Why do organizations such as “Wounded Warrior” exist?
The brave young men and women of our all-volunteer military get severely wounded in battles fighting for this nation.
Why doesn’t this nation take care of them?
It’s obvious that this is not happening, or there would be no use for the “Wounded Warrior” and other such projects.
Doesn’t this country owe them more than what these young people are getting?
Everything they need to return to the civilian world should be taken care of by the military.
We cannot tell them “thanks for the loss of your arm or leg, but this is all we are going to do for you,” kick them aside and let them wait and hope that some organization comes along to help.
Very few of these young people come from families who can afford the cost of helping them return to the civilian world.
It’s great that organizations such as “Wounded Warrior” are there, but there should be no need for them.
The government sent them into the situation that got them hurt. Shouldn’t the government bear the cost of fully restoring them?
In a July 17 letter to the editor titled “Student loans,” a writer complained about the interest rate on Stafford student loans.
He lamented “the increase in the student loan interest rate from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent.”
In a July 18 article, Philip Elliott of The Associated Press wrote that an agreement is being completed “to undo a rate hike that took hold for subsidized Stafford loans on July 1. Rates for new subsidized Stafford loans doubled from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent.”
Neither of these statements is true. There is no “rate hike.” There is no increase in student loan rates. The loan rates are 6.8 percent — period.
In 2007, in spite of tremendous national debt, Congress passed a law temporarily allowing students to pay a lower rate. Students had already agreed to pay 6.8 percent.
For the last six years, students have been receiving this financial benefit.
It’s time for this government “giveaway” program to end.
Terry L. Watkins
I am a white member of the NAACP. I subscribe to “Your Black World,” published on-line by Dr. Boyce Watkins.
In his July 13 response to the George Zimmerman acquittal, Dr. Boyce states, “I need to spend the night calming myself down while remembering that we live in a country that wants black men, black families, and black communities in the grave.”
Perhaps a statement such as this would have had some validity after the 1992 Rodney King beating verdict.
But there has been considerable racial healing in the past 21 years. A black president has been elected for two terms.
Further, my readings suggest that the Zimmerman trial jury did not have the same inherent bias as did the jury in the Rodney King beating case.
Although I respect the writings and issues brought forward by Dr. Boyce, I am very disappointed in his statement. His statement, as a highly regarded black opinion leader, does not acknowledge the interracial progress of the past 21 years and does not promote the cause of further racial healing.
New traffic lights
On my way to work from Moncks Corner to Charleston I was surprised to see new traffic lights on Highway 52 between Moncks Corner and Goose Creek.
Unfortunately, the lights were out of sequence. When one was red the next traffic light was green. This caused a lot of stop-and-go traffic and congestion.
The lights should be set to blink on when a train is coming. The traffic was backed up, and we still had to stop at every other light.
If you cannot turn left because of the train, the lights should have been set to caution and blinking. The traffic could continue to move and motorists would be happy.
Are they trying to slow traffic to avoid accidents? An angry motorist stuck in traffic could surely cause an accident.
Saint Thomas Drive
But once is enough
I can live, this time, with Mark Sanford showing up for an important Defense Department roll call vote in the U.S. House with “knees quaking in the breeze” rather than “not” showing up at all.
His dedication to us, the voters he represents, is admirable; fully realizing he was in for a hazing for violating the dress code.