and for war to yield to peace. The nation that attacked Pearl Harbor – Japan – is now one of our staunchest allies. In September of 1944, a young Navy pilot named George H.W. Bush was shot down in the Pacific by the Japanese. Over sixty years later, his son, President George W. Bush welcomed Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi to the White House.
Our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines have sacrificed greatly to keep us safe and free, and we must support them as they complete their mission. Although some are calling for surrender, I remain dedicated to winning the War on Terror, so that future generations may experience the freedom past generations gave to us.
The Greatest Generation answered the call of Pearl Harbor. The torch has been passed and our generation must carry it out with the same courage and commitment.
Kay Bailey Hutchison

Government By Appointment
Peggy Hausman, a current member of The Woodlands Township Board, has questioned the wisdom of some board members to “rush to judgment” in making an interim board appointment next week (December 12 at 8 a.m.) as a replacement for Les Tarrance, an elected member who recently resigned. “How can a bunch of appointees appoint another appointee?” Hausman says. “The new Woodlands Township entity was approved by 86% of the voters in part so they could elect their own representatives. Why not wait a few months for the election authorized by the residents to decide who is going to represent them until 2010? The Woodlands Township election on May 8, 2008 will elect five board members at large. Why not let the sixth highest vote-getter be appointed to the vacant board position as a true representative of the majority of the people in The Woodlands, Texas - which is also in a democracy called the USA.”
Hausman is a community leader who has represented resident groups here for the past 25 years. She has announced that she intends to be a candidate to maintain her Township seat in the May election for the restructured Town Center Improvement District board of directors. She has stated that she will run on a “Family Focus” platform and work towards a board that will truly represent all Woodlands families. “We must ensure that the new responsibilities of The Woodlands Township board, also means that we will be held accountable for placing the preservation of family and resident interests before special interests.” Hausman said: “Making a rush appointment just weeks before a bona fide election is a negative way to begin the promising future of The Woodlands Township and a disservice to residents who are waiting and anxious to elect their first representatives
Paul Lazzaro
The Woodlands TX.

Time For A Change
Since the time I could legally vote I have been a diehard Republican. From the days of Richard Milhous Nixon to our current President, George W. Bush I have always voted Republican. Most of the time I voted straight Republican ticket.
But I have decided to change my party affiliation and vote for Hillary Rodham Clinton for President in 2008. I believe it is time for a change. From what I can see there just isn’t a person better qualified for the job as President of the United States than Hillary Rodham Clinton.
I recently visited her website (http://www.hillaryclinton.com) and was so impressed by what she wants to do once she becomes President. It brought tears to my eyes to think that, finally, here is a person who really cares about America and wants to do something about the problems facing our country.
Here are just a few things Hillary Rodham Clinton wants to do once she becomes President of the United States:
She wants to strengthen the middle class.
She wants to provide affordable and accessible health care for all Americans.
She wants to end the war in Iraq. She wants to promote energy independence and fight global warming. She is going to fulfill our promises to veterans. She supports parents and cares about children. She wants to restore America’s standing in the world after that despot George W. Bush has ruined our standing in the world. She is a champion for women. She wants a government that puts competency ahead of cronyism. She wants to strengthen our democracy. She wants to reform our immigration system.
Hillary Rodham Clinton delivered remarks in Clear Lake, IA on December 3 about her experience and vision for a new America. The following is an excerpt from her speech: "Standing up for America’s values and protecting our country and our people is the first job of the President. Bringing us together to end the war, fixing our economy, and taking on big challenges like immigration, health care, energy independence, climate change and so much else is what I will do. A President can't dodge the big fights, can’t find political cover, or have words speak louder than actions. A lot of words we have these days aren’t matched by action. And much of the actions I see, I simply disagree with. I have a very clear record on all of these issues. A record of 35 years of fighting for children and families, fighting for working people, fighting for our future – and as President, I will keep on fighting. But I’m running on more than just my record and my experience. I am also running on my vision and agenda of a new beginning for America.”
Isn’t that the type of person, the type of leader you want and we all need as the next President of the United States? Isn’t it time we took our country back and try and repair the damage that was done by the past Presidential Administration? I say it is time and the time is NOW to elect Hillary Rodham Clinton as President of the United States.
I’m going to be a HILLRAISER and join Team Hillary. I’ll put a bumper sticker on my car and wear my “Hillary for President” campaign button with pride. I really like the button that reads, “Hillary Cares about Me.” It has a cute little hand on it. And the button that reads, “I’m Your Girl” has a striking photo of Hillary Rodham Clinton on it. I’ll put Hillary for President signs in my yard, wear a Hillary for President T-shirt and campaign long and hard to make sure she gets elected as our next President of the United States. I’m not going to waste vote this time. I’m going to follow my heart and vote for Hillary Rodham Clinton for President of the United States.
I know that I will be standing alone at my family reunions and probably have to eat at a table by myself in another room after they find out I have switched sides. Instead of gift cards I’ll probably get coal in my stocking for Christmas. But I have to take a stand, even if it is an unpopular one. When you know you are right sometimes you have to stand alone.
Hillary Rodham Clinton is right for this country. In your heart, you KNOW she is right. Stand with me and let’s elect Hillary Rodham Clinton as our next President of these United States.
Ken McKee
Montgomery, Texas

