Letters from our Readers - October 2006

The Case for Legalizing Gambling 
Legalizing gambling will resolve longtime urgent issues: finance public education, build and maintain roadways and provide homeowners with significant reductions in property taxes. 
The resolution of the above issues is simple. Legalize gambling and off-track betting. 
I know many people will react to this solution in dismay and horror. Many will say it will change the composition of Texas life as we know it. Some will say that: 
We will develop an addictive population that will lose homes and savings 
Religious groups will state that gambling is NOT healthy for their congregations and the community 
Financing public education via gambling sends the wrong message 
Legalized gambling attracts more crime and seedy individuals into the area 
Special interests will earn huge profits 
Legalizing gambling will encourage other negative occurrences, e.g., prostitution, illegal drug trafficking and violent behavior.
I won't argue with those complaints and opinions. Quite frankly, at one time I held similar thoughts. 
Instead, let's look at the positive repercussions if gambling were made legal in Texas: 
Millions, if not billions, of new tax dollars will go to the state 
New companies will come into the state and thousands of new jobs will be created 
There would be enough money to finance adequately public education 
There would be enough money to relieve homeowners from paying astronomical property taxes 
There would be enough money to build and maintain roadways throughout the state without having to build toll roads that would keep the state in debt for more than 50 years 
There would be more dollars to provide to other areas, e.g., higher education, social services, better and more affordable health care, lower the sales tax, lower the business tax, give businesses incentives to operate in Texas, etc 
The state will save on lost income of Texas residents going outside the state to gamble 
Texas economy will prosper across-the-board.
Some of the negative comments made about legalizing gambling may be reduced or eliminated by doing the following: 
Develop state funded programs to educate and provide a support network for addictive and potentially problematic gamblers 
Ensure that gambling related businesses return part of their earnings into the community 
Currently many religious organizations raise money using gambling, e.g., bingo nights, casino nights, raffles, etc. Those who continue to object to legalized gambling may provide community members with education and a support network to reduce potential problems; in addition, the state may provide opportunities for religious organizations to apply for state scholarships or financial assistance based on need 
Currently public education is financed in large part by property taxes and the state lottery; legalized gambling ensures that all school districts get fair, adequate and equal financing for operations and maintenance, personnel, program costs, etc. 
A certain percentage of the state's income from gambling may be used to provide additional state, city and town security personnel to maintain order and increase urgently needed equipment and supplies to law enforcement; in addition, casino hotels and off-track betting parlors will provide their own security 
An impartial and independent board with appropriate authority and accountability to the People of Texas, could be formed as an oversight of the gambling industry that will work directly with casino and off-track betting owners and state officials to ensure that the industry maintains an ethical and law-abiding approach in their operations 
As for the potential for increased illegal vices, the state may provide law enforcement with the authority to crackdown on vice and seedy characters offensive or dangerous to the community at-large.
In conclusion, there is no doubt that the Texas community is divided regarding the issue of legalizing gambling. The success of legalizing gambling depends on how well the state and the community work together to ensure that developing a legal gambling environment is beneficial to the Texas community at-large. No doubt citizens should be on planning committees. State or local officials should NOT be authorized to appoint members on any gambling oversight committees. Those on such a gambling oversight board should be elected in some way by non-biased members of the community. 
Legalized gambling is one way that Texas communities finally may resolve those urgent issues that could find no REAL cures during the past several years of legislative sessions. 
Certainly the profits from legalized gambling would provide adequate financing for public education, for building and maintaining roadways (eliminating the need for cost-ineffective and debt producing toll roads) and for providing homeowners with significant reductions in property taxes. 
Despite all the positive results possible by legalizing gambling, there is no doubt that the community debate on doing so will linger on.
Peter Stern
Driftwood, TX 

Fear And Love
It never ceases to amaze me how critical and condemning human beings can be. We look at Moslems and automatically judge them as being terrorists. Yet, a study of Christian history reveals we too have had our share of terrorists. 
Just a few years ago the Serb Christians began to kill all Moslems in an attempt to 
purge them from their country. Throughout the centuries we have murdered Jews 
and anyone else who disagreed with us. Burning at the stake was a favorite for a 
while for the Christian church to get rid of so called heretics such as a lady they later claimed to be a saint--Joan of Arc. 
Leonard Pitts Jr writing in the Houston Chronicle tells of the First Baptist Church in 
Watertown, NY firing Mary Lambert for being a woman. She had been teaching Sunday school there for 54 years. Pastor Timothy LaBouf said he was following the Bible command that women should be silent in the church found in 1Timothy 2:11-14 and !Corinthians 14:34-35. 
Mr Pitts points out how the Bible has been used to justify slavery, persecute 
Jews and gays, and the death penalty. After writing an article condemning the death penalty he got an e-mail from a man named Al," When one criticizes the death penalty, one criticizes God's judgement in the matter, as scripture ordains death for numerous crimes." Mr Pitts pointed out to him that the scriptures also ordains death for cursing your parents (Leviticus 20:9) or committing adultery (Leviticus 20:10). When he asked 
Al if they should be capital offenses, Al answered, "only if one wishes to accomplish 
God's will." Mr Pitts said people like Al scare him and I agree as they can take scriptures and condemn, persecute and even murder people. Remember the ones who murdered doctors, workers and patients in abortion clinics not long ago? 
Mr pitts also points out how the same people can overlook scriptures that say, 
turn the other cheek, do not store up treasures on earth, do not turn away the borrower, and love your enemy. Yes, it is so easy to find faults in others and ignore faults in ourselves. 
The scripture also says,"The letter of the law killeth but the Spirit giveth Life." As a ordained Christian minister I long for the day when people will use the Bible to give life instead of using it to condemn others. The Lord commanded us to Love one another as ourselves. There are 2 emotions and all others come from one or the other of these 2. Love and Fear. 
How I wish we would ask before we speak or act, "Am I coming from Love or Fear?" The scripture says, "God is love and perfect love casteth out all fear." It goes on to say if you have fear you have not been perfected in love (God). 
Rev Billy Graham was recently quoted as saying, " I'm not a literalist in the sense that every single jot and tittle (of the Bible) is from the Lord. This is a little difference in my thinking through the years." Mr Pitts says, "it is a difference people like Al would do well to emulate" and I agree. 
We could have a heaven on earth if everyone came from Love instead of Fear. President Franklin Roosevelt said in his first inauguration speech, "The only thing we have to Fear is Fear itself." 
We should spend more time in holy communion with God and let him remove our fears instead of using our fears to condemn others. I have precious memories of my Sunday school teachers who were ladies. Our churches need more of them --not less. 
Bill Talley 
Houston, Texas

