LETTERS
To the Editor:

In her letter of March 13, Dorothy McIntosh "defines" Barach Hussein Obama for the stated benefit of "Southerners in general and native (sic) Georgians in particular." (The South shall rise again!) Thanks to her dedicated efforts, though,, many thus warned might have found themselves agreeing with much of the senator's political and personal convictions; even at he expense of being classified as "left of pure socialism" - whatever that phrase might mean to Ms. McIntosh.

Calvin Woodward of the Associated Press wrote in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (March 14): "The sensitive trip-wire of race has been set off repeatedly, with religion and ethnicity not far behind." Ms. McIntosh makes her contribution to this un- American endeavor, joining that of other letters to the editor locally and nationally, echoing the bigotry of conservative Blogs and talk show hosts.

She uses Sen. Obama's name as a "gotcha." To assume that the senator is a closet Muslin simply because of his name - given to him as an infant by his father - is just as illogical as kicking dachshunds as a symbol Germany and protesting French policies by not eating french fries. Remember when those name "Adolph" were attacked, even though they were given that name long before Hitler came to power? Out of ignorance and prejudice some now do that same to Senator Obama.

As a matter of fact, a common Semitic name for both Arabs and Jews in the Middle East - and for others in non-Muslim areas of Africa, as well - carries the alternative spellings of "Barak/Barach." One of Israel's leaders happens to be named "Barak." The late King Hussein of Jordan, on the other hand, was the darling of Washington conservatives; his name being no handicap as long as he did their bidding. While the name "Obama" sounds as though it could be found in my ethnic groups - perhaps even the Irish. (Smile.) As Shakespeare said: "What's in a name?"

Ms. McIntosh urges "the citizens of Union County to learn as much as they can about the candidates for local and national office." Now that she has revealed for our benefit "all" about Sen. Obama, she is obligated to point out the shortcomings of Sen. McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential candidate. Perhaps starting with the issue of illegal immigration. She needs to reveal his voting record, and give us the details of Karl Rove's vicious personal attacks on the senator when he was running against Bush. Forget the nonsense about the so-called illegitimate child, but don't forget the romantic affairs and the cozying up to lobbyists over the years. Give us the true status of Sen. McCain's health. Make sure we know of his religious affiliation, and whether his religious convictions were long-held or merely made evident by a campaign epiphany. How often does he attend church; once a year, as did Ronald Reagan, beloved if Republican conservatives?

Above all, Ms. McIntosh, research Sen. McCain's return from Vietnam and the television coverage it engendered. My memory recalls an older military man (who at the time reminded me of Gen. Wainwright) standing in front of the cameras and protesting that John McCain "was no hero." So that we might "be careful who (we) vote for," Dorothy McIntosh, it is your moral duty to furnish readers with this additional expose. We shall eagerly await your helpful advice.

To the Editor:

Sincerely,

Ruth Elizabeth Ramsey

Each year at about this time CAGW (Citizens Against Government Waste - a nonpartisan, nonprofit taxpayer watchdog organization dedicated to eliminating waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement in government) unveils their annual "Congressional Pig Book," which identifies pork-barrel projects in the federal budget and profiles the most egregious examples from the annual appropriations bills. This year they have identified more than 11,000 pork-barrel projects, costing taxpayers more than $17 billion (last year there were 2,658 projects costing $13.2B, so the problem has gotten worse). Some of the revelations in this year's Pig Book include: $4,840,870 for wood utilization research; $1,529,220 for the Appalachian Fruit Lab; and $984,400 for Idaho's strategic plan for managing noxious weeds. Grover Cleveland, the king of the veto, rejected hundreds of congressional spending bills during his two terms as President in the late 1800s, because, as he often wrote: "I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution." Can any of the porkers in Washington today cite the Article and Section of the US Constitution that authorizes them to spend our tax dollars on wood utilization research, fruit labs, or managing noxious weeds? No. Nevertheless, "We The People" let them get away with such largess, year after year. Shame on us.

Cordially, Chuck Esposito

Suches, Ga.