How to Cut Illegal Immigration and Create Jobs
This week I heard Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez talk at the Baker Institute about what trade agreements have meant to our economy. Then I sat in a UK seminar at the Greater Houston Partnership. The
question is: does trade help us or hurt us? Facts show that it can cut illegal immigration and create jobs.
Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich declares that he has seen a UFO and wants to end NAFTA. However, over 1/3 of U.S. exports (which create jobs HERE) go to Mexico and Canada - our two NAFTA trade partners (no trade reported with UFO's to date).
Exports are up 50% from 2003, meaning it is creating 50% more jobs now than we had in 2003. Every $1 billion in U.S. exports creates over 20,000 American jobs HERE. Our NAFTA trade is up 200% and is approaching $1 trillion. That's a lot of jobs. Without NAFTA, the immigration pressure of Mexicans seeking jobs in the U.S. would be much higher. Without NAFTA, we'd have even more people trying to immigrate north!
Personal income -- the real test of whether trade works -- is UP in all 3 countries. So, the new jobs created by trade are raising all boats.
At the Houston Partnership today I heard British trade experts report that trade between the U.S. and England is up something like 50% in the last couple years. One speaker, the president of a small medical software company, described how a UK company called them about their technology -- and that meeting led to over 50% of their sales (and income) coming from international sales.
The UK connection has given a lot of American companies the global perspective, and contacts, they didn't have before. But at a recent Congressional town meeting I heard some people bemoaning the loss of a sock factory in the U.S. because of a one penny price difference. The answer was a "tariff" - but that is what led to the Great Depression of the 30's. I know of no one who wants to work for a sock factory at $6/hour, but I do know people who would love to work for an international medical software company.
This is a snapshot of the changes going on in the global economy that impacts our future. We need an American strategy to lead in technology if we are going to be a player in a 21st century in which most of the low-tech manufacturing has moved to China.
We have trade agreements pending with Colombia and other countries.Failure to pass these agreements will cost jobs in both countries. Europe is leading the U.S. in signing up new trade agreements in South
America (and elsewhere). A few years ago AT&T lost a $200 million sale of equipment Brazil wanted. The sale (and jobs) went to Canada because the Canadians had a trade deal with Brazil that cut tariffs10% on purchases made from Canada. Those jobs went to Canada instead of the U.S. because we didn't have a trade agreement - a 10% saving on a $200 million contract is $20 million, a significant sum anywhere.
Encourage Congress to approve the pending trade agreements. Encourage
more of them. They will help our economy create new jobs and compete with the Europeans who are ahead of us in setting up trade partnerships.
We should have learned from the Great Depression that increasing tariffs creates recessions, not jobs. We should realize that creating jobs in places like Mexico cuts the flow of job-seeking immigrants coming north. It's a win-win.
Trade deals can eliminate the need to build border walls.
Michael Fjetland
www.TexasViking.blogspot.com