Rick Perry is at it AGAIN
Rick Perry continues to prove he does not care about the well -being of Texas - not just its citizens, but the state itself. He has fast-tracked permits for seventeen new coal-fired power plants to be built in North and Central Texas. These plants are worse for the environment than an additional twenty million cars would be. In addition to the decrease in air quality and increase in smog, over 2 tons of mercury would be deposited into the soil. Just why is Rick Perry allowing such a deal to go through? It's because energy companies who would benefit from it have given him him over $37,000 in campaign contributions.
Apparently the only way you can get Rick Perry to listen to your concerns is if you give him a little something under the table. It also appears that Perry has taken a tactic from the oil companies' playbook too: even though the price of natural gas has decreased significantly in the past six months, he has brokered a deal with TXU to let them charge the same rates as they have before.
The only candidate with proven results that can prevent dealings such as these is Chris Bell. He can ensure that such despicable, selfish dealings in the Governor's mansion do not take place. The campaigns run by Strayhorn and Friedman continually show they are either indecisive or incompetent, leaving us with Chris Bell, who showed nothing but progress during his term in the US House of Representatives.
Nick De Cesare
Denton, Tx

Selling America Piece by Piece
As our Federal Government moves us closer to bankruptcy, Americans would be shocked to learn that foreign organizations are buying our infrastructure at an alarming rate.
Recently a Spanish-Australian group paid $3.8 billion for the rights to lease an Indiana toll road. This vitally important asset built by U.S. taxpayer dollars will now be stuffing the coffers of foreign interests. Indiana residents will be facing higher taxes to replace this lost revenue. Most likely, this will come in the form of floating public bonds.
Other states have participated in selling off infrastructure, for example, an Australian company’s lease of a Virginia highway, and a Spanish-American partnership leasing a Texas toll road from Austin to Seguin. Americans were infuriated to learn of the Dubai ports deal, however, only six-months later congress allowed the Arab nation of Oman to operate U.S. ports. To learn more about this sellout of America visit www.thenewamerican.com  and read the article “America For Sale” for more information on this dangerous practice.
We must immediately contact our representatives and demand they oppose this selling of infrastructure piece by piece.
Lawrence L. Swanberg
Victorville, CA.

Above The Law
U.S. policy has long been committed to following Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions requiring prisoners to be treated humanely. The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that this mandate applies to all detainees. 
But President Bush persists in his attempt to tarnish the principles that made this country great by legalizing torture. 
He continues to torment the citizenry with tales of nuclear-toting boogey-men hijacking countries from Spain to Indonesia. This transparent Cheneyism follows the belief that a frightened America is a pro-Bush America and a terrified Congress is a compliant Congress. 
Since 9-11 we've proudly watched in the safety of our own homes the nightly TV fireworks of good old American shock and awe but we failed to notice how quickly the scene changed from blowing up mountains to lighting up the familiar Baghdad skyline. We enjoyed the warm patriotic glow too much to ask why Bush suddenly moved the war. 
We're learning that this new enemy fights in a manner they perfected against the Soviet Union - simply to bog down the invading military machine far from home. They wear it down through attrition with improvised explosive devices and old-fashioned booby traps. The whole farce is reminiscent of the old Russian strategy that worked so well against Napoleon and Hitler, making conventional military methods useless. 
Day after day, Mr. Bush ignores the body count and plays on public anxiety, erroneously lumping our many enemies into "Islamic fascists" so he won't have to negotiate with them. He constantly promises that though the world is in chaos and security is in disarray, only he can keep us safe. He has to it's the only platform the mid-term Republican candidates have.
Bush fights the fascists over there to keep the voters' minds off issues over here such as lobbyists, bribe-taking congressmen, global warming, energy shortages, health care, tax breaks for the rich, frozen minimum wage, broken borders, losing drug war, failed port security, Katrina and funny electric voting machines.
It appears “Stay the course” means “cover my behind” in Bushspeak. 
Bill Barnes
Spring, Texas

Finally
When I learned that Nancy McCoy was running for judge, my first thought was “Finally!” To say that she would make a great judge is stating the obvious. I can think of no one who is more of a natural for the job. Nancy is the most qualified candidate.
In the twenty-plus years that I have known Nancy, I have witnessed her absolute integrity, fine character and steadfast ability to do the right thing. I worked with her as she prepared cases for trial and during trial. I was amazed by the way she handled herself in, and out, of the courtroom. She was professional and tough, all the while, giving her clients the best representation they could get. She is a fantastic lawyer. 
Nancy has always loved the law. It makes complete sense to her. She has a natural ability to understand and interpret the law. I know she will carry that ability with her to the bench.
Nancy McCoy is the best choice for judge.
Susan Peebles
Spring, Texas

