Text Size:
A|
A|
A
Email
PrintDan Rooney should want to spread his wealth
Classic story by Ed Bouchette in the Nov. 11 Post-Gazette ("Rooneys Hope to Finish Ownership Deal Soon"). Let's have the chairman of the Steelers, Dan Rooney, the "lifelong Republican," do all he can to get Barack Obama elected president, then have his son, Arthur II, do all he can to wrap up an ownership deal to avoid having any of the five brothers pay one extra dollar in taxes!
What's wrong? Don't they want to help Mr. Obama "spread that wealth around"? What a joke!
How does one spell hypocrisy? R-O-O-N-E-Y.
BOB REICH JR.
Mt. Lebanon
Pay-up patriotism
I find it odd that the Rooneys are so concerned about getting the sale of the Steelers worked out this year because of the extra taxes they will mostly be paying in 2009, when Barack Obama takes office ("Rooneys Hope to Finish Ownership Deal Soon," Nov. 11 Sports).
Weren't the Rooneys, or at least Dan, big Obama supporters? Shouldn't they embrace paying the extra taxes? It should be their patriotic duty, at least as Joe Biden sees it.
C'mon, Rooneys, help out the rest of America by paying more in taxes. Put your money where your mouth is.
FAITH MILAZZO GRAHAM
Penn Hills
Scramble play
I'm rather surprised by the Nov. 11 article "Rooneys Hope to Finish Ownership Deal Soon." It states, "The brothers want to have a sales agreement and get NFL approval for it by the end of 2008 because of the extra tax consequences they believe will be introduced retroactively to the beginning of 2009 by the new Obama presidential administration and Congress."
Dan Rooney backed Barack Obama, whose campaign was to "spread the wealth." It's obvious that the Rooneys don't want to spread their wealth.
CLAIRE MOORE
Bethel Park
Your duty, Rooneys
I had to read the article concerning the Rooneys' desire to hurry the sale of the franchise five times before I was convinced that it said what I thought it said. The Rooneys want the sale to be finalized before the inauguration of Barack Obama due to tax consequences?
This has to be a joke. Dan Rooney let us know about his swooning over Mr. Obama and now the brothers are trying to avoid paying additional taxes? Perhaps the Rooneys weren't paying attention when we were told that it was our "patriotic" duty to pay more taxes and that we were being "selfish" if we didn't want to pay more.
Mr. Obama needs that money for Planned Parenthood. Suck it up and give it up. "Yes you can."
FRANK ESSEK
Cranberry
What she neglects
After reading Ruth Ann Dailey's column Monday morning, almost one week after the election of Barack Obama, I felt moved to write about her angry, vengeful comments ("So, What Will Change? And How?" Nov. 10). She condemns the journalists who supported Mr. Obama as incurious left-wingers and describes Rahm Emanuel, whom Mr. Obama has selected as his chief of staff, as vicious.
She neglects to mention the qualities we have lived with for eight years in Vice President Cheney and Karl Rove. Even columnist Charles Krauthammer, whom I also read in the Post-Gazette, was more gracious and optimistic. I guess her viewpoint depends on whose ox is being gored!
I do like her crossword puzzles, though.
JACQUELIN G. WECHSLER
Oakland
Speaking of rude
I am writing in response to Chris Armstrong's Nov. 8 letter ("Rude Response"), which criticized John McCain's supporters for booing the mention of Barack Obama's name during Mr. McCain's concession speech on election night.
Fair enough, the booing was a less-than-classy gesture; however, I suggest that Mr. Armstrong is a little hypocritical. Is he suggesting that liberals are all class in victory and defeat?
Let's see, they tried to name a sewage treatment facility in San Francisco after George W. Bush, numerous local governments have passed resolutions condemning President Bush and other local governments have even issued arrest warrants! Not to mention numerous comments made by liberal legislators bashing President Bush.
Mr. Armstrong, are these cheap and classless as well? Oh, I forgot -- when you're a Democrat, it's different.
RICHARD RALSTON
Upper St. Clair
Cookie wisdom
On Oct. 31, I was off work and walking past the Obama office on the South Side. As I was reading the literature on the windows, a man was parking his car with a friend and yelled out from the car "he's a terrorist" and then after that he said, "Don't do it, he's bad for the country." Being sick and tired of hearing things like that from simple minds, I went into the office and volunteered.
For four hours. I helped put packets and boxes of signs and literature together. I met a great group of people from all walks of life -- like Christy, a recent graduate from Pitt; Edgar, an early-30s guy like me; Kenny, a not-so-young man; and a girl I met briefly who had just gotten done working a 12-hour shift at a local hospital -- all working and donating their time for the same cause.
As I came home with some Chinese food, I felt great. After I opened my fortune cookie, I realized what I did was worthwhile. Because as Jerry Seinfeld once said about the black-and-white cookie, "Look to the cookie." My cookie said, "In a gentle way, you can shake the world." Look to the cookie, indeed.
DAVID LANZY
Mount Washington
Americans united
I am proud to be an American -- not just because of the Obama win, but because hope and justice has always been our creed. That is the American way.
Last week, we celebrated the election of our first African-American president and I was heartened. But what was even more exciting was the undeniable unification of the people of America -- all cultures, all ethnicities, embracing each other, with hope in their hearts for a better tomorrow. The world saw us united, and it was good.
It took me back to when I was a little girl -- in the era of King and Kennedy, with the blended hearts and souls of the people of America, as they walked together, prayed together, went to jail together, fighting racism and inequality.
I know we have our problems, but what rings true in my mind and heart are the common bonds that we share. It's our collective desire to provide for our families, to live a better existence and leave a legacy of hope and prosperity for future generations, like Barack Obama talked about throughout his campaign.
It was all Americans of the human race who made this dream a reality, and we know in our hearts that we'll be a much better nation for it. Yes we can!
DEBORAH STARLING-POLLARD
Green Tree
Honoring veterans shouldn't include glorifying war
Can't we have a Veterans Day that doesn't glorify wars? Veterans have indeed sacrificed much -- their safety, health and even lives -- generally for poor pay. They should be supported better financially and spiritually. But let's not continue the ruse that most of our foreign wars "preserve the nation's heritage of freedom" ("Parade of Heroes," Nov. 11 editorial). Too many of them -- Iraq, Panama, Granada, Vietnam -- have been imperial misadventures, not defending our country in any sense, but sacrificing the lives and physical and mental health of our soldiers, and -- can we admit it? -- blighting many more times over the faraway lives of those we so unnecessarily invaded.
Can we survive our war mentality -- that all our wars are good wars? That our military, already as expensive as the combined cost of all other nations' forces, must be increased in size? That no politician dare call to circumscribe or reduce our military?
And military service hardly enhances one's life (I served, 1958-60). Training is an authoritarian, often sadistic, conditioning, still full of a disgusting male chauvinism that degrades and threatens the women in it. The military trains us to kill whomever some irresponsible leader designates, without question. It does not make us better. It is the opposite of a democratic institution.
Until we can deglorify and proportionally measure our wars and veterans, we will remain pell-mell on our present militaristic, dangerous and tragic course.
JIM SCOFIELD
Johnstown
The losing strategy of division
Congratulations are due the Republican strategists for the stunning success of their Southern strategy.They won a sweeping victory in the South while losing the nationwide vote of the distressed middle class, women, our youth and our best educated citizens.
Hopefully this election will mark the demise of divisive political strategies and usher in a new era of more inclusive politics.
NORMAN WIEN
Regent Square
Hillary Clinton deserves many thanks
I supported Barack Obama instead of Hillary Clinton in the primary, but I want to thank Mrs. Clinton -- for ultimately taking the high road to help Mr. Obama get elected; for her tireless campaigning, especially in Pennsylvania, to bring her supporters over to Mr. Obama; and for putting aside what must have been bitter disappointment and showing what "Country First" truly means. Because of her generosity of spirit and dedication to her country, we all have a brighter future with Mr. Obama as our next president. Thank you!NANCY TASHMAN
Mt. Lebanon
A triumph for dignity
The election of Sen. Barack Obama as the next president of the United States was more than a victory -- it was a triumph. He took the high road and he won with dignity and strength of character.We are truly at the dawning of a new world.
