April 22, 2012 • Dear Editor

Romney’s religion

Dear Editor,

As I see that Mitt Romney is going to be picked as the Republican candidate, I wonder why people aren’t making more of an issue of his religion.

Remember when people thought that Barack Obama was a Muslim? They were throwing a fit! But what you don’t know is that there are strange similarities between Latter-Day Saints and Islam.

For example: Muhammad and Joseph Smith were both visited by an angel (Gabriel and Moroni). Both were given a vision. Both were told that no true religion existed on Earth. Both were to restore the long lost faith as the one true religion. Both wrote a book inspired. Both claimed their book was based on a record stored in heaven. Both claimed to be the final prophet of God. Both were polygamists. Both prohibit the use of alcohol and deny the basic idea of the trinity. Both received “after the fact corrective revelations.” And just like the Muslim extremists who attacked the U.S. on 9-11, the Mormon militia attacked and killed about 140 men, women and children, in what is now called the “Mountain Meadows Massacre” on 9-11, 1857! Well, who would have guessed?

Here are a couple of interesting book quotations: “Modern Mohammedanism has its Mecca at Salt Lake. … Clearly the Koran was Joseph Smith’s model, so closely followed as to exclude even the poor pretension of originality in his foul ‘revelations’.” (The Women of Mormonism, Frances E. Willard, 1882). “The student of Mormonism will be struck with the similarity of experience and claims of Joseph Smith and Mohammed.” (The Rocky Mountain Saints, T.B.H. Stenhouse, 1873).

So what do you think Republican conservatives, is Romney the man for you?


Mike McPherson


Horse slaughter ban

Dear Editor:

The horse kill ban in the United States has had the opposite effect of its intended consequences. The intention was the humane treatment of horses. The effect has been the starvation and abandonment of thousands of horses by derelict owners.

I strongly disagree with the emotion-driven rhetoric of the media and the vote-conscious politicians, regarding this issue. In reality, the horse slaughter ban of the United States has been the most inhumane legislation ever forced upon the horse industry.

I’ve talked to hundreds of horse producers and owners and I can safely say that the [auth] vast majority of them agree with this point of view.


Stuart Bogle


Slaughter ban causes more suffering

Dear Editor:

Concerning the humane treatment of horses: Before anyone takes a side on this issue, they need to know the facts!

The fact of the matter is that there are thousands of horses being abandoned and starved to death due to high feed costs, the cost of having a horse euthanized by a veterinarian and the slow down in the economy. If horse slaughter facilities were allowed to operate, this would provide an option to horse owners that would curtail the inhumane treatment of their horses.

Mexico is currently killing horses for human consumption. The problem with sending horses to Mexico for slaughter is that the restrictive policies enacted by our out-of-touch politicians results in the majority of these horses being rejected at the border and thus extending their inhumane treatment. The recent incidents covered by the media in Los Lunas, N.M., should be viewed as a direct result of the absence of a horse slaughter facility in our state.

The United States exports live horses to Mexico for slaughter where there is little, it any, oversight by the government. Why not open a facility here, provide jobs for our communities, provide food for needy countries and most importantly, provide a humane means of ending the suffering of these old, infirm, often crippled animals.


Donald Bogle


Obama trying to fix GOP mess

Dear Editor,

All day long I have to hear Republicans criticize how much money the president has spent. I don’t know how people can be so dumb.

I’ll try to explain: The economy was doing fairly well and there was a surplus when Bush took over in 2000. He quickly gave tax cuts to the rich and tax breaks to the oil companies while expanding the government, sending factories and jobs overseas and starting two unwinnable wars. So the oil companies, defense contractors and corporations in general were very happy. American workers lost their jobs.

Obama comes into office with a large deficit and a faltering economy. He could impose drastic austerity measures or he could borrow money and try to re-start the economy. To illustrate this, imagine you left home for a few weeks and your husband blew all the family savings, maxed out the credit cards, trashed the house, beat up the neighbors and neglected the family business until all your customers went to your competitors.

There was no more money to pay the mortgage, college tuition, medical insurance, nothing! So you can either sell anything you have left and go live in some dump, or you can go to the bank and borrow money to keep going and try to repair some things, pay some bills and try to restart your business. Do you understand the situation a little better? What if you went to the bank and your husband screamed at you that you were getting the family into debt? And that you were wasting money! Do you see how infuriating that would be?

They criticize Obama for having more people on welfare and food stamps than any other president. Well yeah, you ruined the economy and sent all their jobs overseas! They criticize him for increasing the deficit. Well he didn’t do it by starting two wars! He’s using all those funds to try and restart the economy! The group that destroyed the economy is criticizing the group that is trying to restart the economy and give poor people health care!

Personally, I would have gone with severe austerity measures and immediately ended the wars, but I think Obama chose to borrow money because he knew there was no way to clear up the deficit, ever. And might as well borrow more and keep some people working until the country eventually “crashes and burns.” So please, all of you Republicans, all of you right-wing TV and radio talk show hosts, all of you just please shut up.


N. Wayne Walters


Obama’s Marxist agenda

Dear Editor:

President Obama’s ideological war on fossil fuels is now taking half a trillion dollars out of the American economy. It is raising the cost of everything from eggs and potatoes to airline tickets. Gasoline was $1.83 when he took office.

His energy secretary, Steven Chu, does not own a car, but wants us to pay $9 per gallon as they do in Europe. He gets picked up by government limousines, which I presume are fueled by gasoline. We are helping Brazil to drill offshore, so that, our president says, we can be “one of your best customers.” It is estimated that we could be producing enough fuel from oil here to last us 100 years.

To save gasoline the president has advocated correct tire inflation, tuneups and maybe we should develop fuels from algae. How very ridiculous!

He has denied or slowed drilling permits in Alaska, offshore in all directions and turned down the Keystone Pipeline to bring oil from Canada, which oil will now probably be sold to China. We have not built new oil refineries in years. At the same time, we are subsidizing wind and solar with billions in taxes to companies that are failing or can never make it in the free marketplace. We cannot run our automobiles on wind or solar power, and most of us cannot afford electric cars or hybrids.

While the Obamas were taking half a dozen vacations last year, many on gas-guzzling jets, we are at home trying to buy gasoline to get to Walmarts and back. Meanwhile gasoline prices edge higher every day, causing more pain and anger at the pump. This is coming from a man who supposedly worries about lower and middle class citizens. Well, not so much!

His real plan from the beginning has been to “redistribute the wealth.” This is just one more facet of his Marxist agenda. His Environmental Protection Agency is passing regulations that will force coal-fueled electric plants to close and prevent them from being built in the first place. This will result in much higher costs for electricity, not to mention losing jobs and income in the coal-producing states.

One more thing on another subject. He is now “ruling” by executive order. The latest and most alarming gives him unprecedented power under the ruse of National Defense Preparedness. In peacetime, as opposed to wartime, he could declare martial law. He then could seize and control all industries, food supplies, energy supplies, manufacturing, technology, transportation, health care facilities, etc. This man wants the power of a dictator. Whoa, no way! This is so dangerous and should not be allowed to happen. November is too far away. His policies and regulations are destroying more of our freedoms every day. But maybe there is still hope that we can save our country from this arrogant, power-hungry man. God help us if we do not.

Delma Craig


Related Posts

Leave a Reply

« »