Very Concerned 
In WWII gasoline prices were controlled, gas was rationed and “excess profits taxes” laws were enacted to prevent companies from profiting excessively from the war effort. This was legal then and there was no reason Bush could not have done the same to save us from high gas prices and “profiteering”. American oil prices were, in effect, controlled then. Make the public fully aware of this.
If you have not noticed, every time the Bush-Carrier incident is shown on TV now Bush, is in a business suit instead of the full “Battle Regalia (including helmet”, i.e. the “Conquering Hero”, with Karl Rove written all over the scene), as in the original, and the “Mission Accomplished” banner is either not visible or half hidden. If it were my decision I would show the original at every opportunity and in every medium every day for 30 days prior to the up coming election. This scene completely sums up Bush and company’s present dilemma of NO mission accomplished. 
For a “blueprint” of why Bush and company really went to war in Iraq consider the following; Excerpt from Internet article in 2002, regarding plan for Iraq war- “Chalabi would hand over Iraq's oil to U.S. multinationals, and his allies in conservative think tanks are already drawing up the blueprints. "What they have in mind is denationalization, and then parceling Iraqi oil out to American oil companies," says James E. Akins, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia"). Our solders may have died to accomplish the handover to the oil companies. (Go To, Google, "Tinker Banker" and “ Chalabi”). Chalabi visited Cheney’s office a few months ago.
Withdraw from Iraq? We are damned if we do and damned if we don’t.
Thank you for your consideration of my comments. 
Lynwood G. Collins, Retired WWII Navy Vet 78 years old, very concerned about the state of our country. Not affiliated with any organization 

Anti -Illegal- Immigrants
Conroe resident Pablo Serto makes some revealing statements in his letter to the editor last week entitled: "I speak to you Anti-Immigrants". He describes Americans as "blind and ignorant...lazy..." and that we live and eat cheap because of illegal immigrants. He admits that " We come to America illegally because it is impossible to come by other means."
I'd like to respond to this person's opinion from 3 different viewpoints. First, the honest point-blank method: Pablo you are a confessed criminal. Your crime is burglary. You have no rights to profit from this criminal act as you entered into it voluntarily. Therefore you have no right to criticize, insult or slander anyone or anything in this country. You should be arrested, forfeit all your earnings from your criminal activity and be deported to the country where you are a legal citizen. Don't let the screen door hit you in the ass on the way out. Once you are home you can poorly write letters to the editors and tell them what you think of your fellow citizens.
Second method, the process of logical thinking. Pablo's assertions are that without illegal immigrants America would collapse and die. Mass starvation would result because people would not and could not grow, harvest or prepare food. Because no-one would work we would die of exposure from lack of shelter and our economy would non-existent. Nonsense. Without illegal immigration this country would be much better off and a "trickle sideways" effect would be that those offending countries citizens would have to stay home and solve their own problems themselves. Everyone wins. It is a fact that America is not anti-immigrant. 
My third and final point of view is a personal one. The key word in all of this topic is the word "ILLEGAL". I have watched my wages go down because of ILLEGAL aliens. Why? Because they don't assume the responsibilities and liabilities that legal citizens do. Pablo had better ask those charitable organizations he mentions how many ILLEGAL immigrants are collecting benefits from them. My car has been hit twice by ILLEGAL immigrants who either fled because they had no insurance or drivers licenses or had criminal records. Once when I called 911 they told me to not confront the man because he could be violent. Violent?! According to Pablo Serto and his supporters- both ILLEGAL and legal, ILLEGAL immigrants are a boon to society. But if that is the case then why aren't their home countries paradises? Why do millions come here ILLEGALLY and force themselves to work for cheap wages in order to support lazy, blind and ignorant Americans? Are they missionaries? 
People like Pablo Serto who claim to "love this country" sure have a strange way of showing it. They violate our laws and then insult us, they work under conditions they say are unfair but refuse to leave and then they put the blame on us? To all of the Pablo Sertos out there, please go home to your paradise and let us Americans suffer in our own lazy and ignorant ways.
Richard Amburgey
Spring, Texas

Common Ground on Electoral Inclusion 
By end of this letter, I hope that you, the voter, agree with us: inclusion is better than exclusion. 
We are referring to the Texas election code and the upcoming Nov 7 elections. Exclusion is the common theme that voters encounter. In non-democratic governments, choices are restricted or don t exist. Our democratic process is intended to give the people the power to choose. In practice, political parties are taking voting power away and restricting choices. 
Consider the practice of gerrymandering. Instead of the voters choosing their elected representatives, an incumbent political party chooses the voters. Instead of representing compact regions of voters, the legislatures are composed of people that represent whatever voters the party chose when they redrew the maps. You as a voter are just a pawn on the chessboard, and the incumbent party can move you around wherever they like. Who is being empowered here? Clearly it is not the voter. 
Consider Primary Screenout . Texas is alone in excluding a voter that votes in the Democratic or Republican primary from signing a petition to place another candidate or party on the ballot. The same incumbent legislators that take an oath to uphold the Constitution ignore the first amendment when they deny this right. 
Consider the exclusion of candidates and parties from the ballot. We as leaders of political parties are well aware of how Texas is far more exclusive in ballot access than most states. We certainly congratulate Kinky Friedman and Grandma Strayhorn for raising the huge piles of money necessary to buy signatures and get on the ballot. However, consider that Ralph Nader collected over 80,000 signatures yet failed to qualify for the 2004 presidential ballot in Texas. Voters want choice, and the restrictions on choice give many of you nothing to vote for and you stay home. We recognize reasonable qualifications for appearing on the ballot, but the current law is clearly excessively exclusionary. 
These are a few examples of the way in which you, the voter, are being excluded from making choices. These are issues that need to be changed in the law in next year s legislative session. 
Yet, there is an exclusion that you can fix before Nov 7. 
Consider the public debate for governor of Texas. Rick Perry, Kinky Friedman, Grandma Strayhorn, and Chris Bell have been included in the debate sponsored by the BELO network of television and radio stations to be held Oct 6 and broadcast throughout the state. However, when you vote on Nov 7 there will be 5 candidates on the ballot for governor of Texas. Who is being excluded? 
In 2004, over 82,000 voters in Texas signed a petition to place candidates of the Libertarian Party on the ballot. In that election, 843,911 (over 16%) of the statewide voters selected Libertarian Quanah Parker for State Judge, Court of Criminal Appeals Place 2, clearly demonstrating the significance of that choice. However, Libertarian candidate for governor James Werner has been excluded from the public debate on Oct 6. 
We do not expect you to pity us. We the leaders of our political parties understand the challenges of competing against the incumbent parties. 
What about you? Do you want to walk into the voting booth after seeing 4 candidates debate on television and then see 5 on the ballot? Wouldn t you be upset about this? Aren t you being excluded from seeing all the choices before you vote? 
We began by asking whether inclusion is better than exclusion. You as a voter are the one being excluded. You have the power to include yourself. You can contact the debate sponsors and demand inclusion of James Werner in the public debate. You can contact your legislator to reform the election code to be more inclusive of the concerns of voters instead of incumbent political parties. 
We want you included. We hope you do as well. 
Doug Reber 
Co-Chair, Green Party of Texas 
Bryan Malatesta 
Chair, Constitution Party of Texas 
Patrick Dixon 
Chair, Libertarian Party of Texas 

