Ronald Reagan, my favorite president, once said: “The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant. It's just that they know so much that isn't so.” After reading some of the recent VND letters, I have a better understanding of President Reagan's comment.
A perfect example is “Quit wasting America's time” (Oct. 16) by John Emery West Jr.
I am a proud supporter of the tea party, which is under attack from liberals, semi-conservatives and the news media. We are the true conservatives who still think our country should abide by the U.S. Constitution and its system of checks and balances as our Founders intended.
Our goal is smaller government, lower taxes, family values and less debt.
President Obama has proven that with enough money (think billionaire George Soros) and a strong propaganda machine, anyone can become president. I didn't vote for Obama in 2008 because I didn't think he was qualified. I didn't vote for him in 2012 because I knew he wasn't qualified.
If we had more tea party politicians in Washington today, we wouldn't be bickering over a severely flawed health care system.
ObamaCare grants waivers to some unions and large companies, but not to average citizens.
Those who refuse to participate must pay a penalty collected by the IRS. Is this one of those ideas that Mr. West claims will “advance the nation” and be “good for many and not just a select few”?
Our problem isn't the tea party. It's politicians who trash our Constitution.
We need more people like Ted Cruz, David Lee, Marco Rubio and Rand Paul and fewer like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.