Share
In response to “GOP talk of embassy security ignores impact of budget cuts” (Oct. 26 Forum):
Lack of security in Benghazi wasn’t a product of budget
Forum writer Chuck Gardner, in his letter blaming lack of embassy security in Benghazi on budget cuts by the GOP, is misinformed.
Charlene Lamb, the official in charge of embassy security at the State Department, testified at the Congressional hearings several weeks ago that budget cuts had nothing to do with the lack of adequate security in Benghazi.
Philip Howerton Jr.
Charlotte
Romney’s debate positions didn’t seem very original
In college, I typed term papers with carbon copies (pre-computers). The first carbon copy was often okay but never quite as good as the original.
Mitt Romney’s remarkable agreements with many of President Obama’s key positions at the last debate reminded me of those carbon copies.
Jack Shimell
Charlotte
To the campaign sign thief: Don’t you value free speech?
Whoever stole our Obama yard sign is an un-American thief. The fact that he/she left the two small American flags that were on the sign in our mailbox does not change the fact that you are a thief.
By the way, does the right to free speech apply only to you?
Ed McGuire
Waxhaw
Re-electing Obama would
be bad for business, jobs
After 40 years of owning several businesses and hiring people, I can assure you that most businesses fear and don’t trust President Obama. Therefore, they will not offer any jobs until Obama is gone.
This affects not only you, but your family and friends. How hard is that for all voters to understand?
Max Carozza
Swansboro
Obama has been superb in filling judge vacancies
The writer is a professor of law at the University of Richmond.
“Uninspiring choices for president” (Oct. 21 Editorial) correctly describes the current dissatisfaction with both nominees but also offers numerous reasons to vote for the incumbent. Another is Obama’s cooperation with North Carolina’s senators in filling judicial openings.
Thanks to their cooperation a number of vacancies have been filled with superb judges, like Charlotte’s own Fourth Circuit Judge Albert Diaz. This development is good for the courts and the nation.
Carl Tobias
Richmond, Va.
Romney’s plan doesn’t add up; don’t buy the ‘snake oil’
In 2009, the latest year for which the IRS has published data, those with incomes over $250,000 reported total income of $1.649 trillion, taxable income of $1.383 trillion and total income tax of $396 billion, an effective rate of 28.6 percent.
Mitt Romney would reduce this rate to 22.9 percent. Eliminating all deductions would generate only $377 billion, leaving the wealthy another $19 billion and the federal budget another $19 billion in deficit.
To generate the same amount of tax revenue would require taxable income of $1.729 trillion, 5 percent more than the total income of this class of taxpayers.
As President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and many economists have said, the math doesn’t work!
When are Americans going to stop buying this snake oil?
Thomas Strini
Mint Hill
In response to “A part-time life as hours shrink, shift” (Oct. 28):
All of us should object to corporations’ sinister policy
Thank you for publishing the article by the New York Times reporter Steven Greenhouse regarding the shift to a part-time workforce.
This trend has been in the making for years. This article highlights the common practice of large corporations offering jobs at low wages and then encouraging workers to make up the difference between part-time and full-time wages with food stamps and Medicaid which is clearly a tax-payer subsidy for big business.
I find it hard to abide a system that makes these kinds of corporations the largest beneficiaries of welfare while putting responsible business owners at a disadvantage and leaving hard-working Americans feeling trapped.
We need to hold these companies responsible for this sinister staffing policy.
Amber Johnson Logan
Charlotte
In response to “Growing CMPD camera network stirs concern” (Oct. 28):
Surveillance cameras in public areas don’t violate privacy
Opponents of surveillance cameras worry about invasion of privacy and racial profiling? If you are out in a public area is privacy really an issue? And profiling criminal activity is what the cameras are there for.
Let’s get more cameras out there.
John W. McAlister, Jr
Charlotte