To the Citizens and Voters of Montgomery County, Texas
The election for the 284th Judicial District Court Judge for Montgomery County is drawing near. I am writing to ask that you do two very important things on November 7, 2006.
First, please take the time from your busy schedules to vote. This is your opportunity to shape the future of the justice system in Montgomery County. Your vote is your voice. Use it well. 
Second, to ensure that justice for all citizens of Montgomery County will be served, please cast your vote for Nancy McCoy, Democratic candidate for the 284th Judicial District Court. I ask this because I know Nancy very well. I am very proud to say that I worked with Nancy as her legal assistant for a number of years. Because I worked so closely with Nancy both in and out of the courtroom handling numerous business and franchise litigation matters, I can offer a unique perspective on Nancy's qualifications for Judicial District Court Judge. 
Now, more than 12 years later, I can say with absolute conviction that Nancy McCoy is the most qualified candidate to serve the good people of Montgomery County, Texas. Nancy was, when I worked with her, and continues to be very well respected in the legal community. Her demonstrated skill and success as a litigator is matched only by her genuine love of and respect for both the spirit and the letter of the law. Nancy has dedicated her life to the pursuit of justice, including offering her time, expertise and mentorship to students at the University of Houston School of Law. Spend just a few moments in her company, and you will see for yourself what distinguishes Nancy from other attorneys. Nancy has a big heart, a quality I seldom found among the many attorneys I worked for throughout my career. She cares deeply about the issues affecting her community as evidenced by her continued commitment to the Montgomery County Food Bank. There is no doubt in my mind that Nancy would bring to her bench a fair, impartial and straightforward approach to the judicial matters brought before her. 
Nancy has always offered her clients and now offers her constituents a level of honesty and integrity that is, in my opinion, unparalleled in the legal profession. It was an honor and a privilege to work with her. I know for certain that if the people of Montgomery County, Texas elect Nancy McCoy to serve as their Honorable Judge of the 284th Judicial District Court, they will feel the same way.
Kim Balsman
Longmont, CO 

Who Is The Activist?
In his Sept. 22nd letter, Dr. Walter Wilkerson reluctantly acknowledged editing the Republican Party’s misleading information on their website to accurately reflect Cara Wood’s standing in the position for the 284th District Court seat. He goes on to claim that Ms. Wood’s appointment by Governor Perry “is not a paramount issue…. (but) judicial philosophy is.” 
Seeking out and accepting an unethical (if not unconstitutional) appointment to get this seat speaks volumes about her “judicial philosophy” and what she might be willing to do to keep it. All voters should consider this possibility carefully. 
The citizens of Montgomery County deserve a judge that will respect the spirit, as well as the letter of the law, not slide around it simply because, as candidate from the party in power, she can. We don’t need the damage that cronyism appointments like Harriet Myers or “Heck-of-a-job” Michael Brown can wreak. 
Dr. Wilkerson brands all Democratic judges as “legislating from the bench” (judicial activists). He merely assumes Cara Wood will not stoop to that, but I submit to you, she already has! According to the Encarta Dictionary, activism is, “vigorous and sometimes aggressive action in pursuing a political or social end.” By definition, appointing Ms. Woods as Judge of the 284th District simply because she is a Republican is activism of the worse kind! 
In the Courier on Sept. 26th, Shirley Maness says she sat in “Judge” Wood’s courtroom for two days last week and “found her to be extremely fair.” She was able to see “Judge” Woods perform on stage because “Judge” Wood and Republican Governor Perry used “vigorous and aggressive” abuse of power to put her there. Her opponent, Nancy McCoy can be fair too, but she won’t enjoy the privilege to show it for the voters before Election Day like “Judge” Wood. I wonder, does Ms. Maness find this behavior by “Judge” Wood “extremely fair?” 
Nancy McCoy’s website clearly states, “Personal political views should not play a role in this critically important position, and they won’t in my court.” 
So who is the activist? 
Kim Kingsbury 
Spring, TX

Thanks for the Exposure
It’s a pleasure to see that Kim Kingsbury has exposed the cronyism of the Montgomery County Republican Party. Credit should go to Dr. Wilkerson who somehow was able to summon the grace to thank her for monitoring his website and shaming him into removing the deliberately misleading listing of Cara Wood as an elected judge. 
Now if only someone would take a look at the “Made in Ohio by Republicans” junk they call voting machines that have no paper trail.
Somebody has to take a stand for fair elections. The Grand Old Party (of arrogance) certainly won’t.
Bill Barnes
Spring, TX

The Best Choice for Judge
When I learned that Nancy McCoy was running for judge, my first thought was “Finally!” To say that she would make a great judge is stating the obvious. I can think of no one who is more of a natural for the job. Nancy is the most qualified candidate.
In the twenty-plus years that I have known Nancy, I have witnessed her absolute integrity, fine character and steadfast ability to do the right thing. I worked with her as she prepared cases for trial and during trial. I was amazed by the way she handled herself in, and out, of the courtroom. She was professional and tough, all the while, giving her clients the best representation they could get. She is a fantastic lawyer. 
Nancy has always loved the law. It makes complete sense to her. She has a natural ability to understand and interpret the law. I know she will carry that ability with her to the bench.
Nancy McCoy is the best choice for judge.
Susan Peebles
Spring, Texas

