ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1995, Roanoke Times
DATE: Monday, December 25, 1995 TAG: 9512270052
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-14 EDITION: HOLIDAY
TYPE: LETTERS
THE CRITICS of sending troops to Bosnia seem to fit three categories:
Those who think military commitments by a ``draft dodging'' president are hypocritical and therefore invalid.
Partisan politicians positioning themselves to reap the benefits of an American disaster.
People who don't believe ``America's vital interests'' are threatened.
The prejudices of the ad hominem arguments of the first group are ludicrous and based on such narrow, intractable beliefs that meaningful dialogue isn't possible, even if it were welcome. The second group is demagogic, setting its sails to ride the whirlwind of outrage if American lives are lost, even as it itself sows that wind in anticipation.
Those of the third group who harbor none of the hatreds or ambitions of the first two have a legitimate concern. The question is: What are America's vital interests? Access to oil and mineral resources? Protection of markets and free trade? The security of governments friendly to those interests?
These are certainly vital, but this means the lives of American troops are worth sacrificing for the dollar. Which is to say we can exercise our might for our own selfish interests, and when American lives are lost, ``It's worth it.''
America's most vital interest, more than any material holdings or gains that our great strength can get us, is our own national conscience. Ever since the belief that all men are created equal and entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness was woven into our national fabric, our destiny has been to strive for these ideals here and abroad. It has certainly been the rallying call for this Cold War generation, after vanquishing Axis dictatorship, to resist Soviet dictatorship in the remotest of regions in the world. Have we been fighting for money all these years? I haven't.
What is more vital to America and our hundreds of years of striving than to resist this dictatorship of terror - the slaughter of fellow humans who are dying for no more reason than they are living? The role of leadership brings with it responsibility. We can't shirk that responsibility and expect to still lead. And lead we must. This world is still too dangerous to be led by any country that isn't dedicated to the ideals that we espouse as our national identity.
GLENN ROSE
LEXINGTON
IQ doesn't define the differences
KEITH WHITLEY'S Dec. 11 letter, "GOP attempts to rescue the nation," suggests that Democrats with an IQ of 75 or over should be able to grasp the Republicans' "Contract With America."
I have noticed that Republicans frequently belittle the intelligence of those who disagree with them rather than argue the merits of their "Contract" positions.
I agree that House Speaker Newt Gingrich is sharp, and most Republicans I know are intelligent. But I think there are dimensions other than intelligence (which Democrats have an adequate supply of) that more nearly define the differences between Republicans and Democrats.
Moral, ethical, and fiscal approaches to caring for the most helpless elements in our society - the aged, the sick and the poor - vary much more than the IQs of the two parties.
These issues and others deserve vigorous debate uncluttered by sidetrack issues of relative intelligence.
It was not the absence or presence of superior intellect that inspired one former president to devote his influence and personal effort to Habitat for Humanity and many other worthy causes, while another chose to make million-dollar speeches to augment his own personal fortune, another to play golf and another to sit in gloomy seclusion until his death.
Find the Democrat among these and you'll find a great statement about what Democrats and Democratic leadership are about.
As a leader of his party, Jimmy Carter demonstrated, by example, the Democratic Party's concern for less fortunate Americans. Former presidents personify one of the major differences I see between the parties, and it is not IQ.
ROBERT F. ADAMS
BACK CREEK
It's the time to be of good cheer
STEPHANIE SALTER'S Dec. 10 commentary, "Nowadays, Christmas is about money," laments the current social trend of disheartening Christmas activities. However, in spite of all the Christmas abuses and misuses, I find that we don't give enough credit to the season for the special acts - small and large, personal and social - that happen only at Christmas time.
First, we see the ever-faithful Salvation Army volunteers standing in the malls and in front of grocery stores ringing those bells to herald the season and awaken our conscience to see that there are a lot more people who are worse off than we. This is the season when we often say "Thank God'' or ``Thank Goodness'' to express our gratitude for the good that happened during the year, although throughout the year we gripe and complain about all the bad that happens to us.
Second, radio and TV stations in the valley collect thousands of cans of soups, vegetables and other items of food for the less fortunate through holiday food drives to which people respond so positively.
Third, we put a single stamp on cards that will travel short and far distances to reach the ones that we think of throughout the year, but don't do anything about until the Christmas season. The Christmas cards bring smiles and warm memories to both the sender and receiver.
Fourth, this is the season that reminds us the new year is beckoning, and we have to make that resolution again, including the diet plan that never fails to fail.
The Christmas season isn't all that bad. So to all of you Bah, Humbugs: Cheer up. It only comes once a year!
SAE JIN YU
ROANOKE
Clinton has broken every promise
WE HAVE laws to protect us from scam artists and people who use the telephones and airwaves to prey on the elderly. Yet we don't have one to protect us from our own president. This latest federal shutdown is just another example.
When Clinton signed the first bill, he knew what he was promising to do. Let's not blame this on the Republicans. It is just another in a long line of broken promises made by Clinton. I don't believe anyone can tell me of a promise he made that he has kept.
Gays in the military were better off before he went into office. ``Don't ask, don't tell'' - what kind of a policy is that? Now gays are fighting for their right to stay in the service. They had ``don't ask, don't tell'' for decades, but they believed Bill Clinton.
Health-care reform? The cost of going to a doctor is higher now than ever before. Most elderly can't afford to die.
Clinton was too cowardly to fight for his country in Vietnam. Now he's sending the sons and daughters of the very men and women who did fight in Vietnam to Bosnia to put their lives on the line in a country where we have no business being.
He sees a few polls that say his ratings are up so he goes on the air to try and fool the American people once more into believing he's doing what's best for them.
America is in a sad state right now, and it's not going to get any better with Bill Clinton in office.
LEWIS A. CRAGET
CHRISTIANSBURG
Make transfers easier for teachers
THE DEC. 9 article ``School change awaits?'' by Jon Glass of Landmark News Service was excellent.
Why not have standard certification requirements for all states so professional teachers can transfer without having to take Sandbox 101 or, in my case, American History to teach chemistry in Connecticut? The National Education Association teachers union can explain it.
A prerequisite for national certification should be a minimum score on the national teachers' exam that most teachers in Florida failed.
THOMAS LEE COOK
CHRISTIANSBURG
LENGTH: Long : 149 linesby CNB