Elections capture today, not 2010
Tuesday's elections say a lot about today, but not much about the 2010 elections.
Exit polls reveal in Virginia and New York the majority of the people said they were not voting on the current Democratic administration but were voting for state politicians they believed would better serve them and their needs now.
In New Jersey, more than 50 percent of the people voted against the Republican winner Chris Christie, who received only 48.8 percent of the vote. New Jersey folks are unhappy and appear to be slated to remain that way for a while since the majority of them voted against the winner.
In Virginia the Republican winner said he no longer believed in the conservative dissertation he wrote stating that women should not work outside the home, etc., and he convinced voters he would work for local issues. Also, his Democratic opponent did not claim to be an Obama Democrat.
The only two congressional seats that could be considered a reflection on President Obama as he seeks support for health care reform were won by Democrats, in California and New York. If there is a mandate, it is to Democrats to get the health care job done.
The election results clearly say a lot about what voters want now, but I doubt they show portents of the next election.
Too much information in Corning stories
I do not personally know former state assistant attorney general Roland Corning and, like most people, know not enough of the publicized circumstances to make any judgments or even assumptions. But I am incensed at the media for abusing his privacy by repeatedly divulging the contents of his car.
If those articles were contraband, or if Mr. Corning had been guilty of some legal violation that would warrant his car search and ultimate revelation of its contents, and such contents were illegal, it would be understandable. But such is not the case. Your revelations are founded simply on titillation and prurient interest and have no legal or ethical ground. How would you like to have your underwear or other personal possessions divulged for no reason beyond curiosity?
THERON TEAGLE SR.
There's been change, but not for the better
What is going on in our nation? Why is there so much division, so much anger and so much distrust of each other, so much willingness to respond quickly and irrationally to an opposing view?
President Obama promised transparency and no lobbyists, yet that promise is just another illusion for those that were hoping for change.
Now we have President Obama set to dismantle the health care system and make it over as yet another dysfunctional government-run program.
Obama is not much different than Bush or Clinton when it comes to feeding the banks and bowing to unions.
History has shown that any form of government based on more government and less freedom costs many lives.
As the debate rages over government-run health care, cap and trade and rich against poor, American troops are dying overseas.
Democrats are determined to force their ideology on all of us, at the same time they attack what is great about America. It's time to say enough.
Cap and trade support will hurt S.C.
Sen. Lindsey Graham claims to want to increase the Republican Party's presence in Congress by being more "centrist," but we, his electorate, are here to remind him that we did not elect him to increase the Republicans' presence in Congress or "reach across the aisle." By siding with liberals on bills such as cap and trade, he thinks he's appeasing Democrats and center-right Republicans, but all he actually does is betray his constituents.
South Carolina receives 62 percent of its electricity from coal-power plants. These coal plants will be hit the hardest by cap and trade taxes. As a recent EPA report shows, South Carolina industry and power plants will have to purchase "carbon credits" from states that have excess credits.
The money the energy companies have to pay for carbon credits will end up costing customers and taxpayers more money. If we wanted to support such government growth and confiscatory tax policy, we would elect a Democrat.
Gov. Sanford and suspended mayor
Do I understand this correctly? Gov. Marshall (Mark) Sanford suspended the mayor of a small town in South Carolina because she left the scene of an accident; however, he continues in office after leaving the scene of four million citizens for six days. Further, he lied about where he was. Does something seem a little strange here?
CERMETTE CLARDY JR.
Isle of Palms