St. Petersburg Times
Special report
Video report
  • For their own good
    Fifty years ago, they were screwed-up kids sent to the Florida School for Boys to be straightened out. But now they are screwed-up men, scarred by the whippings they endured. Read the story and see a video and portrait gallery.
  • More video reports
Multimedia report
Print Email this storyEmail story Comment Email editor
Fill out this form to email this article to a friend
Your name Your email
Friend's name Friend's email
Your message
 

Let's have a Patriot Tax on fuel to pay the costs of war

Letters to the Editor
Published January 28, 2005


President Bush just requested another $80-billion, mostly to pay for his war to replace Saddam Hussein, and secondly for the real war on terror in Afghanistan. Never before in a time of war have we as a country done so little to sacrifice. Rather than just placing yellow-ribbon bumper stickers on our cars, and telling everyone how much we support our troops, it is time for us to do our patriotic duty of sacrifice.

President Bush should ask his Republican-controlled Congress for a temporary "Patriot Tax" on gasoline to pay for the war in Iraq, and the real war on terror in Afghanistan. Having consolidated his hold on America last November with Karl Rove's "divide and conquer" political strategy, I am sure the president won't have any trouble getting his Congress to go along with a Patriot Tax on gasoline.

So instead of plastering bumper stickers on our gas-guzzling SUVs, let's show true support for our troops by putting our pockets where our mouths are! Mr. President, let's bring America back to fiscal sanity and urge Congress to adopt a Patriot Tax so that future generations won't have to pay for our bills.


-- Rafael Emmanuelli, Tampa

Mission accomplished

Re: Report: Bush to request $80-billion more for wars, Jan. 25.

Osama bin Laden's intent when he attacked the World Trade Center was to destroy the American economy. A $4-trillion surplus is now a $4-trillion deficit and it's still growing.

It looks to me like he's won.


-- J.R. Ford, St. Petersburg

Divergent worldviews

I was struck by the irony in two headlines in Tuesday's paper. One reads Bill Gates donates $750-million for immunization programs. The other is Report: Bush to request $80-billion more for wars.

Two men, two different ways of looking at the world.


-- David K. Himber, Largo

Priorities should be at home

Re: Planning to stay, Jan. 25.

There it is, buried on Page 7 in a scant 3 column inches: The Army plans to maintain the current troop allocation of 120,000 in Iraq through the year 2007. Is anyone paying attention? Does anyone care? Now there are rumblings of an invasion into Iran. This is madness.

"Mission accomplished," my foot. The war is costing the lives of our young men and women, those of countless Iraqi citizens, and it is gouging U.S. taxpayers for more than $175-million every day. It's time to end the insanity. Let's get our soldiers and our priorities back home.


-- Ray Dabkowski, Dunedin

Make sure the job is done

Re: The George Bush I remember, Jan. 24.

I very much enjoyed Lanny J. Davis' article. His insight into President Bush's character and humanity was refreshing, especially in a left-leaning paper like the St. Petersburg Times. But I strongly disagree with his conclusion, suggesting Bush pull out as quickly as possible from Iraq.

Whether or not one agreed with going there in the first place no longer matters. The fact is, the United States is there, has dispatched a despot, Saddam Hussein, and will soon oversee an election of truly historic proportion. To leave now would be an abandonment of the people of Iraq and would marginalize the contribution of America's armed forces. As a Canadian citizen, I have great respect for America and its people. I would not like to see its reputation besmirched by a reckless pullout before the job is done.


-- Ron Tomlinson, St. Pete Beach

Bush is more like Theodore Roosevelt

The comparison of Bush's foreign policy to Wilson's that has been advanced by David Broder (Bush's vision born of his faith in freedom, Jan. 21) and other commentators is historically inaccurate and misleading. There may be a superficial similarity of Bush's universal vision of a messianic mission of spreading democracy around the world. But the philosophical foundations of the two positions are quite different. Though Wilson could sometimes be imperialistic, as in his policy toward Latin America, he believed in an altruistic, idealistic internationalism that was not rooted in American power and national interest, but in the moral aspirations of mankind.

The proper precursor of Bush's foreign policy is Wilson's Republican contemporary, Theodore Roosevelt, whose nationalistic, aggressive egoism aimed to use American power to advance democracy and peace by working to achieve stability in the international balance of power. The emotional power of Bush's foreign policy is that of TR's Big Stick.


-- William F. McKee, professor of history emeritus, Eckerd College St. Petersburg

Don't overlook the environment

Re: The president's inaugural speech.

President Bush did not talk about the environment in his inaugural speech, but the environmental challenges we face - from air pollution to our vanishing open spaces - are some of the most far-reaching and profound we face as a nation.

We should urge President Bush and his administration to change course in his second term - to strengthen, not weaken our environmental laws; to promote clean, renewable energy and energy efficiency; and to aggressively enforce the laws already on the books. And to not open the pristine Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas drilling.


-- Mirko I. Soko, Tampa

Err on the side of life

I am outraged! Terri Schiavo does not deserve to die by starvation or dehydration. Anyone who looks at the video clips of her can see clearly that the woman is alive and is aware of her surroundings. Terri needs no assistance breathing. Terri's heart beats on its own just fine. She only requires a feeding tube. We cannot remove this feeding tube from her. We are civilized people after all!

We don't know what Terri would want in this situation. But even from that premise, you only have one option: to preserve her life. You must assume she would want to live. You can not kill her without knowing 100 percent sure that that is what Terri would want.

I am not totally against euthanasia when the person has expressed a desire to die. But this woman has made no such expression. True, she isn't capable of asking for death. But you certainly should not demand she die without her expressed consent. Without knowing one way or the other what Terri would want, you err on the side of life. That is the only option.


-- Angela Warner Rogers, Tampa

Let her rest in peace

Re: "Terri's Law" loses last battle, but it's not over, Jan. 25.

Not only do Bob and Mary Schindler continue to have unreasonable expectations for their brain-dead daughter Terri Schiavo, but their very own judgment on this highly emotional issue also appears to be warped. After 15 years of waiting and hoping for a miracle recovery (which is not likely), it is now time for the Schindlers to remove their daughter's feeding tube and let her finally rest in peace.


-- JoAnn Lee Frank, Clearwater

[Last modified January 28, 2005, 00:21:17]


Share your thoughts on this story

Comments on this article
Subscribe to the Times
Click here for daily delivery
of the St. Petersburg Times.

Email Newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT