Jimmie Hollis writes that the armed forces must be rebuilt after President Barack Obama's meddling.
To the Editor:
As an American of Dutch, Indian and African ancestry, and a political conservative, I think the past seven-plus years have been terrible for the United States.
One reason for this is the weakening of our military and adverse political interference in its basic structure. As a military retiree, this concerns me a lot. The military has historically provided a huge voting block for Republicans. Mainly, this is because most military leaders are patriotic and devoted to American values.
Knowing this, the Obama administration took steps to change that voting base from Republican to Democrat. This disruption in historical patterns came in part by the commander-in-chief forcing the military to openly accept homosexuals. The next step was to quietly replace top military commanders and officers with people who were politically loyal to Obama and his liberal views. Then there were cuts in spending for some military functions.
Fed up, the people elected a Republican-majority Congress, hoping that it would halt the administration's adverse actions affecting the military. However, hopes were dashed since the GOP-led Congress was feckless and only rubber-stamped administration policies. This, along with damaging domestic policies, brought people to a boiling point. This year's presidential election reflects their anger and disappointment.
Hence, the election of a conservative Republican as president is vital. The Congress has to be purged of members who have supported and the president and his policies.
It is also is essential that many military commanders be replaced in 2017 with men and women of integrity, dignity, patriotism and sound moral values.
The voices of conservatives, "Blue Dog" Democrats and independents are speaking loudly and will not be silenced by riots, demonstrations and violence from the far left.
Our military deserves our best, and that can't happen under a Democratic president.
Jimmie Hollis
Millville
Vote to take big money from campaigns
To the Editor:
We are entering a critical time in American politics. These changes can be attributed to several recent events including the U.S. Supreme Court's Citizens United decision that affected campaign spending, the emergence of the tea party and the election of a black president.
For decades, contributions by wealthy people, large corporations and Wall Street have shaped our government policies. These special interest groups have made huge contributions to super PACs to support the their choices. This ability for unlimited spending undermines the will of individuals to elect the candidate of their choice.
The discord in the Republican Party caused by the refusal of tea-party-aligned politicians to compromise on any issue brought before them has split the conservatives and right-wing, resulting in a non-functional Congress. Because of this, many Republican voters have revolted against their elected politicians and are backing an "outsider" for president. It is interesting that this "outsider," Donald Trump, is himself a multi-billionaire who has admitted making large contributions to both parties to advance his own wealth.
The Democratic front-runner is not much better. Hillary Clinton has undeniable ties to Wall Street and, like most other politicians, she relies on contributions by wealthy individuals and super PACs. She says she wants to reverse the Citizens United decision but, at the same time, she is benefiting from its rules.
Neither of these candidates has a plan to change the way campaigns are funded. To me, this is the major issue that must be addressed before we have any chance of saving our political system.
I would ask the voters, especially Democrats, to take a hard look at the candidates. Support someone who has historically supported changes to the election process. I urge Democrats to register and vote in the coming primary and general elections to assure the future of this great country of ours.
James Stewart
National Park
Christie wrong to cut food stamps
To the Editor:
Gov. Chris Christie's administration has cut extra food stamp assistance that has been available to New Jersey residents in areas of high unemployment.
Because the state no longer supports a waiver from the federal government, an estimated 11,000 people were dropped from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) because they have been unemployed for more than than three months and do not otherwise qualify.
This decision is wrong, and it means that our state is walking away from federal dollars made available to help those in need. Beyond that, helping to provide food to those who might otherwise go hungry is a moral obligation we have lived up to in the past.
I was glad to see state Senate President Sweeney and other legislative leaders including state Sens. Joseph Vitale and Shirley Turner bring attention to this issue and work to reverse these cuts. (The Legislature has passed a bill requesting that the state re-apply for the benefit waiver; it awaits action by the governor).
SNAP is an important program that helps families put food on the table. Most of us are very fortunate that we can afford necessities like food, but not everybody has that same good fortune.
People are still struggling in this economy and employment is not something everyone can easily acquire. For Gov. Chris Christie to make it even harder for struggling families is wrong.
I applaud the lawmakers listed above for standing up to help these families.
Donald Troxell
West Deptford Township
Send a letter to the editor of South Jersey Times at sjletters@njadvancemedia.com