Not all can be winner
Unfortunately for me, Linda Eubanks beat me to the punch on commenting about the past two generations of children.
Yes, there are exceptions to the rule, as in anything else, but it seems the high percentage of kids from these two groups just can't seem to understand the concepts of paying their dues or working their way up the corporate ladder.
The idea of how social sports is relayed to these kids with a "no loser, everyone is a winner" attitude is insane, to the point that when they are out of school and entering the real world, and the jobs that they apply for are filled by someone else, they go crying back to Mom and Dad asking, "Why didn't I get the job, because you told me years ago that everyone is a winner? What do I do now?"
I can only hope that this thought process doesn't continue to be passed on to their kids, or we will have an entitlement society where everyone is a loser.
Again, thank you, Linda, for your "life ain't fair" letter.
STEVE SHIRAR
Conway
On the road again ...
Just read "Family Circus" about Steve Straessle's road trip to New Orleans with five children and his wife. This is great journalism!
I well remember the carsick son of three, and the fights between them causing near-wrecks. Through it all, Steve kept his sense of humor and understanding of family dynamics. It was truly a pleasure to read. I'm just sorry he didn't have a good report about New Orleans, my favorite city in the U.S.
One last word. I had the exact same reaction to raw oysters. He could have used them to plug up the leak in the tire.
KAY FISHER
Little Rock
Parasitic infestation
Re Asa's tax oops: Like this candidate for governor apparently cheating on his tax credit, most of our gosh-darned mistakes favor ourselves. Especially do they among the entitled, the degreed, the big shots.
Society as a whole, the poor and homeless most certainly, shall never be able to thank these parasites enough.
GARY BRODNAX
Fayettevile
Can't take it seriously
Re K.K. Kennedy's letter about seat belts: I can no longer take seriously this universal claim that any law or regulation is wrong simply because it constitutes an "invasion of personal freedom."
The preamble to the Constitution states: "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common Defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
For me, this constitutes the basis of all laws, regulations and enforcement by our government. It provides general guidance not only for governmental activities but an obligation on each citizen to respect and comply with all legitimate laws, policies, regulations, etc.
Kennedy's letter specifically states that the use of seat belts saves lives. How, pray tell me, does this not satisfy the purpose of our government as set forth in the preamble stated above?
If, however, you are refusing to respect and comply with a self-confessed beneficial law simply because it requires you to take responsible action when operating a motor vehicle, then I must conclude you should not be taken seriously.
This nation is all about us, not all about me. If you cannot pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States, how can I or anyone still accept you as a citizen of this country?
JAMES VANDERGRIFT
Little Rock
Arguments are moot
In lieu of flowers, and as requested in his obituary, I offer the following "letter to the editor" in tribute to the late Dr. Jerry Kahler.
Perhaps Garey Sublett and others of like mind have forgotten what they learned in their civics and history classes. America is not a democracy. America is a republic; a "representative" form of government. This means that through the democratic process known as "one man, one vote," we choose individuals to represent us at the national, state and local levels.
If Arkansas were a nation unto itself, and the majority of its citizens voted for a law defining "marriage" as only between man and woman, and its legislature enacted that law, then it would be law and there would be no more debate on the subject.
However, this is not the case. Arkansas is only a state, and as a member of a union of states, Arkansas has sworn allegiance to that union and is therefore bound by its laws, the U.S. Constitution.
Every state has the freedom to write and enact its own laws as long as they do not conflict with the Constitution.
But, unless the U.S. Supreme Court changes its opinion regarding same-sex marriage, or an amendment to the Constitution is passed defining marriage as only between a man and woman, or Arkansas secedes from the union again, then all this moaning and groaning about "democracy" and "the majority rules" is moot.
FLEMING STOCKTON
Little Rock
To change for better
I am not a registered Democrat or Republican. I am not a member of the libertarian or Tea Party. I am a true independent.
Let me pose some questions. In the past six years: 1. How has the U.S. financial statement changed? 2. How has unemployment changed? 3. How has U.S. debt changed? 4. How has cost of living changed (gasoline, food, health-care costs)? 5. How have our relations with other countries improved? 6. How have relations between the executive branch of government with the Congress and the judicial branch improved?
Objectively, how can one not conclude on all counts, a deterioration?
As election time nears, the primary question to be considered is do we want the same players with more of the same? Do we need to go in a different direction with a change of leadership?
I do not see how any American cannot seek change, hopefully for the better.
L.J. MICKEY JORDAN JR.
Hot Springs Village
Editorial on 08/03/2014