Wally’s World
I just finished reading Wally Wilkerson's groundless and partisan attack on Nancy McCoy, the Democratic candidate for the 284th District Court.
Initially, it is astonishing that he would reference qualifications at all, given how woefully inadequate his candidate stacks up in that area. Contrary to what Dr. Wilkerson says, Nancy McCoy has experience interpreting (not legislating) both criminal and civil law. Importantly, unlike her opponent, Nancy also has real and significant trial experience. And Nancy taught a class at U of H on how to try cases for 13 years. Her opponent, meanwhile,
flirted with careers outside the practice of law and worked in non-trial jobs on the county payroll.
When you don't have the facts or the qualifications on your side, the only thing left to do is lash out in inflammatory partisan rhetoric, throwing around tired old cliches
like "activist judge" and "soft on crime". Neither of these phrases has anything to do with Nancy McCoy, by the way.
I know her and have heard her speak, including about her judicial philosophy, many times. I have never seen Dr. Wilkerson there, though, and don't think he even
really knows her other than to say hello at public events. Nancy talks all the time about the importance of following the law, not making it, and being tough and fair enough to do the job no matter what it takes.
And her experience shows she walks the walk instead of just talking the talk.
Nancy's opponent is an unelected, political appointee, selected by a few local laywers because she's the Republican in the race and rubber stamped by outside politicians. Consequently, already she has favors to pay back. In this election we have a choice. We can choose the qualified, independent political outsider, or we can choose the same old politics.
Mary Kosmitis
The Woodlands, TX

Every Democrat Is Not The Same
Unfortunately, the Montgomery County Republican party continues to mislead and insult the voters. Recently, Dr. Wilkerson wrote in to (strangely) attack highly qualified Democratic judicial candidate Nancy McCoy and to opine condescendingly that “we” know that Democrats, presumably all of them, are “activist” and “soft on crime.”
“We” can think and vote for ourselves. And most people I talk to believe qualifications are of paramount importance. Nancy McCoy is far and away more qualified than her Republican opponent, as a cursory review of the websites of both candidates makes abundantly clear. 
Nancy will be tough on criminals convicted in a fair courtroom and deal equitably with everyone who comes before her. She will be a "law judge" who will not legislate from the bench. And she has the expertise to effectively manage the massive civil docket. I have talked to many attorneys who have expressed frustration about unqualified judges, especially those without any meaningful civil experience, being offered up by the Republican party of late.
Elections are about choices. For the first time in 14 years, a formidable Democrat is challenging a Republican in a judicial race in November. But Nancy McCoy, a Democrat, stands on her merits and continually asserts that judges should “check their politics at the door.” In my personal experience, people who listen to her judicial philosophy--Democrats, Republicans and Independents-- walk away convinced, impressed and committed to vote for “the Real McCoy.”
The need to resort to silly platitudes and stereotypical partisan rhetoric, rather than have a real debate about the relative qualifications of the candidates, signals that the local Republicans are scared. And they should be. I have faith in the voters of Montgomery County not to be fooled by tired old stereotypes about what every Democrat is and what every Republican is and instead vote for the most qualified candidate.
Wendy Maceo Melton
Democratic Party Chair
Montgomery County, Texas

Some Things Cost Money
Can the Democrats ever really matter again? Can they win? Can they do more than complain about the Republican agenda? Election season is in full swing, and the Dems apparently have a chance to take back the House and the Senate. All they have to do is. . . well, say something.
Say something other than, "We are against terrorists, too, but we want to be fair about it. We want a strong military too, but there are other priorities, so PLEASE don’t pick on me. We’ll revive government programs without raising your taxes, and we know you don’t believe us." 
How did this Democratic double-talk become the norm? How did the Democratic party end up forever on the defensive, merely echoing a watered-down version of Republican priorities? Didn’t they once have a lock on power, and successfully labeled the Republicans as the party of the rich? Yes, they did. So what happened?
Let’s go back to their heyday, when a discredited Herbert Hoover ceded power to an Administration that spent lots of government money with the full approval of America. Back when President Roosevelt proposed Bill after Bill that put government squarely in the center of American life. Government was not a dirty word. The Administration created jobs, created public works, and only the Ultra-Rich cried foul. The rest of us put the "socialist" label to rest for the time being and accepted the knowledge the Government Saved Us. The federal government created programs to make sure the old and the poor didn’t die in the streets. We built highways, created federal Parks systems, built bridges and dams, schools, science academies, hospitals and enacted huge Public Works programs, fought a war that saved the world, all of which made America proud, all of which cost lots and lots of money. 
Then in the 60s, President Johnson implemented two expensive projects at once: The Great Society, which aimed to provide education, jobs and a safety net for everyone in this country. . . and the Vietnam War. The result was higher taxes. And then in the late 1960s, we began hearing tales of Welfare abuse, people living permanently on the public dole. We also witnessed the rise of that great American stereotype, the Government Worker, slow and slothful, dumb and inefficient. In our thinking, Big Government was no longer a good thing. 
Then the 70s gave us the Bussing issue, in which liberal judges in urban areas forced integration at public schools. Black kids were bussed to White schools, and vice versa. America was not impressed. Then came California’s watershed vote: Proposition 13, which capped property tax increases, and California’s entire public sector cried foul. Hospitals will go unfunded, we were warned. Schools and the Criminal Justice system will go starving. California citizens responded, "So what?" and the measure won by a landslide. Also, the death penalty was abolished nationwide, a move that most Americans did not agree with, and liberal judges like California’s Rose Bird loudly handed down pro-criminal verdicts that sealed the opinion that the Justice system was run by a bunch of ivory-tower bleeding-hearts. At this point, government became the enemy. 
Enter the Reagan Revolution of 1980. Federal agencies were slashed, the federal budget for domestic spending was gutted, and America said "It’s about time." But by 1984, though, President Reagan was fairly unpopular. Unemployment was at record highs, and many voters felt Reagan had swung the country too far to the right. So the Democratic party ran an old-style liberal at the top of the ticket, Walter Mondale, who went on TV and said, "I will raise your taxes." 
The Democrats lost by a landslide, and the party has never recovered from those five words. The notion that Democrats are "tax and spend" is a permanent part of our political landscape. 
So that’s your answer. We won’t pay for things. America will pay for Bush’s war against Muslims without blinking an eye, but we don’t want to pay for better schools, better hospitals, publicly-funded disease research, roads and bridges, global warming prevention, earth-friendly transportation. We don’t want to be what we once were: World Leaders in the public sector, the best in science, the best in manufacturing, the best in education. American voters don’t want that anymore. What do we spend money on? Electronics, all built overseas, consumer gadgets of all types, all built overseas. None of that is investing in America. And yet our thinking is so twisted, we believe the Republicans are the more patriotic party. But what could be more patriotic than building great schools, developing cures for diseases, and preserving America’s resources, all of which 
By Gina Parkerwill help ALL of us. And yet those priorities are considered "soft," "liberal," not patriotic, like fighting wars. 
And as long as Americans maintain that twisted idea of patriotism, Democrats will teeter on the edge of extinction. Until we decide we love our country enough to make it work, to produce students that can read, cars that don’t pollute, cures that benefit all, until we get our heads out of our Ipods and computers and decide that we are willing to spend what it takes to make America a proud place again, then yes, Democrats will continue to dance around what they are afraid to say: "Quality costs money, people. Tax money. Not as much as destroying Iraq, but a proud nation costs money." 
Are we ready to hear that fact this election season? We’ll find out soon enough.
Kathrine Fonte