You're Fat
A pastor friend once told me that he was embarrassed by the lack of physical fitness in his ministerial association.
I see the Internet picture of Bishop John-David Schofield who appears to be morbidly obese as he instructs his San Joaquin diocese in California to exit the Episcopal Church on a theological issue or risk moral decay.
I am concerned for the health of Bishop Schofied as he manifests the risk of physical decay possibly due to an improper diet and absence of exercise.
I would never want to offend Bishop Schofield, but “he is heavy, he is my brother and his welfare is my concern.”
Ironically, my first born is a John David.
Mike Sawyer
Birmingham, AL

The End of American Theocracy?
Will the presidential election of 2008 terminate with extreme prejudice the conservative ascendancy that has dominated the country for the last generation? The answer is yes. (Steve Fraser, Tomdispatch.com)
In 1968, when Nixon won the presidency, Kevin Phillips, was a political strategist for the Republican Party. He wrote the triumphant “Emerging Republican Majority,” having helped produce a more conservative Republican majority that would dominate American politics for decades.
In “American Theocracy” (his 13th book,) he displays a different attitude. No longer does he see Republican government as a source of stability and order. Instead, he presents a nightmarish vision of ideological extremism, catastrophic fiscal irresponsibility, rampant greed and dangerous shortsightedness. (New York Times)
After a brief respite during the Clinton years, Newt Gingrich made political hay with his “contract with America.” This promise never materialized and was immediately followed by Dick Cheney and other neo-con promoters of violent regime change and U.S. military domination. Their maniacal scheme for a “New American Century” masterfully beguiled many patriotic voters and placed an easily manipulated figurehead in the White House. Capitalizing on the 9-11 attack, they skillfully exploited ambivalent intelligence reports to shift directions and invaded Iraq under the thinly veiled disguise of “protecting our freedoms” and terror-coated it with the false threat of a “mushroom cloud.”
Only at moments of profound shock to the old order of things [such as] the Great Depression of the 1930s does such an upheaval become possible in a political universe renowned for its extraordinary capacity to duck things that matter. The trauma must be real and painful for the American people to react as one. (Steve Fraser)
We Americans will no longer tolerate the outsourcing of war by our government through corporate profiteering and then defending the war crimes of their paid killers. We will not allow a political party to adopt the rallying call of “support the troops” as solely their own, then cutting funds for rehabilitating those same troops. And oxymoronic Christian conservative “values,” such as worshipping God and water-boarding the Godless will, God-willing, never again be shouted from American pulpits.
“The political implosion of the Republican Party will make 2008 a year to remember.”
Bill Barnes
Conroe, TX

The 2008 Snake Race
Just reach inside the bag and pick our next president!
The Snake Oil Salesmen are selling again, but what's inside the packaging?
Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, Al Gore, John Kerry, Chuck Hagel, Newt Gingrich, to name a few --- what do they all have in common? Easy, none of them is worthy of being the next President of the United States.
There are several reasons why Americans are in big trouble, why the two-party political system continues its spiral-down dilemma at the national and local levels and why parties just can't seem to organize and gain momentum to win elections by providing intelligent, honest, unbiased and ethical candidates.
There are very few candidates in the public eye who offer American voters a reasonable choice. One of the big problems is that corruptive influences have saturated the presidential market place. Who is free of special interest campaign contributions and which candidate hasn't stepped on a lot of others on their way up in gathering marketable value?
Many wealthy special interests have purchased media publications / syndications, so where can average Americans find the truth? Some of the truth may be found on various blogs, but even blogs are NOT special interest proof.
While there is no shortage of political aspirations and financial muscling among prospective candidates, there appears to be a void in character and ethics. Whatever happened to an "Honest Abe" and where is the candidate who will provide the proverbial "chicken in every pot"? Apparently, those days are gone forever.
Seems like every candidate these days has at least one or two "skeletons hanging in the closet".
On a positive note... there are many grassroots potential leaders coming "out of the woodwork" because it has become apparent to them and to many voters that our American society needs them. Certainly we need more honor among politicians and require their independence of special interest dollars and perks. What's the use of having an Ethics Commission if the members are store-bought?
American families are hurting big-time! Home foreclosures are at an all time high and millions are without jobs and health care. Few Americans can keep up with their monthly living expenses. Many have been (and are) using credit cards for daily living expenses and have maxxed-out their credit limits owing creditors in record numbers.
If more angry and discontented voters feel the same way at the national and local levels, we may soon see a change for the better. If not, you may want to apply in advance for a passport and/or work visa while we still are able to freely travel abroad to find a new nation of residence.
Maybe we shouldn't act so quickly to build that 2,000-mile fence between Mexico and the U.S.? We may need the escape route.
Peter Stern
Driftwood, TX

