John Cummuta: Three issues reveal better presidential choice

John Cummuta  —  9/11/2008 5:36 am

Dear Editor:

The presidential campaigns are officially under way, so now we can examine the two candidates and their positions. There are three issues that jump out at me: international terrorism aimed at America, the economy and energy.

On international terrorism I fear that Sen. Obama is a modern-day Neville Chamberlain. Chamberlain was the British prime minister who believed you could talk to and negotiate with evil leaders like Hitler. So he negotiated a deal that gave the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia to Adolf Hitler. The German occupation of the Sudetenland began on the next day. Chamberlain came back to England, held up the document, and declared "Peace for our time."

Over the following year Hitler ignored the agreement, continued his aggression, and finally invaded Poland, plunging Europe into World War II. Could Ahmadinejad, Putin or Kim Jong-Il be today's Hitler? Could Barak Obama be today's Neville Chamberlain? Isn't it too dangerous to risk finding out the hard way?

On the economy, let's say you're a farmer. Obama is saying he can help you increase your farm's output by taking away some of your seed before you can plant it. McCain is saying he wants to let you keep more of your seed so you can increase your yield and enjoy more prosperity. Which plan makes more sense to you?

And, if Sen. Obama's answer would be that he's only going to increase taxes on high-income people, consider this from the IRS's latest figures. The top 1 percent of income earners pay 39.9 percent of all federal individual income taxes. Many of these are the entrepreneurs whose money stays in their businesses to create jobs. The top 25 percent of income earners pay 86.3 percent of all income taxes. How much more would be "fair"?

On energy, Sen. Obama says we should fast-track new energy sources. What sources? How long will they take to develop? In the meantime, do we stay dependent on our enemies for oil? Sen. McCain also says we should fast-track new energy sources, and at the same time develop as much of the home-grown energy we already know how to use as possible, to tide us over until new energy can be practically distributed and used by consumers. Which solution would lower your energy bills first?

John Cummuta

Prairie du Chien

John Cummuta  —  9/11/2008 5:36 am