Closing Our Eyes Doesn’t Make Darfur Disappear
When I last wrote about the genocide occurring in Darfur, I referred to it as “Sudan’s Dirty Little Secret.” I commented on the U.N.’s blatant use of “look-the-other-way” politics and urged action on the part of our government. Sadly, things seem to have progressively worsened since June. 
What started as dirty and little is now filthy, enormous, and messy. Assaults on civilians in the Darfur region of Sudan became increasingly frequent and severe throughout July and August, forcing U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan to call for a 17,000 member peacekeeping force to replace the 7,000 African Union workers, who had been exhausted beyond their capacity. Shortly thereafter, the Sudanese government rejected this directive and in a frightening show of belligerence mobilized 10,000 more of its own troops from the capital city of Khartoum to Darfur. On August 31, U.N. Security Council Resolution 1706 was passed − a measure that calls for a peacekeeping force of 20,000 to be deployed to Sudan. The next day, Sudan once again disobeyed the U.N. and in retaliation launched yet another offensive in the Darfur region. Even the refugee camps were raided; countless women were raped and killed, according to sources from the International Rescue Committee. 
The last two weeks have been tumultuous as well, with Sudan aggressively reminding the African Union (A.U.) that their tenure runs out at the end of the month and with reports of the food supply being cut off to upwards of 350,000 refugees. Aside from making a few idle threats, the U.S. government has largely left the crisis in Darfur to the U.N., while making little preparation to intervene independently. On September 10, The Washington Post ran an opinion editorial of Senators John McCain and Bob Dole entitled “Rescue Darfur Now,” in which the senators liken the current crisis in Sudan to previous conflicts in Bosnia and Rwanda where U.S. involvement came too little, too late. The article is bold calling for swift and decisive action by the U.S. government to alleviate the injustice occurring overseas on America’s watch. Interestingly, it asserts that a sort of multi-national blitz may be necessary to ensure total victory in this intervention and calls for the help of everyone from the European Union to NATO.
McCain and Dole have hit the nail on the head. The United States has not only a social, but also a moral obligation to aid in liberation of those suffering at the hands of the tyrannical Sudanese government, and it is imperative that we act quickly to prevent these atrocities from progressing any further. To do any less would be to deny what makes us American in the first place. 
Gina Parker
Waco, Texas

Should We Mind Our Own Business
In early August, General John Abizaid, the commander of the U.S. Central Command and the most knowledgeable senior military official about Iraq, expressed his fears to a Senate Committee that conditions in Iraq are the very next thing to a “civil war.” 
New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman went further one day later when he wrote that our armed forces in Iraq "are baby-sitting a civil war." Can any good come of continued U.S. presence in such a conflict? Isn’t it time to consider letting the Sunnis and Shiites settle their centuries-old animosity without our forces caught in the middle?
I also refer you to U.S. President John Quincy Adams, who stated: "America goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own." And Calvin Coolidge, our nation’s 30th chief executive, famously summarized: "Perhaps one of the most important accomplishments of my administration has been minding my own business."
I agree.
Marilyn V. Hilborn
Boulder City, NV

