Candidates need to have integrity
People want to feel good about what they do, but that does not achieve a desired result ("Candidates need to care about people," July 30 Letters to the Editor). Without the rule of law and integrity, you will have a giant Woodstock society that will fail and provide nothing meaningful for the people.
People of integrity with a comprehension of right and wrong are needed in government. When politicians take an oath, they should do it. They should not pass laws they have not read because the selling point sounds good and gives them warm feelings. They should make themselves accountable to the laws they pass. There should be no class warfare and special groups to coddle or punish. They should obey the law and be good stewards of the public trust.
Integrity is the most important issue, and not how good they can feel about what they have accomplished.
Money in government is not the answer. The Katrina disaster is still a disaster in which the government is responsible for rebuilding. The country has spent unreasonable amounts of money, and we still have increasing welfare, unemployment and crime. Money in government can be nothing more than a slush fund without integrity.
JAMES KILPATRICK Jr.
Flat tax is better
Several Republican primary candidates were supporters of the Fair Tax plan. Although all were fine candidates, their support of the Fair Tax indicates a naive understanding of how government really works and the lack of a critical analysis of the true consequences of this plan.
The so-called Fair Tax is basically a progressive national sales tax. The motivation for the proposal is commendable: to eliminate the income-redistribution, social-engineering monstrosity that is the U.S. tax code. The problem is that the Fair Tax offers a utopia that, when the details of the plan are revealed and analyzed, cannot exist. Indeed, the plan likely would lead to a worse condition.
The Fair Tax, as admitted by its most prominent proponent, doesn't reduce the revenue or the size of the federal government. All it does is fund the government in a different way.
If one insists on feeding the federal beast, then a simple flat tax is the only logical and truly fair plan. Everyone pays the same percentage. Everything wrong with the current progressive income-tax scheme is eliminated, including the Internal Revenue Service and the billions of dollars spent trying to comply with the income-tax code.
The real issue is severely reducing federal revenue and spending, not how the government legally steals from us.
Not still governor
My husband and I answered three recorded phone calls from someone introducing herself as "Gov. Sarah Palin." I'm sure she wanted us to vote for her favorite candidate. We didn't listen long enough to find out.
Palin resigned July 26, 2009 — more than a year ago. How credible is she to still be introducing herself as the governor?
It was refreshing to see two letters so eloquently stating the history and importance of religion and prayer to the Founding Fathers in the formation of our federal government ("Founders backed prayer at meetings," "Begin with prayer," Aug. 2 Letters to the Editor).
But the statement "Better to keep religion where it belongs — at home," from a third letter ("Separate religion," Aug. 2 Letters to the Editor), didn't reflect how the Holy Scripture says, "Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord." Also, the suggestion that Christians believe God is behind whatever they want to do showed a clear misunderstanding of what true Christian faith is; it is a petition for guidance and revelation.
It seems to me there is every evidence indicating a direct correlation between our nation veering away from God and the pit currently being dug — economically, spiritually, morally. Call me crazy, but I do not fear the prospect of a citizen "swinging a dead cat around the council chamber to invoke Satan's blessing" as much as I do a nationwide citizenry that does not understand the consequences for the soul of America of eliminating prayer from the public square.
Put down phone
Wichita-area drivers, hear my plea: Put down the cell phone while behind the wheel.
I know you think your conversation is too important to delay until you are not in traffic and that you absolutely must make your destination in the next few minutes. But you are endangering yourself and everyone around you. I am sure you believe you have superior driving skills and can multitask, but do everyone a favor and concentrate on the job at hand — driving.
As for texting behind the wheel: Semis have had text-based communication devices installed for years, and the companies know that a driver cannot read or type while controlling a vehicle. Trucking companies have fitted their onboard communication devices with a lock that disables the device once the vehicle is in motion. If companies that benefit from their vehicles being in motion force their drivers to stop to read and answer text communications, don't you think it is with good reason?