BARBIERI: Like Founding Fathers

I read Cheryl Stransky’s flyer wherein comparisons are made between herself and Vito Barbieri. She listed all the reasons why we should re-elect Barbieri. If you want your children educated by the government, which more often than not is contrary to your own beliefs and standards; if you want the government spending your money in ways that are often morally repugnant to you; if you want an increase in unfunded government liabilities; if you want to limit our to protect ourselves from armed criminals; if you want your taxes increased, then Stransky is your gal.

Regarding returning federal lands to state ownership — that would turn the rights to harvest timber over to the state. The revenue generated by that alone would be sufficient to hugely reduce, or even eliminate, state income and property taxes. That revenue would greatly exceed the federal stewardship payments she refers to. Regarding the 17th Amendment, our Founding Fathers understood the separation of powers quite well. When that amendment was repealed, states lost their representation in the federal government, which enabled more centralization of power in Washington, D.C.

Before taking Stransky’s comments about Mr. Barbieri’s voting record as adequate, it would be wise of all voters to do their homework and learn WHY he voted the way he did. It’s not enough to take anyone’s representations at face value. Uninformed voters gave us Barack Obama, Harry Reid, and — oh, my gosh — Butch Otter.

Vito Barbieri’s views mirror those of our Founding Fathers. Cheryl Stransky’s mirror those of Karl Marx. Be careful in the voting booth — you get what you deserve.

P.S. — Steve Smylie, if you had a choice between voting for a devil or a demon, which would you select? I suggest you cast your vote for John Bujak.

SCOTT GRUNSTED

Hayden