Reader feedback on my Nov. 4th column

I apparently struck a nerve with a reader of The Selma News. I got this email today. My response follows.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: November 4th Column
Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 17:23:18 -0700 (PDT)
From: Christina Holt
To: troy@troylaplante.com
CC: rstewart@kenlynews.com


Mr. LaPlante,

Good evening. I am writing to express my extreme displeasure and disappointment in your November 4th column in The Selma News. While I am wholeheartedly in agreement that we should all be able to express our opinions, insults about a person's race or ethnicity, even those hid in sarcasm and mediocre humor should be excluded from print. Referring to the WIC recipient as having "questionable legal status" and calling her an "English as a Second Language candidate" is beyond reproach. Did you ask to see her green card? Did you attempt to carry on a conversation with her to assess her English speaking skills? I am sure both answers would be no.

You, like so many other narrow-minded individuals these days, simply sat back and talked about her as if she was less than human. Regardless of whether or not she had toys, a cell phone, or an expensive stroller, she had something even more important with her that day - children. Every child, legal or not, deserves adequate nutrition. Have you ever looked into your child's eyes and wondered how you would find the money to deliver his or her next meal?

I have been a single mother. Thank God I had a supportive family so that I didn't have to ask myself that question. Unfortunately, not every parent, single or not, is that lucky. Many of these parents go to work every day, performing menial tasks that you probably wouldn't even consider. However, they just don't make enough to support their families and provide everything their children need. Do you think that most people enjoy going and asking for help? I can tell you that it is humiliating and makes you feel like a failure as a person and a parent. What makes you feel even worse is people like you who sit back and analyze everything in your cart, tap their feet because it's taking too long in the check-out line, and whisper, thinking we must also be too stupid to understand you are talking about us.

I was a WIC recipient and my daughter grew up strong and healthy. I also put myself through school while working full-time to better our lives so that we didn't have to continue taking "free money" as you call it. Let me ask you another question, would it have made you feel better about the WIC recipient if she had no toys and no stroller? Perhaps her children should be punished in your eyes because they were born to immigrants of a low socioeconomic status.

My husband is an immigrant, who by the way speaks perfect English along with four other languages. How many languages do you speak? He works long shifts and goes to school. I wonder if you'd stand behind him in the check-out line and make the same assumptions on your way home from church next Sunday. Perhaps you should pay closer attention to the sermons, which I can guarantee do not revolve around judging others or alienating certain groups of people.

Perhaps also you should be reminded that this wonderful country of ours - the one that grants you the freedom to rant - was built by immigrants. These people, like so many today, seek more opportunities, freedom from some kind of oppression, and a chance for their children to have and be more. Maybe we are out of candy to give away, but we are also out of much more important things - love for one another, generosity, compassion, and respect. Instead of worrying about what we give away, maybe you should be focused on what we don't.

Thank you for your time.

Christina H. Nait Saidi
112 Kirkwall Lane
Selma, NC 27576

-------------
My reply:

First of all, thank you for reading the column. If you are displeased, that is fine. It is not like that is going to sway my opinion.

As to the subject's questionable legal status, it was not necessary to ask for her Green Card. Her being an ESL candidate was obvious. All we had to to was listen. We did not have to carry on a conversation to hear her lack of command of the English language. I have no problem with her not knowing how to fluently speak the language. I do have a problem with taking from Americans who work hard and pay the freight in this country. Race or ethnicity has NOTHING to do with it, madame. Common sense does.

Children do not "deserve" adequate nutrition at the expense of everyone else. That is the parents' responsibility, not that of the taxpayer. If she could not afford to have more children, then her money would have been better spent on birth control rather than on toys. Or better yet, she could have refrained from procreative activities altogether rather than making us all pay her way.

Is it fair for the American taxpayer to shoulder her burden as well as our own? Is it fair that we pay full price for school lunch while subsidizing the meals of 90% of Selma Elementary student lunches? Are all children guaranteed an equal outcome? Is it fair that my parents had to bust their tails to provide for us while others got freebies at taxpayer expense? Was it fair that welfare recipients in my hometown were driving nice, new cars while so many hard working citizens drove rust buckets?

As to your comment, "Many of these parents go to work every day, performing menial tasks that you probably wouldn't even consider", you obviously do not know me nor know how poor I have been in my lifetime and the menial, low paying, mundane jobs I have had. I have worked my tail off for years to make the sort of income I now enjoy. It came at a cost. It came with extremely hard work, discipline, and long hours. I have paid my dues, lady.

Since I am the one helping pay for what that woman was buying, I have every right to be critical of what is in her cart. As to your accusation of assumptions and judgmental ism, you have obviously missed the parts of Christianity in which we are SUPPOSED to judge. The oft misunderstood and misquoted "judge not that ye be not judged" is rarely taken in its context or with the rest of the verse, thus twisting it to fit one's point. The idea is that when you make a judgment, you will be held to that same standard yourself. I have no problem with that at all. As a matter of fact, the Bible is full of admonitions that if you don't work, you should not eat, meaning that you pay your OWN way. Also, we (the Church and who are spiritual) are to judge ALL things. Furthermore, one who does not provide for their own children is worse than an infidel and has denied the faith. Nowhere are we commanded to supply for everyone else's children. But of course these do not fit your perspective, so I am sure that you will be dismissive of them. If you want to bring religious belief into this, be prepared before you engage me, because I am just about always prepared for such discussions and teaching. Ironically, you have done the very thing you have just accused me of, which Jesus called hypocrisy.

You asked how many languages I speak. I speak two.

You wrote, "we are also out of much more important things - love for one another, generosity, compassion, and respect". No, we are not. We are full of these things, as well. When was the last time you sent someone $100 just because you knew someone was lacking? When was the last time you opened your pantry to someone who could not afford groceries? When was the last time someone came to you needing help with a car repair, with transportation, or with a meal and you cheerfully obliged? When was the last time you took in a family member who had nowhere to turn? When was the last time you tried to give away a perfectly good automobile to someone who had need of one? When was the last time you dropped a case of diapers on the doorstep of a young single mother just because you knew that she was struggling financially? Ask my bride sometime and you will find out just how much that is my nature...and she can only speak for the times she knows about.

As Americans, we give more money to charity, to churches, in volunteer service, and of ourselves than any other country on the face of the planet. We do this out of the willingness and gladness of our own hearts. When one mooches off the government, such generosity is extracted by force. THAT is the problem with WIC, welfare, and other entitlement programs. As one of the millions from whom that money is forcibly extracted, I have the right to be critical of how it is spent, or rather redistributed to others.

You wrote, "I wonder if you'd stand behind him in the check-out line and make the same assumptions on your way home from church next Sunday." Not if he whipped out his OWN debit card or paid cash rather than a WIC voucher or a food stamp card.

You wrote, "this wonderful country of ours...was built by immigrants". Only partially. And then by ones who primarily were here legally, my ancestors among them. You further wrote, "These people, like so many today, seek more opportunities, freedom from some kind of oppression, and a chance for their children to have and be more." Seeking opportunity is fine. I welcome those who seek opportunity. I welcome immigrants from all over the world...as long as they enter the country legally. We are guaranteed equal opportunity. We were never guaranteed equality of outcome. Since you wrote of religious concepts, Jesus himself said, "the poor you will have with you always". That does not mean that we have to give them equal food, equal education, equal clothing, equal housing, or even equal toys for children at taxpayer expense.

For what it is worth, just this evening I had someone recognize me, ask me if I was the one who wrote the newspaper column, and then proceeded to tell me how much she absolutely loved the exact same column you despised above all the others that she has read.

Again, thank you for reading the column and for your feedback. I will continue each and every week to try to persuade people like yourself how correct I really am. By the way, if you think that my column is something, you should see my television talk show on Wednesday nights at 7PM on the local TV station, WARZ channel 34.

Respectfully,

Troy LaPlante

Column for Nov. 4, 2010

“Y’all are going to vote November 2nd, aren’t you?” we were asked while waiting in line at Wal-Mart. “Oh, yeah,” replied my lovely bride.

One of the frustrating things about writing this column is that I have a deadline for publication prior to knowing what Tuesday’s election results were. As I am writing this, we finally put one seven-year-old to bed and my wife is sitting in my living room trying to rock the baby to sleep so we can have the evening to ourselves. I just finished watching the New England Patriots win another football game and my wife finished handing out big handfuls of candy to the little beggars that come to our door every year.

I don’t mind giving out candy to children on Halloween, but I personally am not into participating in its celebration. Giving out candy at least gives me the opportunity to show good will and if I am so inclined, to slip in literature such as gospel tracts, campaign literature, fliers, etc. This year we did not give out an sort of literature, but we did give out the most candy we ever have previously. What October 31st really means to me personally is that it is the anniversary of the day on which I closed on my modest home here in the booming metropolis of Selma.

Each year we give handouts. Some people I know hate Halloween, some do not mind. Some have religious issues against the observance, some don’t care. Personally, I often liken it to government handouts. If your porch light is on during Trick or Treat time, you are in effect advertising that you have something to give away free. All one has to do is knock on the door to get free candy. We as a nation do that same thing each and every day of the year.

So what does that have to do with my opening paragraph? On the way home from our regular Christian religious observance gathering today, we stopped by the Wal-Mart in Clayton. We filled our shopping cart with groceries, a few low priced DVDs, and a few other desired items. We then proceeded to find the best open check out lane we could. We got in line behind a middle aged lady who did not have too many items on the conveyor belt. Ahead of her was a woman of questionable legal status who had a child with her who was about kindergarten age and what appeared to be twins in a double baby carriage.

This woman tied up the check out lane for quite some time. She had four different transactions. Her first three transactions were all paid for with WIC (Women’s, Infants, and Children’s federal assistance program) vouchers. Contrary to the WIC official web page, WIC is essentially an entitlement program. If free money is being given to people who did not earn it, then it is, as far as I am concerned, an entitlement program. Immigrants are especially considered for WIC because (reading from the WIC web site), “migrancy is considered a nutritional risk factor”.

We waited a good ten minutes just for this one woman’s purchases to be processed. Just when it looked like the order was complete, another was transacted with another voucher. Finally, she payed for the last bit of groceries with cash. She already had toys that were paid for in the shopping cart. She pulled out a cell phone while were were all waiting for her to be checked out, and the baby stroller was certainly not an inexpensive one.

The woman in front of us looked at us, and we looked at her. All of us were a growing a wee bit impatient. I said to the woman in front of us, “At least we are paying for hers in addition to our own groceries.” She assented to the sentiment and a moment or two later, after she grew increasingly frustrated, she asked us if we were going to vote. We knew exactly why she asked that question. Like us, she is tired of the handouts.

We grew even more impatient when we watched our check out girl leave the register in between WIC transactions and run into the bathroom. When she returned, she resumed checking out the English as a Second Language Class candidate. When the woman finally “paid” for all of her groceries, she attempted to apologize for taking up so much time. I wanted to tell her, “When you start paying for your own groceries, then you can truly apologize. Until then, I don’t buy that concept.” Of course I chose to remain silent, instead, and not cause a scene. It would not have accomplished anything at the time.

I believe in Christian charity. I do not believe in government forcibly taking money away from people who will work and giving it to people who do not or may be lower on the income scale. That is what family, charities, and the Church are for. I have never failed to help people who truly have been in need or were hungry.

I don’t know what the November 2nd election results will be as of this writing, but I do hope that we can turn the proverbial porch light out. We, as a nation, have run out of candy a long time ago and can not afford to keep giving it away.

Column for Oct. 28, 2010

I ranted about political advertisements last week. The amazing thing about attack ads is that either an ad is going after someone’s character or their beliefs. One ad that really got my attention had a lot of elderly people griping about how one candidate for Congress wants to privatize the Social Security system. I personally love that idea. I would gladly relinquish any claim to Social Security benefits in the future if the government would allow me to take the money I pay into that system and instead put it into my own private retirement program. Yet Americans have been duped by the lie of “security” for so long, they have come to the “gimme mine” entitlement mentality.

I have paid into the Social Security system since I was 15 years old. When I sat down with my Merrill Lynch planning software and ran some figures on my target retirement income, Social Security was factored in as a part of my plan. But it was only a part of the plan, not all of it. As much as I dislike Social Security, I don’t know if I will ever be excluded from its regressive payroll taxation. The Social Security system was never intended to be a full retirement plan, but rather a supplemental plan. The New Deal under the Roosevelt administration was more of a raw deal for Americans. That Social Security system has morphed into something abhorrent and gives a false sense of security and entitlement.

Amazingly, through political wrangling, FDR managed to get the Social Security Act passed. It has never passed objective Constitutional scrutiny and would never have survived had he not received extraordinary, unconstitutional power from Congress. Franklin Roosevelt is often cited as one of our greatest Presidents, but I see him as one of the worst. When it comes to government intrusion and control, it is hard to beat FDR, but our present Commander in Chief is right up there with him.

This is going to sound rough, but anyone who was ignorant enough to buy into the lie that government will supply all of your needs and therefore never made any other arrangements is going to have to live off the fruit (or lack thereof) of their own efforts. I know that is not going to sit well with people who are elderly and on a fixed income, but it is the brutal truth. In this country, we are guaranteed equal opportunities, not equal outcomes.

I just had a discussion with a friend about Social Security and its lack of constitutional grounds. We discussed the Democratic-Republican party history that sprouted as a reaction to big government Federalists. The party included men like James Madison and Thomas Jefferson. Both were for limited government and a “laisez-faire” style of government, meaning that government stays out of your life and your business. The idea also was that you are responsible taking care for your own and your family’s well being, not the government.

I will never be a member of the AARP. One reason is that they are terrible about supporting gun control agendas. Another is that they are adamantly opposed to privatization of Social Security and play on the fears of the elderly. They frighten people into thinking that politicians who are for financial accountability and rule of law are trying to take away their entitlements and will force them to eat cat food because they can not afford groceries.

In the nation of Chile, their old system of social security was modeled much like our own. They found it to be inefficient, expensive, and not beneficial to their citizens. They abandoned their system and privatized much of their public system. To quote Chile’s Minister of Labor, José Piñera, “Pension reform has contributed strongly to an increase in the rate of economic growth. Before the 1970s Chile had a real growth rate of 3.5 percent. For the last 10 years we have been growing at the rate of 7 percent, double our historic rate. That is the most powerful means of eliminating poverty because growth increases employment and wages. Several experts have attributed the doubling of the growth rate to the private pension system.”

In the ad to which I refer, a politician taking aim at another totally missed the idea that there are Constitutional boundaries and fiduciary responsibilities to those who are and will be paying the bills in this nation and played upon fear. I find the nagging, “Don’t touch my Social Security!” and “Privatize Social Security? Are you nuts?” claims of gloom and doom as disgusting as the mud slinging personal attacks. I also find the entire Social Security boondoggle a sad testament to America’s decline into socialism.

Column for Oct. 21, 2010

I have to turn off the television, walk out of the room, or hit the mute button when some political ads hit my TV. I try to catch the news on my local broadcast and cable channels once in a while. Unfortunately, television news is peppered with political advertising. I often finding myself shouting at the television and using some unsavory verbiage. Why? Because I have a very low tolerance for blatant lies.

I am used to politicians trying to blow smoke up my pants leg, but the latest ads I have seen from Congressmen in particular have my blood boiling at times. I don’t mind when a Congressman touts his roots in his family, his education, his military service, his church service, and his record as an elected official. But when a Congressman brags about being a Sunday School teacher then turns around in his next campaign ad and blatantly lies about his opponent, that has me shouting at the television.

I have written on several occasions about my support for The Fair Tax plan, which is a plan to eliminate all federal income tax, Social Security tax, Medicare tax, etc. and replace it all with a simple consumption tax built into the cost of products. It would not increase the cost of products, since there is already the cost of income taxes built into the goods we already buy.

Anyway, read up on the Fair Tax and learn about it on your own. Congressman Bob Etheridge obviously has not done so. He blatantly lied and said that his opponent, Renee Ellmers, supports a 23% sales tax on all goods and services including medications and mortgages. No, she supports The Fair Tax, which would replace the income tax. His ad is intentionally misleading and just plain dishonest. I fired a salvo of one way conversation at my television and on the internet after seeing that garbage.

Representative David Price is not much better. He levied the charge of being “wrong in the extreme” against his opponent B.J. Lawson. Lawson supports the idea of the abolition of the US Department of Education. Wow, that is extreme...wanting the U.S. Government to only perform the functions it is Constitutionally allowed to perform. The creation of The Department of Education is not in accordance with the Constitution or original intent. Nowhere does the Constitution give the federal government the authority to intervene or fund public education. As I wrote several weeks ago, the idea of public education was soundly rejected during the debates of the Constitutional Convention of 1787.

I firmly believe that the states, counties, and towns are much better equipped and knowledgeable about how to educate our children here in North Carolina than some bureaucrat behind a desk in Washington, D.C. Our state constitution deals with public education, our federal constitution does not. Therefore the federal government should get out of the business of education. Period.

I hate lies and dirty politics, but it happens at all levels and has happened for centuries. I read about the federal election of 1800 and it easily eclipses today’s dirty political climate. The more I read on that election, the less respect I had for some Founding Fathers, and more for others.

Right here in little old Selma, I saw dirty politics at work three years ago. At the time, I was running for town council. I encountered a situation in which I was the victim of marital infidelity. I will spare the details, but the next thing I knew, I heard from six different sources about the rumor that I was a wife beater and that is why I was separated from my (then) wife. I can count on one hand (and have a few fingers left over) how many people in this town knew that I was separated at the time, so that narrows it down from whence that dirty political trickery came.

I can handle hearing political criticism and even news about scandalous behavior by political candidates if (and that is a big IF) it is true. That is a part of public life. Congressman Etheridge’s notorious, caught on tape, “Who are you!?” assault several months ago is one of those cases. However, blatant lies and character assassination for political gain are dishonest and worthy of great disdain.

Column for Oct. 14, 2010

Whether you like and support Sheriff Steve Bizzell or not, do you want him or his employees looking through your prescription drug records? Or do you find that concept and the invasion of privacy as repugnant as I do? Well, if The North Carolina Sheriffs' Association has its way, your prescription drug records will be made available to your local sheriff. They have yet again asked the state legislature for a law allowing access to state computer records to help track down prescription drug abusers.

