Murphy will best represent district
The author of "The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People," Steven Covey, said this: "Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space lies your freedom and power to choose your response. In those responses lies your growth and your happiness."
On March 31, voters in the 20th Congressional District have the opportunity to choose Scott Murphy, a dynamic, smart, family-oriented businessman to represent our interests. I strongly urge you to do so.
Alternately, we could choose to send a career politician, Republican Jim Tedisco, who holds a leadership position in historically the most dysfunctional state legislature in the country (see Brennan Center, October 2006), who furthermore cannot take the time to educate himself about current House of Representative legislation, nor share how he would vote on issues important to those he seeks to serve. Additionally, our career politician was chosen to be the candidate in a less-than-inclusive process that didn't even include an interview by the Republican County Committee leadership.
Proudly, the Democratic Committee leadership engaged in a tireless, inclusive process to find and promote the most-qualified candidate among a large pool of great applicants.
We found in Democrat Scott Murphy what truly represents the needs of this vast district. He is an expert in small-business economic development, a vital asset as we look to create and maintain healthy, vibrant communities in this difficult economic climate. He is fiscally conservative and articulates a real ability to understand and analyze problems to seek common-sense solutions across a wide spectrum of issues important to voters.
On March 31, you have the freedom and power in this very special election to vote for Scott Murphy. He will lead us with compassion, hard work, dedication and tireless enthusiasm.
Lockrow-Schimmerling is chairwoman of the Delaware County Democratic Committee.
God of my choice or God of the Bible?
This is in reply to Cindy Davidson's Feb. 2 letter to the editor.
Growing up in a religious home while feeling strong attractions to other boys/men, I felt trapped between what I was taught and how I felt.
After "coming out of the closet" in my teens and eventually embracing a homosexual identity, even becoming a bartender at a gay bar, I struggled to reconcile homosexuality and a relationship with God. In other words, I viewed "a god of my choice" and the God of the Bible as synonymous.
In my 20s, I came to know God in a way I had never experienced before and I realized that for many years I had been trying to make God into who I wanted him to be, instead of serving him for who he is, and submitting my life to his truth as clearly revealed in the Bible.
There are more than a few Bible passages that clearly reveal homosexuality as a distortion of God's design for male and female sexuality. Now, there are also many other sexual sins listed in the Bible and the inordinate harshness toward homosexuals reveals a double-standard in the church.
The question really isn't about whether God loves us (the Bible is clear that he does), it's about whether or not we love him. Jesus put it simply in Matthew 16:24 "If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me." Embracing a process and dealing with the complex issues that led to powerful feelings of homosexuality has truly been "taking up my cross" to follow him. I chose to stop serving the comfortable "god of my choice" for the living God of the Bible because he deserves my obedience _ and what a treasure I've gained.
Aid to Gaza will just continue cycle
I just read that the United States will pledge $900 million to rebuild the Gaza Strip following its destruction by the recent Israeli invasion of this Palestinian area. The Israeli attack was in response to the launching of rockets from Gaza into southern Israel by Hamas, the Palestinian terrorist group in control of the area.
It struck me that the United States gives more than $2 billion of aid to Israel each year. Israel uses the money to purchase weapons from us so that it can do things like invade the Gaza Strip. Meanwhile, we also give billions to Egypt _ which borders Gaza _ where arms are smuggled across Egypt into Gaza, so that Hamas can launch those rockets into Israel. As a result, Israel levels the Gaza infrastructure, and the United States pledges $900 million to rebuild it so that the whole cycle can start again. Is this a little bit nuts?
Does anyone think this will end happily ever after? Is it possible there may never be peace in the Middle East despite the best efforts of the United States? Besides, given our nation's financial condition, wouldn't those millions be better spent in America?
Lyle R. Chastaine
Obama's race not why he was elected
Regarding a letter on March 10: If "ignorance is bliss," then Mr. Herbert Faulkner is one happy camper! How dare he sit in Roxbury and presume to know that millions of Americans voted for President Obama because it "felt good to elect an African-American president of the United States." I would have voted for him if he'd been purple with orange stripes. Even though he has less experience, he has fresh ideas that just may dig us out of the hole that GW, his warmonger friends, his so-called economic experts, and all those who voted them into office have put us in.
He mentions the author of "Basic Economics," who doesn't happen to agree with President Obama's recovery plans. Doesn't Mr. Faulkner know that there other experts who agree with them and, in fact, are working with the president?
If all these people who are trashing President Obama, even though he's only been in office for two short months, could give us good new ideas instead of garbage rhetoric, I would listen. But don't tell me that he's in office because he's African-American and it "felt good." That is just plainly and simply ridiculous.
Men weren't bad, only down on luck
I was a young person in the Great Depression, but I still remember how things were. We lived in Deposit at the time. The Erie Railroad ran through town a block from where we lived. Almost all the trains stopped there to pick up water for the engines.
If they were traveling west, they had to pick up a pusher to help get over the Gulf Summit. When the train came to a stop, 20 or so hobos would get off and others would get on open box cars.
Down behind the stores was a hobo camp. They had a large iron pot with a fire always under it. The men threw in water and vegetables and whatever food they could scrounge up. They were not bad men, only down on their luck.
Most of them did really carry a stick with their worldly possessions tied to the end, and they really did carry this over their shoulder.