Judging a Book By Its Content
Attorney General's ruling affirms SBOE authority over textbooks. 
Last week’s media pronouncements on whether the State Board of Education has authority over content in textbooks reflect a classic example of slanted reporting. Most metropolitan dailies in the state chose to report that Attorney General Greg Abbott had affirmed a 1996 Dan Morales ruling that the elected body has no authority to examine the editorial content of textbooks used by Texas public schoolchildren. 
If reporters had actually read the new AG opinion, however, they would have discovered otherwise.
The Sept. 18 opinion issued by Abbott’s office clearly states in its analysis of the question: “The Board has significant statutory authority over textbooks and textbook content in the adoption process,” and “We accordingly conclude that the Board may adopt general textbook content standards to the extent such standards fall within the express powers granted by the Education Code.”
At issue had been Texas Education Code Section 28.002(h) that states the State Board of Education “shall foster the continuation of the tradition of teaching United States and Texas history and the free enterprise system in subject matter and in reading courses and in the adoption of textbooks.” Although this language has been in the TEC for 10 years, Texas Education Agency lawyers repeatedly attempted to delete the section in administrative rule reviews and refused to certify the patriotism and free enterprise portion of the textbook rules, contending it violated the old Morales decision. Abbott’s ruling last week upheld the State Board of Education’s authority in this area, stating that to the extent the Morales opinion “is read or applied inconsistently with this conclusion, that opinion is overruled.”
Attorney General Greg Abbott also addressed the question of whether the State Board of Education may adopt or reject ancillary materials provided by publishers at no cost to school districts that select their textbooks. Abbott states several ways in which Morales wrongly concluded these materials do not fall within the board’s review jurisdiction, and he expressly overruled the previous faulty opinion.
The new AG opinion corrects a longstanding misinterpretation of the Texas Education Code by liberal activists anxious to do away with these standards. It also clarifies original legislative intent as it relates to textbook content dealing with patriotism, citizenship and the free enterprise system. The issue was never about personal and political agendas, as some have contended. Rather, it concerned the ability of elected State Board of Education members having the authority to ensure that curriculum taught in school books fosters an appreciation for the basic democratic values of our state and national heritage. To argue otherwise is clearly to ignore the summary conclusions of Abbott’s ruling.
Media outlets owe it to the public to report the news accurately, regardless of personal biases. Relying on political organizations with their own outlandish agendas to explain a legal ruling instead of examining the Attorney General opinion objectively for what it actually states is editorializing and selective reporting.
Attorney General Abbott has rendered a valuable service in clarifying the issue of whether or not the State Board of Education has jurisdiction to approve textbook content, particularly content having to do with patriotism, capitalism and other cherished ideals rooted in our unique heritage. Significantly, the ruling even broadens the scope of the education board’s authority -- to review ancillary materials, if it chooses.
In the wake of the AG ruling, the issue is clear: The State Board of Education has constitutional authority to sign off on textbook content. Having been given the green light to examine the editorial content of textbooks, education board members now need to do just that.
Terri Leo (R-Houston)
State Board of Education District #6
Spring, Texas

The Real McCoy
I have known Nancy McCoy, the Democratic candidate for the 284th District Court, for more than 14 years. For approximately 13 of those years, I was her legal assistant. Nancy started off as a boss but quickly became and remains a close friend. 
I have seen Nancy represent her clients in a variety of scenarios but always zealously and with the utmost integrity. Nancy puts 110% into everything she does, whether it's preparing for a trial, appearing in court, educating her clients, or spending time with her family. I've probably worked as closely with Nancy as anyone, and I've never seen her back down from any difficult situation. 
I have been by Nancy's side through the loss of both of her parents, the marriage of her only child, the birth of her first grandson, Alex, and the publication of two books. These are all huge milestones that she handled with her characteristic style and grace. 
Nancy would make a fantastic judge because she is consistently fair and tough when the situation warrants. I am only sorry that I don't live in Montgomery County because I would be the first in line to vote for her. 
Joan Falcon 
Houston, TX 

Rick Perry’s Highway to Hell 
Texas Governor Rick Perry is so blindly and stupidly obsessed with his Trans-Texas Corridor boondoggle that he apparently doesn't realize that he is playing into the hands of America's enemies by creating a target for terrorists so large that it would be visible from the moon.
Just think how strategically dimwitted it is to place all of our eggs in one big oversized basket. A single strike against this "Highway to Hell" could knock out our electrical power grid, as well as our natural gas, oil, and water supply systems, and all forms of ground transportation. 
It is sheer insanity to build 4,000 miles of highways at a time when the planet is running out of fossil fuels, and burning what is left at an even faster pace. This detrimental situation contributes to global warming and ecological disaster, which boggles the minds of intelligent people.
Only one part of Perry's feebleminded plan makes any sense at all and that is the high-speed rail aspect. At 200 miles per hour, people and goods can be moved between major urban areas in less time and at much less expense than traveling by automobile or even by air. The pollution level would be only a fraction of that caused by millions of cars and overloaded diesel trucks.
An elevated high-speed rail network with dual tracks could easily be built on a hundred foot wide right-of-way, rather than Perry's 1,200 foot wide gashes across Texas. Perry's plan would sever hundreds of rural county roads, divide farms and ranches, fragment forests, destroy wetlands, and cause widespread environmental damage so severe that the quality of life of all Texans would be negatively impacted.
Half a million acres of Texas would be permanently destroyed so that Perry's overblown ego can be stroked to his satisfaction. Billions of dollars would migrate out of Texas to bank vaults in Spain. The Spanish would then have our own dollars with which to purchase and take control of our factories, farms, and industries. Perry would trade the basic wealth of Texas in order to satisfy his obvious megalomania.
Hundreds of rural families whose lives would be disrupted, and in many cases destroyed, would resort to alcohol and drugs in an attempt to cope with the inevitable depression that could lead to suicide. In my opinion, their blood would be on Perry's hands, and all of the scrubbing in the world could never wash it off.
Much more innocent blood would also be spilled if Perry's dream, which is our nightmare, comes to pass. No terrapin, deer, rabbit, armadillo, fox, beaver, river otter, frog, toad, or any other member of Texas' wildlife population could ever successfully cross a 1,200 foot wide series of highways and ground level train tracks. The road kill slaughter would be horrendous. Eventually, it would virtually depopulate millions of acres of rural Texas of its wildlife.
An elevated high-speed rail system would impact only around 45,000 acres rather than twelve times that amount. In addition, the environmental degradation would be only a tiny fraction of what Perry's scheme would cause. Animals, farmer, ranchers, hikers, hunters and vehicles could all pass safely beneath the elevated railways at almost any point along the course of the lines. 
Farms and ranches would not be fragmented, rural county roads would not be cut and blocked, and life for the residents of Texas could go on relatively undisturbed as multitudes of passengers and tons of freight stream past at 200 miles per hour. In addition to the millions of animals that would not become road kill, the lives of hundreds of Texans who are killed each year by inefficient, and dangerous fuel-guzzling 18-wheelers would be saved. 
If I were Osama Bin Laden or another terrorist leader, I would hang portraits of Rick Perry on the walls of my cave and thank Allah five times a day at prayer that Texas is being led down the primrose path by a dupe of the enemies of America.
I wouldn't be a bit surprised if it were discovered that some of the money being poured into Perry's campaign coffers by promoters of the "Highway to Hell" originated in Iraq, Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan.
George H. Russell
Huntsville, TX