For years I have not slept well. I have gone through a sleep study and tried numerous over the counter sleep aids. I have resisted seeking prescription drugs to aid in getting sleep. I even bought a $3300 Sleep Number Bed to assist with better sleep. However, if under my doctor's care I decided to take Ambien or something similar, it is none of Sheriff Bizzell's business.

A year ago, I about broke my toe and went to an urgent care center. My toe was swollen and red, but it turns out it was not broken. Is it any of my local sheriff's business that the doctor gave me a prescription for Percocet for a few days to mitigate the pain? Heck, no, it's none of his business.

The idea is that law enforcement officials want access to the records to help track down drug abusers. Sorry, but that means that about the 30% of North Carolinians that got prescriptions for controlled substances would be subject to an invasion of privacy to root out a tiny fraction of the population.

Not only is that a huge invasion of your privacy, I am sure that the information could be used for non- drug abuse situations. In a small community like we find in some areas of the state, do you want Grandpa's Viagra prescription becoming public knowledge through some loose lips at the sheriff's office? Could an unscrupulous employee leak sensitive medical information about political foes?

Better yet, the county sheriff is responsible for issuing pistol purchase permits. In permit issuance, sheriffs have a good amount of discretion as to whether or not to issue a purchase permit. The fact that someone takes a strong, regular dose of Percocet or Ambien could be used as a reason for justifying the denial of a permit (which is not a Constitutional process, by the way) to purchase a pistol.

I have a close personal friend who is on a strong, regular dose of Percocet every day and has been for five years to help with the pain associated with regular foot surgeries. He is one of the most lucid and levelheaded people I know and experienced in the use of firearms. Should he be denied a purchase permit because he regularly gets a legitimate narcotic prescription for pain relief?

I personally know someone who was denied a permit to carry a concealed weapon by our local sheriff because she had a few issues with depression and sought treatment for it. She had dealings with the county mental health department, so the issue was brought to light through a background check. If she had not dealt with a county agency and was only dealing with a private physician, should she be denied the right of self-protection because she was found to be on Zoloft or Prozac?

Another issue here is just plain incrementalism. If we give up privacy rights concerning prescription drugs now, what is the next privacy we will have to give up? Will complete health records later be submitted for government review? Should all of our emails, phone records, internet use records, credit card bills, library records, and utility bill statements become subject to government inspection in order to pinch a few offenders?

In a drought period and subsequent water usage ban, should your water bill be up for government review? If the government decides to institute requirements to own fuel-efficient cars, should they have access to your gasoline credit card statements to see if you are buying too much fuel?

I value your privacy more than The North Carolina Sheriffs' Association does, and so should the state legislature. I will most likely vote for Sheriff Steve Bizzell in next month's election, but that does not mean I think he should be looking through my prescription drug records.

Column for Oct. 7, 2010

I am sure that there are a lot of you are like me in that you know of someone who has been out of work for some time now. I stand by my earlier assessment that the economy was not as bad as many people made it out to be. Unfortunately, just as with the Great Depression at the end of the 1920's, government intervention that was intended to help had just the opposite effect. But that is a different subject for a different column.

There are two people in my family who lost their jobs in the past couple of years. Both of them were long time employees of their respective employers. Both ended up being laid off and receiving unemployment benefits while they applied for new jobs. Neither has found new employment to this day. One finally reached the proper age for retirement, so he started drawing on his retirement savings. The other decided to just become a stay-at-home mom full time rather than re-enter the workforce.

Both of these people ended up being "overpaid" in their unemployment benefits. The elder of the two was the first one laid off and ended up paying back about a thousand dollars (as I recall) to the state. The younger of the two was amongst the 38,000 people who recently got nastygrams from the North Carolina Employment Security Commission saying that she owed the state.

As a matter of fact, this young lady received a total of four letters saying that she owed the state money. Three of those letters all arrived on the same day. You may have read, seen, or heard about this story in recent newspaper articles, on television, on the internet, or on the radio. I heard numerous stories about it. It was even national news.

Every one of the people that received nastygrams from the government allegedly received benefits above which they were entitled. The state knew that over payments were being made as far back as January but did nothing about it then. They waited until September to do something about it and put pressure on the poverty-stricken to repay money they did not have.

My family member was rather unhappy with the demand for money back since she, like tens of thousands of others in North Carolina, is still out of work. She received the alleged overage money through no fault of her own. She showed me the letters and they were as confusing to me as they were to her. She told me that every time her unemployment benefits were supposed to expire, she would get an extension of benefits letter. After getting these four letters saying that she owed the state money, she got yet another letter informing her of yet another extension of her unemployment benefits.

I am glad to say that Governor Beverly Perdue did the right thing by stepping in and making sure that the people who received any overage did not have to repay it. I am not much on government entitlements, but unemployment benefits are a bit different than welfare, WIC, food stamps, government housing, and other such programs. People pay into the system, as do employers for benefits during such cases of unemployment.

As I was told about the fun that my family members had in dealing with a state agency, I could only marvel at the gross inefficiency. The same state that knowingly overpaid unemployment benefits and failed to correct the problem is the same state government that tries to run our education system. The same state government that sent duplicate letters to 38,000 unemployed people is the same state that is ruthless in collecting back taxes from its citizens.

Look at this on a larger scale. If a state government can be so inefficient with unemployment benefits for 38,000 people, imagine how inefficient and wasteful the national government is with all of its giveaways and entitlement programs. I imagine that it is 50 times or more as bad as North Carolina.

When I think about government inefficiencies like this, I wonder why in the world we agree to depend upon them for retirement income programs, for running the mail service, for income for the elderly and infirm, and for medical care. Is the government that knowingly did not make correct payments to the unemployed then tried to demand the money back, the same government that you want taking decisions for your children's education or for your health care? Not me.

Tim Hawkins - The Government Can

And sometimes I get fan mail

Received today via email:

I have never written to a news paper column before, so this is a first for me,but after I read your column in today's paper and read the other column regarding your choice to not let your son listen to Obama's speech , I felt the need to speak my piece. If you choose not to let your son listen to the speech, it is your choice and should not be any body's business!! Oh, and if we don't like your column, we also have another choice, DON'T READ IT .

