Liberal teachers pushing anti-gun attitudes onto kids
If you were considering refinancing your mortgage, would you consult your teenage child? If you were buying stocks, would you ask your 16-year-old kid’s opinion? Why would you even consider changing our Constitution’s Second Amendment because your child is out there protesting our gun rights? Remember that most of these children have never had a job, they have no mortgages and they live with their parents, so they have no earthly experiences in life. The only reason they are protesting is because their liberal so-called professors or teachers told them they should be out there. These are sheep being led by liberal teachers who fill their heads full of mush. Does anyone wonder why the world is going in the direction it is?
JIM CORDER, ACWORTH
Regarding Kyle Wingfield’s column, “Term limits aren’t the answer to the real problem,” (Politically Georgia, March 12), his analysis seems a bit superficial. He concludes, “It’s not so much about limiting (elected officials’) number of terms, but what they do during the terms they serve.” Well, independent research shows politicians spend about a third of their time soliciting donations so they can run again. Their large donors have more influence than the voting public. Wingfield found that the median member (half above and half below) of Congress has been in office seven years. This sounds low for the Senate and does not allow for the fact that big changes in voter sentiment during the past 10 years has caused some turnover, as has the aging of members and the frustration caused by gridlock. No wonder so many want to be “career politicians,” given the many perks and benefits they have bestowed on themselves. If the average voter is to have any influence, we need term limits – with intervals before seeking another public office – elimination of gerrymandering, and public financing of campaigns if campaign contributions are not limited.
RON KURTZ, ALPHARETTA
