A sour note
I wonder if Mayor Joe Riley has considered what will become of local musicians if bars are forced to close at midnight.
I doubt it will hurt the guys from Hootie and the Blowfish or any other acts that have received national recognition, but what about the up-and- coming artists struggling to make ends meet? It ain't an easy way to make a living, and I should know because I am one of them.
Look around you. The music scene in Charleston is finally on its way to becoming what it once was in the Myskyns days, and everyone has to start somewhere.
Those guys in Hootie were once college boys playing dive bars, believe it or not. It's hard enough to own a small business and make ends meet, and politicians are asking new business owners to give up two of their most profitable hours.
Surely, our mayor, who prides himself as a person of culture and a champion of the common man, won't allow the future of so many hardworking Charlestonians seem so uncertain.
Alex Charles Goss
Let's try and comprehend the latest spin our "government" is throwing out regarding the thousands of children illegally crossing our borders without their parents.
Granted, the 2002 law was designed to protect children's welfare. This law should not and does not change the fact that they are entering our country illegally.
The excuse that there were already 30,000 deportation cases pending in the system prior to the latest surge is lame.
The current case load is all the more reason to turn away anyone, regardless of what country they come from, attempting to enter our country without following our citizenship laws that were in place long before the 2002 ruling.
The legal taxpaying working class Americans should not have to subsidize this blatant disregard for our long-standing immigration policy by providing jobs, education and health care.
I find it hard to understand how any educated person could support the current administration in office that claims to "represent the people" and uphold the U.S. Constitution.
Enough is enough.
Legends Club Drive
The June 17 Post and Courier reports great news about new jobs for our state. Gov. Nikki Haley cites the Charleston port expansion as essential to job creation. She's right.
However, the Port of Charleston is merely one component of the trade conduit. We need deeper water. We need more terminal capacity. We need an Intermodal Container Transfer Facility. However, this is all for naught, if our elected officials don't prioritize and fund our highways.
Interstate 26 is already at gridlock several times a day in several locations in Charleston. An accident further west, in either direction, can shut it down for hours.
The governor and the General Assembly need to recognize this fact: 80 percent of all containers (import and export) move by truck. One hundred percent of the 20 percent moving by rail is transferred to and from the port terminals by truck.
S.C. citizens should also understand this fact which cannot be ignored: Our neighbors to the south are also growing their ports, and much of that trade travels into, originates from, or passes through our state.
Let's not get too excited about all the job creation numbers, harbor deepening, terminal expansions, etc. unless and until we get highway funding in South Carolina figured out.
An increase in the motor fuel user fee seems the only logical solution. That takes political will, and guts.
Patrick T. Barber
Superior Transportation, Inc.
The VA has nothing on MUSC. I have been trying to get an appointment with MUSC three weeks and counting, and getting a massive runaround.
Too many lawyers
There has been a lot recently written relating to what can be done to fix the federal government. It is clear that the current administration can identify problems but is clueless as to any viable solutions. As a retired engineer and having had a career in identifying and solving problems, I offer the following:
It is a fact that the current congressional makeup consists of 80 percent career lawyers. Lawyers get rich off of problems. Lawyers do not have the necessary skills to solve problems; they are good at creating problems.
That is why we will never see tort reform with this Congress. Lawyers love lawsuits. Are lawyers trained in problem solving?
No, quite the opposite. They are trained in how to take a side in a dispute and to win. Lawyers are also trained in public speaking and that is why they are electable; they sound good.
A healthy government is one where only 20 percent of the members of Congress are lawyer, with the other 80 percent consisting of engineers and people with a background in the following fields: medicine, religion, education, economics, logistics, military, business, labor, etc. You get the idea - it would be a good mix of all professions and skills.
My suggestion is to think twice before you cast a vote for a political candidate who is a lawyer; we already have too many in Congress.
Property tax relief
The writer of the May 21 letter titled "Marriage penalty" is sore because South Carolina allows only one primary residence per person or married couple to receive the property tax relief credit.
He went on to claim that this eroded the moral sensibilities of our state because the law penalized married couples and rewarded unmarried couples.
The law does nothing of the sort. Its purpose is to give citizens a break on the property taxes for the home in which they reside. In fact, the law takes the traditional stance that a married couple lives together in one home and that unmarried couples live separately.
Even if that is not the case, it is illegal to claim a house as your home if you do not live there most of the year. This includes homes in other states. And believe me, they do check and they check thoroughly. Not to mention, the neighbors are checking too.
Married couples enjoy many tax privileges and the S.C. tax code assumes they enjoy them together at one address.
Put him on trial
As the Bowe Bergdahl news moved to the back pages of the papers, the story coming out of Brooks Army Medical Center was that Sgt. Bergdahl has been moved to outpatient care. For a solider who was charged with being AWOL in 2009, what does this mean?
When I was recovering from wounds at Brooks in 1971, it meant that I lived in a barracks, no longer in the hospital. I was free to come and go after normal duty hours. I sure hope that isn't true in Bergdahl's case. He should be under guard until he answers the charges against him.
This is one of the worst stories coming from our Department of Defense in a long time. Ask Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel what would had happened to him had he walked, leaving his post and weapon in Vietnam.
The only people I trust are the ones who served in combat with him. It would be a lousy Army that would allow its soldiers to walk away from their post when they disagree with the noncommissioned officers and officers in charge. This man is entitled to a fair and speedy trial under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
Joseph H. Wolfe Jr.
Sgt. First Class, U.S. Army (Retired)
St. Margaret Street
Notice about comments: