No. 28 11/4/15
Wow! What a difference a week seems to make!! A definite NO from Paul Ryan to those pushing him to become the new house speaker, has suddenly become a YES! Not only has he agreed to run, but it sounds like he even has the votes to succeed!
And last week, all the talk was about a head-butting battle between members of the Freedom Caucus, intent on cutting spending and denying federal money to Planned Parenthood, and others who sought compromise to avoid a government shutdown!
Now just today we hear that the White House and enough legislators have agreed to a funding program that will combine cuts in spending, an increase in the military budget, coupled with a necessary increase in the debt limit to keep government going for a few more years, eliminating the need to deal with the problem until the year 2017!
It's time to backtrack, and ask what is the driving force behind the decisions being made at the national level today. For several decades now, the United States and much of the world has been driven by the theories of John Maynard Keynes in economics, and of socialism in politics. The two go hand in hand, because both rely on action at the top level in decisions that must be made. Keynsian's cling to the notion that the government and its national bank can solve all economic problems from recessions to inflation!!!
And the slow drift to socialism over the decades is now responsible for the buzz words heard out of Washington, and a couple of the candidates running for president. Income equality, wealth redistribution, universal health insurance, gun control, women's rights, are just a few of the ideas daily hammered on by our liberal press and progressives in our government. A growing reluctance to be regulated by the Constitution, and a complete unwillingness to tolerate differences of opinion are running rampant today!
So, what is the basic difference between the modern advocates holding to the two theories above and the traditional thinking held to by our founding fathers? I submit that the biggest difference lies in the attitude one has towards the individual. Progressives today believe that governments must help the average person not able always to care for himself. Truly, they see the masses the same way a dairy farmer views his dairy herd, a valuable asset needing care at all times. A close look at many of our programs today definitely supports this claim!
But what of the traditional thinking of our founding fathers and those today who hold to a different view of the individual? In Review 26, we cited Og Mandino's claim that the life found in each individual is "The Greatest Miracle in the World," and that individuals who realize their potential are capable of incredible accomplishments. A study of the history of our nation over its first 200 years proves this claim. With no or rare help from government at any level, the progress made by this nation of individuals is phenomenal, and definitely unprecedented in the history of nations.
And what about today? Though socialism seeks to be center stage, and is hailed by many to be the wave of the future, current groups like the Austrian School of economics, and their guru Ludvig von Mises, make a compelling argument for individualism, for a limited role for government, and for traditional capitalism as once practiced in this country. So, more about that and their formula MV = PO in the near future!!
Jake Wren 

Dear Editor:
I feel fortunate that at least four people read and responded to my Letter to the Editor. 
I agreed with Schnider that “Most of what Jake ‘rants’ about in the Redneck Review does not occur in Cottonwood.”  Shouldn’t he rant instead about local issues--like mental illness, poverty, addiction, lack of education--which cause personal pain and hardship and do occur in Cottonwood?  Why “talk about the wrongs happening throughout the world,” before you address the wrongs happening in your own community?   
In addition, according to the CDC’s website, “The Center for Disease Control & Prevention collects data about mortality in the U.S., including deaths by suicide.  In 2013 (the most recent year for which full data are available) 41,149 suicides were reported.”  That’s 10,000 more deaths than Jim Chmelik cited in his Letter to the Editor.  I guess he figured no one would fact-check what he wrote.
Idaho has the 4th highest suicide rate, 67% higher than the national average.  According to the Suicide Prevention Action Network of Idaho, Idaho County had a total of 16 suicides between 2010-2014.  During that time, most Cottonwood citizens cared more about the abortion issue than about mental health in their own community.  Does anyone see what’s wrong with this picture?  
Joan Kopczynski
Spokane

Dear Editor,
 "There is no excellent beauty that hath not some strangeness in the proportion." -Francis Bacon, Essays, Civil and Moral "Of Beauty"
I agree with Francis Bacon. I believe Francis Bacon is saying nothing is perfect and our imperfections make us who we are!
Supposed beauty to the human eye is asymmetrical. Meaning two sides perfectly alike, but no one is perfectly asymmetrical. If everyone was "perfectly beautiful" the world would be boring. Imperfections make beauty...well, more beautiful. Everyone has imperfections on the outside, and on the inside.
We judge, as humans, it is part of our nature, but we should keep our unkind thoughts to ourselves. We should try to see past people's imperfections, and like people for who they are, not what they look like. Beauty is inside and out!
In conclusion, I repeat Francis Bacon, "excellent beauty does have some strangeness in the proportion!" Let us celebrate the "strangeness", and try to remember the "beam that is in our own eye" before we judge the "splinter" in our friends.
Hailey Stubbers,
8th Grade, Summit Academy

Home

Classified Ads