CARLINO GIAMPOLO
Oakland
The smoking ban should have no exceptions
I would like to congratulate the Pennsylvania Legislature on another inept attempt at passing meaningful legislation. Regarding the PA Clean Indoor Air Act, the legislators have managed to take a bad thing such as secondhand-smoke exposure and actually make it worse.Just released last week was a list of more than 1,700 exemptions statewide, many of which are in Allegheny County ("361 Taverns in County Avoid Smoking Ban," Nov. 8). Exemptions range from private clubs to tobacco shops to businesses with less than 20 percent of their revenue from food sales. This law was enacted, we were told, to protect workers and consumers from the scientifically documented harmful and often fatal effects of secondhand-smoke exposure. What these 1,700 exemptions tell me is that the health of employees in these establishments is somehow not as important as the health of other workers in the state, and surely not as important as the "almighty dollar." Their attempt at making even the playing field for smaller businesses has, in fact, disenfranchised businesses that are in compliance with the law.
The fact of the matter is that "sales figures" should play no role in the decision for our state to go completely smoke-free (no exemptions). This is not a business issue. It is a public health issue. If an establishment chose to pump carbon monoxide through its ventilation system while customers were eating, or mixed arsenic in with the iced tea, it would be shut down instantly. Why, then, is there any debate about which establishments must comply with clean indoor air standards? Perhaps the carbon monoxide or arsenic lobbies are not as influential.
It is time for all of Pennsylvania to comply with the Clean Indoor Air Act. Only then will all of our citizens get the fair chance at health they deserve and will all businesses be able to compete on a level playing field. I urge everyone to boycott businesses that fail to comply with Clean Indoor Air Act standards.
KEVIN KOTAR
Pennsbury Village
Handgun safety laws protect the public
Passing judgment so soon on the efficacy of lost or stolen handgun reporting laws doesn't make sense ("Lost-Gun Ordinances Usually Fire Blanks," Oct. 30). Most of these laws have been in effect for a relatively short time, so any lack of data on their usefulness is hardly surprising. These laws require a reasonable period to work before we can assess their impact.In the face of rising levels of gun violence across Pennsylvania, is the answer to do nothing? Public health data in other countries with stronger handgun safety laws tells us common-sense laws lead to vastly fewer shootings and homicides by firearms. Great Britain has strict gun possession laws and has fewer than 100 gun-related homicides per year. The United States has 30,000 deaths by firearms -- homicides, suicides and accidental -- every year. The answer isn't no gun laws. We need reasonable, common-sense reforms, like lost or stolen handgun reporting.
The chief obstacle to reform, the National Rifle Association, says this legislation doesn't work -- but offers no factual support for its rhetoric. The NRA says this reform will "criminalize" law-abiding handgun owners; but how? Law-abiding gun owners automatically will report a lost or stolen handgun to file an insurance claim. Police and law enforcement officials say this reform will help crack down on illegal straw sales of handguns to criminals. Why are we more concerned with helping criminals get their hands on guns than with protecting our police officers, schoolchildren and others?
Handgun violence is a public health crisis requiring real safety measures. During a shooting event recently, an 8-year old Massachusetts boy accidentally and fatally shot himself in the head with a fully automatic Uzi in the presence of his father and a weapons instructor. (Apparently guns do kill people after all.) What is wrong with a society that allows young children to attend such an event let alone handle a loaded machine gun?
JANA FINDER
Highland Park
Why do they insist on pushing faulty gun control?
Notwithstanding the ongoing failure to actually perform exhibited by gun control proposals when/where enacted, the proponents of such failed measures continue their sales pitch. It's still, more or less, a free country, and individuals may propose such hare-brained ideas as suit their fancy. Nevertheless, the public should remain aware of what has worked and what has failed, gun control proposals falling into the latter category.As to city Councilman Bruce Kraus, a sponsor of a lost-stolen handgun reporting requirement ordinance for the city of Pittsburgh, he offers the following, regarding what might happen given enactment. "We're not going to see positive effects ? for a year or two or three" ("Lost Gun Ordinances Usually Fire Blanks," Oct. 30).
How long might it take to achieve arrival in "the promised land" of safety and security, and why the significant delay he describes? If the claimed "good effects" of legislation take so long to achieve, likely a serious fault in the ordinance is indicated.
Last but not least, existing state law appears to preclude such legislation as Councilman Kraus and others propose, this being a minor impediment to the social engineering types who continue to push such failed ideas as gun control.
ALAN SCHULTZ
McCandless
We welcome your letters. Please include your name, address and phone number, and send to Letters to the Editor, 34 Blvd. of the Allies, Pittsburgh 15222. E-mail letters to letters@post-gazette.com or fax to 412-263-2014. Letters should be 250 words or less, original and exclusive to the Post-Gazette. All letters are subject to editing for length, clarity and accuracy and will be verified before being published.