Football Follies 2007
The “Football Follies” series of films contains classic highlights of players bumbling, stumbling, and fumbling their way across the gridiron. While highly entertaining – such as ex-Minnesota Viking Jim Marshall’s fumble recovery and ensuing 65 yard run to the wrong end zone – they also provide excellent examples of how not to play football.
Recent government forays into consumer regulation provide similar examples of how not to intervene in markets.
Take, for example, the public relations war surrounding the NFL Network. Last week’s game between the Dallas Cowboys and Green Bay Packers featured two 10-1 teams, with the winner becoming the frontrunner to reach the Super Bowl. But many fans used to seeing such contests couldn’t watch it.
Last year, the National Football League opted to move some of its games off of broadcast TV and onto its NFL Network, available only on cable and satellite services.
From the network’s inception, the NFL has prodded cable providers to include it on their basic tier of channels, as the two main satellite companies have done. But the major cable providers objected to the hefty price the NFL is seeking. They’ll carry it, they say, but only on the sports tier, which entails an additional expense and thus reaches far fewer viewers.
This has all the elements of a classic battle between marketplace titans – including the unfortunate attempt by one party to get government intervention on its side.
Such behavior is known as rent seeking, where businesses attempt to gain through government what they can’t win through market competition.
The NFL, probably the most muscular of all sports leagues, is no stranger to competition. But rather than battle it out on the field, the league has turned to the Federal Communications Commission and the Texas Legislature in order to force the cable industry’s hand.
This is not surprising, since the FCC has made it its business recently to involve itself in such matters. It is currently considering prohibiting providers from “tying” programming and instead forcing them to offer channels a la carte, and just last week began the process of regulating the market share of cable companies.
The FCC, though, has no monopoly on overreach. Earlier this year, the Texas Legislature came dangerously close to re-regulating Texas’ world-class electricity market – failing to do so only because of a technicality. Government regulators routinely interfere with insurance market transactions. And a Texas legislative committee held hearings earlier this week on the NFL Network dispute.
Regulators simply cannot deal with such issues better than the marketplace, where billions of consumers negotiate with millions of suppliers every day to reach optimal solutions.
The response of consumers to the NFL Network problem shows the superiority of market-based solutions.
Many fans watched the game with other friends who had satellite service. One such satellite customer in East Austin opened up his yard to all comers with a big-screen TV and free food. Others actually switched their television service to a different provider that carried the NFL Network.
Probably the most common response by fans was to watch the game in sports bars, which reported huge crowds and revenues that night.
Let’s not forget this is all about money. Sellers want to maximize revenues, consumers want to minimize costs.
Rather than taking money from one pocket and putting it into another, regulators ought to remember that fans are quite capable of taking care of themselves when it comes to figuring out the best way to watch a football game, or to buy electricity or insurance. It is folly to think otherwise.
Bill Peacock
Director for the Center for Economic Freedom
bpeacock@texaspolicy.com

Editor's Note: We encourage you to send in your Letters to the Editor, but please remember to give your name and town. `Anonymous' letters will no longer be accepted. Direct confidential questions by calling (936) 539-2200 or e-mail editor@thebulletin.com.

LETTERS FROM NOVEMBER 2007

LETTERS FROM OCTOBER 2007

LETTERS FROM SEPTEMBER 2007

LETTERS FROM AUGUST 2007

LETTERS FROM JULY 2007

LETTERS FROM JUNE 2007

LETTERS FROM MAY 2007

LETTERS FROM APRIL 2007

LETTERS FROM MARCH 2007

LETTERS FROM FEBRUARY 2007

LETTERS FROM JANUARY 2007

LETTERS FROM DECEMBER 2006