People must take responsibility for their pets
To the editor:
I read with great interest the Sunday (July 31) articles beginning on page A1, "Who's In Control?" I also read the column regarding lost animals on a daily basis and follow the stories regarding dog attacks on farm animals.
I often watch the TV show "Animal Patrol," not for the sensationalism, but to help me wrap my head around the fact that we, human beings, can say we love our pets, and starve them, allow them to be flea- and tick-infested, dehydrated, tied to a tree in severe weather, frozen to trees, bred all their lives from their first heat never knowing what human touch feels like, thrown out of cars unwanted and allowed to wander aimlessly and confused, hit by cars and left by the side of the road, taught to attack just because their owner thinks it's macho, puppies and kittens acquired only because they're cute, households with pets living in their own feces.
My brain cannot even conceive of this. And, yet, it does exist. Much of this has occurred right in our own area, as attested to in our own news reports. We expect our Humane Society to police it all.
So, whose responsibility is it to control the animals? Not the Humane Society. It is the animal owner. You see, when you have an animal, it is your responsibility, and mine (I adopted a wonderful puppy-mill dog) to make sure that it is treated with respect and love, that training is not discipline and consequences, that it takes its place in society and learns to live with human beings. It is our responsibility to make sure that its rights are met: those rights of food and water, shelter from the elements, love and compassion, safety, medical care and education. If we cannot provide these, we have no business having a pet or any other animal.
And, guess what. It is yours for life. I also believe that this city and county, in order to show responsibility, need to put in place a strict leash and containment law. It is irresponsible to allow animals to roam, causing potential harm to them and to others. The powers that be are not in control.
This county commission will not have to even think about allocating more money for an animal control officer, the Humane Society will not need one, there will be fewer horrible stories for me to read. My brain can rest.
Tea partiers are doing what the voters expected
To the editor:
Well, the Kool-Aid drinking crowd is at it again while assessing the debt-ceiling crisis. They have graduated from accusing the Tea party of being "racist" to the slogan of the day, "terrorist."
Kathleen Parker of the Washington Post Writers Group attacks the tea party in her Aug. 2 Herald-Mail column, "Toss the tea party." She has added "Fragging" to the description of the tea party. "Had the nation defaulted on its financial obligations, the blame would have belonged to the tea party Republicans who fragged their own leader, John Boehner." Fragging: "To intentionally kill or wound (one's superior officer, etc.) esp. with a hand grenade." Other comments from her column describes the tea party as "the most destructive posse of misguided patriots we've seen in recent memory;" "These people wouldn't recognize a hot fudge sundae if the cherry started talking to them;" "What is it with Republicans and their silly pledges? Didn't get enough Scouting?" She concludes her thoughts with; "The tea party was a movement that changed the conversation in Washington, but it has steeped too long and has become toxic. It's time to toss it out."
The gist of Parker's column was the lack of legislative tea party support for the Republican debt-ceiling plan and her opinion that they should be replaced in the next election. She concludes that "Their sweep of the 2010 election was the exclusive result of anti-Obama sentiment and the sense that the president, in creating a health care plan instead of focusing on jobs, had overplayed his hand."
A reminder to Parker and like-minded friends. The tea party moniker is short for: Taxed Enough Already. Those elected under that moniker committed themselves to a reduction in government spending and thereby the deficit. They are doing what the majority of American voters expected them to do. Not like those who go along to get along.
So, no, Boehner was not fragged. He got what he should have expected — conservative politicians keeping their promise to their constituents.
America will be better off if the voters decide to send more tea partiers to Congress in 2012. Our children and grandchildren will thank them for removing a burden that we now suffer.
Ronald F. Moats Sr.
Americans should choose milk over soda
To the editor:
I was delighted to read an article a few weeks ago in a local newspaper about "Teens Drinking Fewer Sodas." The media advertising over the past 20 years has apparently convinced families that soda is "the new milk."
Soda is an empty-calorie drink that helps bring dollars into the pockets of manufacturers and obesity and dental decay to the American public. Not mentioned in the article is that the caffeine in soda can cause excessive urination, which in turn diminishes the potassium, calcium and minerals in the body. Many think that they are fine if they stick to diet drinks.
New studies are showing that artificial sweeteners are tricking the body into thinking that actual sugar is coming to metabolize and triggers insulin. When this happens, the unused insulin turns to fat. So, diet sodas are not the answer. They take an expensive toll on the body.
Americans need to go back to milk for children and non-plastic container drinking water for adults.