Fahrenheit 451
The people of Montgomery County are truly blessed with all the protection from sin we need by The Almighty when citizens work so hard to remove the statue of David and other classical works of art they deemed to be obscene from Portafino a few years ago. 
Montgomery County recently caught the attention of the national media with our vigilant disciple, Alton Verm, watching out for the morals of our children. His request to ban Fahrenheit 451 from school libraries for its “filth” was on the front page of the Courier Oct. 1st. It came during the 25th annual Banned Books Week. He said his request to ban "Fahrenheit 451," a book about book burning, during Banned Books Week, is a coincidence. He added that he had not read it.
"Banned Books Week is all about celebrating the freedom to read. What part of “freedom to read” doesn’t Mister Verm understand?
I wonder if all these good people are members of the same party that sent Mark Foley to Congress.
Bill Barnes
Spring, TX

Family Values Party?
The "family values" party (Can we say GOP, boys and girls??) has another very serious problem on their hands only weeks away from mid-term elections. It seems that a gay Republican Congressman (Is there really such an animal??) from Florida, Mark Foley (Foley has denied being gay for years, labeling his accusers "character assassins" and the charge "ridiculous"), was fond of male pages and sent many of these teenagers sexually suggestive e-mails. 
Now, of course, the GOP party has an immediate remedy for this embarrassing dilemma. Lead by US Republican Congressman Ray Lahood from Illinois, the GOP party suggested that the page program be eliminated! Yes, you heard it right. A Congressional page program that was established by Congress in 1829, almost 180 years ago, should be canned because a middle aged Republican Congressman couldn't keep his eyes off of these kids! This is a classic example of not only throwing out the baby with the bath water, but of typical GOP remedies; deal with effects rather than causes. 
Let's stop the nonsense and get this Republican Congress to finally do its job of oversight and not rubber stamping. Actually, an independent investigation is needed for these characters can not be trusted to conduct a "fair and balanced" investigation. 
This Republican Congress is not only a disgrace but is filled with hypocritical charlatans. I am of the opinion that come November, they should all be thrown out on their rear ends! 
Jim Farrell 
Oak Ridge North

Cara Wood is Qualified for District Judge
Much has been written about the interim appointment of Mrs. Wood as judge of the 284th District Court. The Governor called on her to fill on an interim basis a vacancy created by Judge Underwood's retirement and she accepted. Many feel that this has given her a special advantage in the general election. Whether this perceived advantage is real or not is not the question here. If it is perceived as real, then it can affect the voting in the general election. But consider that by accepting the interim appointment, Mrs. Wood has made herself open to full public scrutiny. She withstands this scrutiny well. Anyone who has visited her courtroom, as I have, will note that she serves with integrity, firmness, fairness and, where appropriate, a rare graciousness. It is also consistent with the way she served in all her other achievements, including activities with schools, service organizations and many programs in her church. 
Mrs. Wood received the Republican nomination in the primaries, not because of party connections (the Governor made phone calls supporting her opponent in the run-off), but because of overwhelming grass-roots support. Such support came from recognition by her peers of her extensive experience with the legal system in Montgomery County and her high qualifications for the position of District Judge. Her hands-on experience before the bar includes many years of presenting civil cases as well as felony drug cases. 
Mrs. Wood's familiarity with the workings of court system is demonstrated by her support for the creation in 1988 of the Dispute Resolution Center where she also served as a trained mediator. The DRC allows individuals to resolve their own issues in a safe, facilitative environment, assisted by trained volunteer mediators. Not only does this result is reducing the heavy case load on overworked judges and reducing the costs of the parties involved, it also equips the parties with a set of techniques to resolve their own issues well into the future. Since its creation, the DRC has facilitated over 8000 settlements that otherwise would have to be made by judges.
Mrs. Wood's skill, integrity and extensive practical experience with the Montgomery County Courts made her the best candidate in the primaries and she is clearly the best candidate now. She deserves our support in the general election.
Ralph W. Greenwood
Willis, TX

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 SEPTEMBER 2006

LETTERS FROM AUGUST 2006

LETTERS FROM JULY 2006

LETTERS FROM JUNE 2006

LETTERS FROM MAY 2006

LETTERS FROM APRIL 2006

LETTERS FROM MARCH 2006

LETTERS FROM FEBRUARY 2006

LETTERS FROM JANUARY 2006

LETTERS FROM DECEMBER 2005

LETTERS FROM NOVEMBER 2005

LETTERS FROM OCTOBER 2005

LETTERS FROM SEPTEMBER 2005

LETTERS FROM AUGUST 2005

LETTERS FROM JULY 2005

LETTERS FROM JUNE 2005

LETTERS FROM MAY 2005

LETTERS FROM APRIL 2005

LETTERS FROM MARCH 2005

LETTERS FROM FEBRUARY 2005

LETTERS FROM JANUARY 2005

LETTERS FROM DECEMBER 2004

LETTERS FROM NOVEMBER 2004

LETTERS FROM OCTOBER 2004

LETTERS FROM SEPTEMBER 2004

LETTERS FROM AUGUST 2004

LETTERS FROM JULY 2004

LETTERS FROM JUNE 2004

LETTERS FROM MAY 2004

LETTERS FROM APRIL 2004

LETTERS FROM MARCH 2004

LETTERS FROM FEBRUARY 2004

LETTERS FROM JANUARY 2004