I read your column every week and I sense that you are very concerned about the direction this country is headed, and I too am very concerned. It seems to me that some people have become so "politically correct" that if you don't agree with them, you are wrong.We as free Americans are slowly loosing our freedom and some people refuse to open their eyes enough to see this. I also took training and had the background checks to be granted a concealed weapons permit and I agree with you 100% on the fact that we should have the right to carry them anywhere. It is not the law abiding citizens that people need to be concerned about.There is an old quote that says" if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns".This is very true in places that post handgun bans. If Our founding Fathers could see the direction we are headed in as a country, they would roll over in their graves!! KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK !! Marie Kadow Micro NC

My reply to Marie:

Thank you for your kind words and for reading. I truly do appreciate it when people take the time to read my meager rantings. Whether people agree or disagree with me, they are reading. And for that, I am humbled and thankful.

The latest hate mail

The following is a letter that was published in The Selma News in response to one of my columns. I find it interesting that he proves my point. I did indeed support my argument with Obama's own words. I did have my facts straight as to how things at the school went in terms of whether or not children had to watch the speech. A child had to get a note from their parents in order to be excused from watching the speech, hence the note I wrote.

I was even got a phone call from and had a resulting meeting with the principal of the school after the column ran and we discussed the issue. She said that there was indeed an alternative activity scheduled, but John was the only one in the entire school who did it. The principal also said that they did not spend the whole time in the office as John had said, so I found out there was a half truth there. I was also told that the teacher in question did deny laughing at the note. Otherwise, the column was accurate on facts.

Anyway, this guy proves my point about the subtlety of the collective message. He can't recognize it his own self. His presumption of the ideas on education of The Founding Fathers is just that, presumption, and without basis. The facts are not in his favor. The Constitution is clear as to the federal government's role. The voluminous writings from their era totally support the idea of the federal government being kept out of such things. Period. Mr. Worley is purely ignorant.

Here is the rant against my rant. Enjoy.

To the Editor,

I’m not sure just exactly who Troy Laplante is, or why he merits a five column wide diatribe about anything. Perhaps there is a reason why his particular viewpoint is significant enough that your paper saw fit to allow him to editorialize for nearly a quarter of a page.

It might be nice however if Mr. Laplante would at least get his facts straight before writing statements that simply are not true. It also would be nice if he would learn the art of supporting his arguments with some shred of evidence, no matter how flimsy it might be.

Johnston County School students were not mandated to watch the President’s message to them. All students were given the opportunity to be excused from watching the message as long as they had parental permission. And just what activity did Mr. Laplante want his child to be doing while his classmates were watching the President of our country speak on television?

I hate political labels and those who engage in political labeling for the sake of choosing sides. Mr. Laplante strikes me as such a person.

President Obama may not be the person you voted for in our last election, but he is the President of the United States regardless. What a wonderful lesson we teach our children when we show them that if our man does not win, we simply reject the winner.

Mr. Laplante seems to suggest rather strongly that President Obama’s message to our school children was nothing more than political indoctrination. The problem is that he offers only the tiniest sliver of evidence, promises more, and ultimately fails to deliver when he gets caught up in the rapture of his words apparently.

So the President is indoctrinating our children to socialism when he suggests that it takes “the whole village to raise the child?” Really? Because, gosh, I guess my parents and all our neighbors were closet socialists way back during my childhood. That was sure the prevailing idea at work during my youth at least.

If I was messing around with some kids doing bad things, the neighbors would fuss at us and run us off, then call my folks so that they could fuss me out as well. Strange. I thought we usually referred to those as the good old days.

Clearly I am not as knowledgeable or educated as Mr. Laplante, but I’m pretty sure that many of our founding fathers had quite strong ideas about the education of our children. Horace Mann (for whom the insurance company is named) was but a generation removed from Thomas Jefferson when he responded to Jefferson’s idea for an academy of sorts for gifted children by asserting that a common educational experience for all students was necessary.

Given that our country has grown exponentially since the time of the founding fathers, is it so difficult to believe that they would have indeed been supporters of the federal government endorsing and supporting the education of our children?

I was still looking for Mr. Laplante’s “little bit of arsenic in the meal” when he literally stunned me with his final observation of how President Obama was seeking to twist and warp the minds of our children. When the President said that education was NOT all about getting into a good college or getting a good job, but instead was about fulfilling our promise and becoming the best version of ourselves we can be...well... apparently there was a sinister and hidden message there.

I read on through Mr. Laplante’s diatribe, hoping to find what my simple mind was unable to notice on the surface. Surely President Obama has slipped one in on us by suggesting that our children should treat others as they would like to be treated (oh my goodness, does that mean the President is now using Jesus’s words against our children - for shame!)...but alas, Mr. Laplante could never find his point again.

The excitement of sharing with us his many great educational accomplishments, all achieved by him and him alone, was apparently simply too much for the man.

Honestly Selma News, are you telling me that there is no one else in the Smithfield-Selma region who could do a better job finding a topic of relevance and interest to those of us in the community?

Are we simply fated to continue reading Mr. Laplante’s rantings and ravings about the insidious evil of encouraging people to become the best they can be?

Please save us all...

Bill Worley
Selma

Column for Sept. 30, 2010

I recently sent a letter to the largest toy centered business in the world. I am not going to mention the name of the company, but I will share the letter with you.

"Just when I was about to continue my practice of getting my Christmas shopping done early for two boys and a bunch of nephews and nieces, I read that your company has unfortunately decided to disallow concealed carrying of firearms in your stores by law abiding customers like myself. It is not the law abiding citizen who has at his own expense taken classes on firearms law and handling, not to mention gone through an extensive background check by state law enforcement and local sheriffs that you have to worry about. You have to worry about the lawless, which steal weapons and use them to suit their own illegal practices. If there is ever a deranged or criminal shooter in one of your stores, it is people like me who you want to have as patrons in your stores to protect your customers and your employees.

"I make it a practice to not patronize businesses that wish to abridge the freedoms of honest Americans but still want our money. In America I not only have the right to carry a firearm to defend myself and those around me, I have the freedom to spend my money where I so choose. As long as your "no concealed weapons" policy is in effect, I shall choose to spend my money with your competitors."

Do you know why there are a lot of carjackings perpetrated near airports? It is because criminals know that anyone who just stepped off an airplane and is renting an automobile is unarmed because of security restrictions for air travel. That makes them an easy target.

Do you know what tells me that a business is an easy target for armed robbery? It is a sign on the front door that says something like, "All weapons prohibited", or "Concealed weapons prohibited". It announces that there is a good likelihood that there is nobody inside the business that is armed and can fight back. Then again, a house in an affluent neighborhood with a car in the driveway displaying a pro-Obama bumper sticker serves the same purpose to a burglar.

If schools allowed safe, concealed carry of firearms by trained, mature individuals, perhaps the shootings in Paducah, Columbine, and at Virginia Tech would not have been so deadly. Just maybe someone could have taken out the shooters before they killed more people. Police can not be everywhere all the time.

The State of New York proposed an amendment to the US Constitution for the Bill of Rights that explained the role of an armed populace. Their proposal included "That the People have a right to keep and bear Arms; that a well regulated Militia, including the body of the People capable of bearing Arms, is the proper, natural and safe defense of a free State". The responsibility was that of the citizenry to serve as the militia as well as to act as a constabulary force. The idea of a standing army was anathema to them, so it was expected that every able bodied man who could bear arms would be a participant in the putting down of insurrections, helping to repel invasion, and keeping order in their towns.

When I was asked why I would want to carry a gun, my answer was, "Because a cop is too heavy to carry around." I am a concealed carry permit holder. That means that I have demonstrated proficiency with a handgun, I have taken a class to learn the legal responsibilities of carrying a firearm, and have undergone a full background check by the State Bureau of Investigations. My fingerprints are on file with the state. In my own case, I have also undergone a background check by the Federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives because I also hold a Curio and Relics federal firearms license.

There are millions of people like myself who are law abiding, honest citizens. These are not the people you have to worry about. They are not criminals. They are the ones who have jumped through hoops of unconstitutional red tape in order to exercise their rights. Constitutionally, nobody should be required to get a permit to carry a firearm.

Business owners have every right to restrict what people should be allowed to carry into their establishments. At the same time, they are exercising their right to alienate their customer base and advertise themselves as easy targets for armed robbery.

Now compare the above to this business in the video below. I would do business with them in a minute.

Column for Sept. 23, 2010

“It is my understanding that today, students will be required to watch a televised speech by President Barack Obama. Since I do not want my child to be subjected to political propaganda, I find it entirely inappropriate to force grade school children to endure such a speech. Therefore, I request that my son, John, be excused from viewing said speech and instead participate in whatever alternatively planned activity is being provided.”

That is the text of a note I sent last week with my son to school. It was that time of year again, the Second Annual Back to School Barack Obama Propaganda Message. Last year we sent a similar note. There were two things very different this year. First was that the upcoming speech got very little media attention like it did last year. All over the nation, people were upset at the President using the opportunity to peddle his propaganda, myself included. This year it was kept relatively quiet so as not to inflame opposition.

The second thing that was different was that I was told that my son was the only one in the entire school to have gotten excused from viewing the propaganda speech and ended up hanging out in the school office because the school made no plans for any alternative activity. I was told that the teacher actually laughed when she read the above note. I hope that was not the case, since I don’t take this whole thing lightly.

I would have no real issue if there was a short, pre-recorded message given to encourage students and that was all there was to it. However, knowing how politicians, and liberals especially, like to grandstand and take every media opportunity, it was not going to be the case. I read the text from last year’s speech. I have the text from this year’s speech in front of me right now as I bang away on my aging keyboard.

In case you think it was just an encouraging pep talk, here are a few things I found that are really just a progressive and socialistic agenda with a fresh paint job. “So, you have an obligation to yourselves, and America has an obligation to you to make sure you’re getting the best education possible. And making sure you get that kind of education is going to take all of us working hand-in-hand. It will take all of us in government – from Harrisburg to Washington – doing our part to prepare our students, all of them, for success in the classroom, in college, and in a career...That’s what we have to do for you. That’s our responsibility. That’s our job.”

Do you see the problem in that statement? On the surface, it sounds nice, but it is subtle. It is the “it takes a village” mentality. It is the idea of collectivism rather than individual work and family support to facilitate achievement. This quote embodies the idea that it is government we must look to as our savior and our source. It is especially heinous since the federal government was never meant to be involved in public education whatsoever. Even during the Constitutional Convention of 1787 when it was suggested that the nation found a college for the public benefit, the idea was resoundingly shot down.

President Obama’s remarks were wrapped with plenty of encouragement to do your best, pursue your education, and take self improvement seriously. Again, that theme is not bad. It is the little bit of arsenic in the meal that is dangerous, though. A little leaven makes the whole lump of dough rise, as the Biblical example shows us. It is a socialist political agenda couched in a Tony Robbins pep talk.
.
An example of a good quote is, “But the truth is, an education is about more than getting into a good college or getting a good job when you graduate. It’s about giving each and every one of us the chance to fulfill our promise; to be the best version of ourselves we can be. And part of what that means is treating others the way we want to be treated – with kindness and respect.”

Of course we should treat others with kindness and respect. That reminder is always prudent. It is also true that there is a big difference between attending school and getting an education. I have become far more educated than some people who have schooling in certain topics because I have educated myself on the topics. I have had constitutional law discussions with lawyers who were woefully ignorant and looked foolish. I have met men who never took a computer course yet worked circles around the most certified of employees.

I am all for encouraging people to work hard, study hard, and be successful in life. At the same time I also recognize that there is no place for Utopian political ideas being spewed forth by a nation’s leader to subtly indoctrinate our youth. My son is learning that if he takes a stand for his principles, he may end up standing alone. I am used to it and am passing that value along to my family.

Column for Sept. 16, 2010

I have been observing the climate of both our churches and the world’s system for some time now. In both realms I have seen an awakening. I have been proclaiming that this awakening would be coming for years now. At the same time, I am in a season in my life where I have dropped back from both scenes in various ways. I have known that this season was coming. I am not sure why, but it has been the case during this stage of my life, so I am rolling with it.

