Voters can end 'rigged' elections
The practice of politicians protecting their jobs is not new. It has been around since the late 1790s when a Massachusetts governor named Elbridge Gerry created a district that looked like a salamander and thus the term "gerrymander" was coined. What is new is our chance as voters to end this practice in Florida by voting "yes'' on Amendments 5 and 6 in November.
These amendments will end the current practice in which each district is rigged to accomplish a particular result. Districts are set up to be either Democratic or Republican and opposing party candidates do not have a chance.
Only 7 percent of Florida's legislative elections are really competitive. Voters do not have a real choice in selecting their representatives because the elections are rigged before they even start.
Do you need proof? In the last six years, there have been 420 elections for state senator and state representative. Only three incumbents have been defeated.
We can change this old practice by voting "yes'' on Amendments 5 and 6. If you want to help this effort, go to FairDistrictsFlorida.org and learn more.
James L. Singer, Brooksville
Trouble with those pesky laws of the land | Dan DeWitt column Aug. 20
Mosque is a front for terrorism
Are we to understand that Dan DeWitt is of the belief that the proposed Cordoba mosque at ground zero is a religious house of worship rather than a front for the imposition of Shariah Law on the United States? It would have been helpful if Mr. DeWitt had opened up the discussion by pointing out that Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, who is the point man for this mosque project, has publicly stated that the United States was an accessory to the 9/11 carnage; and he has refused to acknowledge that Hamas is a terrorist group.
Mr. DeWitt's column does not acknowledge that a large number of these mosques, both here and in Europe, are breeding grounds for jihadist terrorism wherein firebrand imams preach Sharia Law and advocate hatred and violence against America. The column would have been more balanced if he would have provided us with his viewpoint on that aspect of the discussion.
The political objective of Sharia Law is to displace the United States Constitution by any means including terrorism and violence. In that regard, there is no constitutional protection for a terrorist movement whose ultimate goal is to destroy the secular constitution and laws of the United States irrespective of whether it hides its political agenda behind the sheep's clothing of religious doctrine.
It is not unreasonable to inquire into the source of funding for this imposing building which, if erected, will look out over the scene where Mohamed Atta and his fellow al-Qaida hijackers crashed two airliners into the twin towers on 9-11, inflicting death and destruction on an apocalyptic scale.
But of course there is an old worn out tactic, now wielded by advocates for this mosque, whereby they seek to vilify and silence anyone who questions the bona fides of this mosque by hurling accusations of racism and bigotry against them.
When the day arrives that trusting lambs like Dan DeWitt suddenly find their comfortable little enclaves threatened by resolute, well-coordinated and dedicated jihadists showing up on their doorsteps with AK-47s, by which to enforce the precepts of Sharia Law, I trust that they will not reach out to those of us who oppose this mosque. I'm afraid that their entreaties will go unanswered — we'll be gone by then.
Jack B. McPherson, New Port Richey