Why it makes sense to vote for Tennant
CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- The issue of Social Security can best be explained using jars of pennies. The people had been saving their pennies in a jar since 1935. In 1982-83, a well-meaning bipartisan commission, the Democratic Congress and the Reagan administration came to a compromise that it would be necessary for the people to start to save two pennies instead of one each year for all the baby boomers who would retire after 2010. And so the people began putting two pennies in the jar each year. Along comes George W. Bush who saw all pennies in the jar and gave a tax break and all the pennies in the jar to the richest 1 percent. Congresswoman Shelley Moore Capito said this was a great idea, and she voted to give the pennies away! Now the Republicans say the jar is empty for the people needing Social Security in the future. So, let's privatize it. We'll take the security out of Social Security and replace it with market risk.
The pennies that the people have been saving since 1935 have been invested in U.S. Treasury Bonds which the government backs with full faith and credit in itself. They remain the safest investment on earth. Keep in mind they have those tanks and airplanes to back them up. If the pennies were put into the stock market, it could go down. Remember 1929. But perhaps, and even more importantly, the treasury would have to borrow the money from another source to finance the deficit. Keep in mind when we pay interest to the Social Security Trust Fund, we pay ourselves back, like taking the pennies from your wallet and putting them in your pocket. If we borrow money from China or the Arab states, we not only go in debt to them, but worse, much worse -- we pay them the interest as well.
Voting for Natalie Tennant for U.S. senator makes sense, since Shelley voted to give away all the pennies the people saved to 1 percent of the richest people.
Conservatives also care about people
I take issue with your editorial of Sept. 26 titled "Progress," particularly the paragraph which states: "President John F. Kennedy once described a liberal as 'someone who cares about the welfare of the people.' That sums it up." This implies that you believe that conservatives don't care about their fellow man.
I consider myself to be a conservative, yet during my career, I worked as a VISTA worker, and spent the last 10-plus years as a social worker. Since retirement, I have volunteered with the homeless, and in assisting indigent mothers in obtaining necessities for their children. I like to think this qualifies me as "someone who cares about the welfare of the people."
Also, following this line of thinking, I'm sure you equate liberal with Democrat and conservative with Republican. If this is the case, I want you to examine the lists of the large donors to most local charities, and if "unmasked," I'm sure you would find many conservative Republicans. So, if they don't care about "the welfare of the people," they are doing a very good job of disguising it.
Barbara Beury McCallum