I observed some time ago about how people by the hundreds were becoming disenfranchised by organized religion and dropping out of it, seeking something more. I have run across so many people who had just had enough. Some got bitter, some got better through their ordeals. Many people have maintained their faith through it all and even become stronger in their beliefs and relationship with God as a result. Some have not.

I know from experience that many people feel like they have been ripped off, deceived, lied to, and have a great mistrust of churches, church government, and have their senses heightened to such as a result. Often those who turn bitter have an outcry against the establishment. Those who become better often end up being dynamic teachers to help others in the same situation.

Quite honestly, there are many people in the Church overall who are deceived by false doctrines, have ears that are easily tickled, and are just plain lazy about learning solid fundamentals of their faith. They often are zealous but the zeal is often misplaced.

I have been observing people in the world’s system who have been going through much the same thing. Men and women by the millions have been feeling disenfranchised and angry at our nation’s government. As a result, we have seen people protesting and public outcry like I have never seen in my lifetime. I am not talking about protests against an unpopular war, I am talking about protests against what people perceive as an unfair government, against being used, and abused, and a loss of the basic precepts of our nation.

In the past several years, I have seen some men rise above the crowd who decided to lead by teaching others, by sharing the foundational principles of our nation. There are some men with whom I am often in agreement, some with whom I am not. One thing I do know is that either way, I am grateful that the fundamentals are being revisited.

Like with the Church, when people learn the truth about the foundations of the country, its history, and its principles, they tend to get angry. Having been burned by both sides of the comparison, I have endeavored to work through things within my own self and then reach out.

I decided several years ago to drop out of my pursuit of broadcasting, though I loved it greatly. I have dropped back my pursuit of ministry, though I loved preaching and teaching greatly. I have dropped back from copious writing, though I enjoyed it greatly. I dropped back from doing talk shows, though I enjoyed it greatly and have even been offered opportunities to do a good amount of it recently.

Even when I saw one of the greatest disasters heading towards our national sovereignty in the form of an avowed socialist as President of the United States and a complicit Congress, I remained fairly silent. I didn’t write much about the elections except in this column. Even then, I have refrained from giving most of my opinions. I have felt a cautious restraint in some ways, and I am not sure why. Yeah, I know that some of you are thinking that I am blunt and opinionated, but believe it or not, I have wrestled with this very thing for the four plus years I have been writing this column.

I have seen in the church world, pockets of men and women have gone underground, so to speak. I have seen patriots in this nation do the same. I have seen teachers arise in the church world, and I have seen the same in the world’s system. I have seen angry people be extremely vocal in the church, and I have seen a lot of it in the world. Quite honestly, I believe that people have just plain had enough in both.

There will be and has been a clash coming internal to the Church. I have seen and experienced a sliver of it myself. I have seen a huge clash arising in the world’s system. I don’t know how peaceful it will be, however. When we have seen spiritual movements and anti-world’s system movements cross paths, we have not typically seen peaceful resolutions in this country.

Troy and Sharon Wedding Book

Click here to view this photo book larger

Column for Sept. 9, 2010

You are not going to find someone who supports the local fire service more than I do. I consider it an essential service to the town and surrounding area. I actually support the levying of a fire tax for people who live outside of the town yet receive fire services from a town or country volunteer department. I have a degree in fire protection and I spent nine years in the fire service. I have a folder full of certifications and certificates and notebooks full of educational materials from classes I have taken over the years. I volunteer my time to serve on the county's Local Emergency Management Planning Committee.

I wrote in favor of the reorganization that the Town of Selma did several years ago when the Town Council decided to hire a full time chief. I believe that Chief McDaniel has done a great job so far. I do not doubt his capable leadership at all.

Yes, you knew that there was a big "but" coming. It has been said that I always have a big "but". But I read with dismay last week's edition of The Selma News. Right on the front page was the story, "Fire Dept. seeks Council approval to charge for auto wrecks".

I realize that every time the fire department is dispatched to a call for service, whether it is the proverbial cat in a tree (not that it really happens), a car wreck, or a full blown house fire, it costs money. There are always going to be costs associated with manpower, equipment, supplies, wear and tear on vehicles, vehicle maintenance, fuel, and the list goes on. I comprehend the concept of wanting to recuperate costs.

However, the fire department, like any other municipal department, has a budget for which they receive tax dollar funding. I expect a municipal government, or any other government for that matter, to spend tax money in order to supply the services they do. To then charge for the services for which we are already taxed amounts to double taxation.

I read the reasoning that the fire department or town could bill the insurance companies of the accident victims. If insurance companies start paying bills associated with emergency response, we all pay for those costs. Insurance companies are not just going to absorb those costs. They are going to pass on those costs to the insured, meaning us taxpaying citizens who already pay for emergency response in the first place. Again, that amounts to double taxation.

It is for this reason that I really despise local government grants and loans from the federal government, since we are taxed on both ends to pay for those, especially loans.

Just this week, my lovely bride and I filled out our passport applications, got our photographs taken, and went to go get them submitted. We are planning a trip or two next year, so we will need passports. We took all of our paperwork to the US Post Office. Would you believe that we were turned away, being told that we had to make an appointment first? At the USPS? I guess I will need an appointment to rent a PO Box or get a money order next.

We already pay taxes to fund the US State Department. On top of that, we just paid $110 a piece for a passport application fee for each of us. Not wanting to have to make an appointment, we went to the Clerk of Court's office the next day to make the application process quicker. There we were charged a $25 fee for each application just for them to process them and send our paperwork to Washington, DC.

On top of that, even if we presented the requisite certified copies of our birth certificates at the time of application at an accepting agency, we still had to send the original certified copies along with the applications. There is a $10 charge each should we need to replace them. The required photographs were $10 per set. All total, we paid $290 for two passports. Now watch me be on some "no travel" list, be stopped at the border by Customs agents, and denied entry into or re-entry from Canada and Mexico.

I view both of these scenarios as double taxation. We pay the government once via our tax dollars to provide services. Then when we utilize the services, we have to pay for them again. The response of fire trucks and emergency response personnel who have dedicated their lives to serving others should not be something for which we pay twice.

Column for Sept. 2, 2010

What has been on my heart for a couple of weeks to share has been prayer. I am a believer in Jesus, the son of God, as my savior and my Lord. I make no apologies for that. I was not always a believer in Christ but I always had a belief in the existence of God. I have always had strong opinions on politics and religion, and those views have been refined over time as my relationship with God and my understanding of history grew.

Since I became a Christian in 1991, I have seen an awful lot in our nation and in our churches; some good, some not so much. One thing that I am reminded of from time to time is that I am supposed to pray for our leaders. I must admit that I have been remiss in my personal prayer life when it comes to praying for our governmental leaders.

Ye Olde King James Bible says in 1Timothy 2:1-4 “I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.”

Though I do remember from time to time to stop and pray, I am often quick to comment, instead. Believe it or not, I have been endeavoring a lot over the past several months to be more temperate in the expression of my views and have on many occasions withheld my tongue when I thought I would jump on a topic with both feet.

For several years now, I have contemplated organizing a prayer gathering here in Selma. Whether such a gathering would be once a month or once a week, I have often thought about getting together with other believers who would be willing to gather at some place like the gazebo behind Town Hall some evening for the purpose of praying for the leaders of our nation, our state, our county, and our town.

I have not sat down to look at my calendar yet as to dates and times, but I would love to hear from anyone else so inclined to pray for our leaders. My email address is at the end of every column in this newspaper. You can also find me at the web site within that email address and I am also in the phone book. I am sure you can reach me through this newspaper’s normal communication channels, as well.

Well, enough talking about it, I am going to at least start my dedication to public prayer right here.

Father God, in the name of Jesus I come to you now and I ask the readers of this publication to join me in bringing our requests to you. It is in answer to your instruction to pray so I know that you will hear me and the others who come to you. You ordained human government through civil authorities. I personally ask for your forgiveness for not being slow to speak and slow to anger when it comes to your servants, as you call them in Romans 13.

I thank you, God, for your ordained government in our nation. You, in your grace and wisdom, gave us a long lasting and wonderful form of government that transcends all the way down to our local levels of government. I realize that it takes great wisdom, great moral character, and your hand of guidance to rightfully run such governance. Therefore I ask you to bless every elected, appointed, and hired official in governance over your people and over those who are not your children; the just and the unjust alike. I pray first and foremost that the blessing that Peter spoke of in Acts 3:26 “Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.” Let your Spirit have free course to reprove of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment in the hearts of your servants.

I pray that you would grant wisdom to every government official, that they would take decisions according to your will, and that they would be rulers who would truly not be a terror to good works, but to evil.

In my limited space here Lord, this is my pondering and my heart’s cry. I pray it would also be that of every believer, and that every non-believer would be transformed to be one of your own. I thank you for this privilege and opportunity. I love you, the only father I have. Amen.

Column for August 26, 2010

I was at a loss about what to write this week, but one thing kept hitting me every time I read a newspaper, news web site, or local news report today. That was local spending. Every news source seemed to carry some story about local taxes, local spending, local grants received for more spending, and the list goes on.

During my perusing through my favorite sources for news, I found a report from George Mason University that showed that state and local spending in the United States as a whole has increased nearly ten times since 1950. Private spending has only increased five times in the same time period. What does that tell us? Government spending is out of control. Where does government get its money? From taxpaying citizens, which explains why private spending rose only about half of the government rates.

Guilford County is looking at another sales tax increase. North Carolina is looking at tollbooths on I-95. Cities like Philadelphia are requiring people like myself to pay for a business privilege license fee in order to have an internet blog. The cost of the license is $300, regardless of whether the blog is kept as a hobby or as a business, or even if the fee far exceeds any profits from the web site. That is nothing more than sheer governmental greed to feed an insatiable appetite for local spending.

Locally, I have seen grants and loans from the federal government for local spending on police and fire departments, schools and educational equipment, public library system computers, and local road paving projects. One major source of local money supply seems to be the US Department of Agriculture via loans and grants. I fail to see what local water systems, police department facilities, and road paving projects have to do with agriculture.

Just as frustrating to me is the idea that the federal government is making local towns, counties, and states increasingly dependent upon it as a money supply. Either way, the money is from taxation. Taxation comes from our pockets, not some magical, inexhaustible, deep well of cash in Washington, D.C.

When we get taxation on both ends, I am reminded of the admonition from an opponent to the US Constitution's ratification in an Anti-federalist letter written in October of 1787. The author identified himself only as "Federal Farmer" and was thought to possibly be Richard Henry Lee of Virginia, whose resolution was passed by the Continental Congress on July 2, 1776 declaring independence from Great Britain.

In this letter, Federal Farmer (in letter number 3) wrote, "…to lay and collect internal taxes in this extensive country must require a great number of congressional ordinances, immediately operating upon the body of the people; these must continually interfere with the state laws and thereby produce disorder and general dissatisfaction till the one system of laws or the other, operating upon the same subjects, shall be abolished".

Basically he thought that two levels of government attempting to rule on the same topic would clash and cause one or the other to be abolished. Unfortunately, we instead have a huge codependency of one on the other. Both, however, have the same insatiable appetite for tax money. One government is following in the footsteps of the other and taking more and more money from the citizenry to feed itself. Local and state governments following suit have, as I stated, raised local government spending ten fold since 1950 while private spending by contrast has only risen five fold.

As recently as the 1920's local governments did not constantly look to the federal government as a source from which to suckle money. During Calvin Coolidge's administration (a greatly underrated President, in my opinion), there was great flooding along the Mississippi River, far worse than the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Yet the federal government was not in the business of feeding the spending of local and state governments, even in the face of widespread disaster. Nowadays, a town can not pave Main Street or renovate a fire station without looking to Uncle Sam for money to do so.

We fell for this insidious plot decades ago and now it has caught up to us. Our federal deficit has grown (according to the Congressional Budget Office) by $4.4 Trillion since Barack Obama took office only a year and a half ago. States are going bankrupt. States are suckling more borrowed cash from the federal nipple. Local towns are raising taxes to keep up with their smaller yet nonetheless insatiable appetites for control and spending.

I have been decrying this for decades. Now we may have gone well past the rubicon of financial destruction. If so, we have done it to ourselves.