|
Title of ‘General’ is measure of competence
To the Editor:
In response to Jim Greenwald’s letter in the Oct. 19 edition of The Sylva Herald, I would like to point out that the word “General” preceding Geoff Higginbotham’s name is not just a title, it is an earned rank. Titles may be awarded, academic degrees are conferred and military rank (particularly in the U.S. Marine Corps) is earned. Furthermore, in our history since the earliest days of the republic, earned rank continues to be part of the proper form of address after an individual retires from active duty. General (George) Washington, General (Ulysses S.) Grant and General (Dwight D.)Eisenhower continued to be identified by rank during their political careers, and our history is filled with many more examples.
The earned rank of “General” is about as close as one can come to providing proof of competence. The clear fact is the gentleman is at the least overqualified for the job. I appreciate the willingness of a man who has served his country with honor and earned his retirement to take on an office that nearly anyone who has experienced it will admit is often a headache. As a native of Western North Carolina whose family has been here since the American Revolution, and as a descendant of officers of that war who continued to be addressed by their rank after they entered careers in service to North Carolina, I am well aware of the practice.
As far as mountain values are concerned, Higginbotham’s published platform issues are a perfect fit with our mountain values. According to Higginbotham’s campaign material, he has only lived in North Carolina for 39 years. Is it really consistent with our values to hold that against him?
Ronald Poor
Sylva
Writer questions whether Shuler will represent WNC values
To the Editor:
The time has come for us as voters in the 11th Congressional District to look at our representatives and determine who has our best interests at heart.
A new candidate on the horizon seems to have good ideas and plans as a representative for this district. Democrat Heath Shuler promises to have WNC values at heart and to represent North Carolina as a “conservative Democrat.” He pledges to protect gun rights and vote pro-life while protecting good moral values.
However, one must question where Shuler’s allegiance will lie if he is voted into Congress. The largest part of his campaign funding has come from liberal Democrats and large union political action committees looking for representation in Washington. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has funded Shuler’s campaign through her own campaign fund as well as “PAC to the Future.”
Nancy Pelosi is a liberal Democrat who is strongly pro-choice and in favor of gun control. Her total contributions to Shuler’s campaign totals more than $14,000, and as House minority leader we could only expect that she would play a vital role in any vote that Shuler would cast on Capitol Hill.
Can Shuler really promise to look out for our best interests without being influenced by the groups largely responsible for funding his campaign? Ask yourself, are the interests of these groups in line with the best interests of the rural North Carolina district Shuler would be representing?
Samantha Ferguson
Cherokee
|
