It would seem that some of our politicians
may suffer from a case of cognitive dissonance.
In a recent
U.S. Sen. Ben.
what he considers
as positives for the area, such as the North-
South highway (“Senator optimistic on
region’s future,” Jan. 26, Page 1A). That’s been
in the works for decades and nothing much
Cardin plugged the Appalachian Regional
Commission. The ARC is almost 50 years old.
We’re better off now than 50 years ago, right?
He mentioned the “possible” energy corridor
for our area; but not if his party has their
way on fracking. How can he be so duplicitous?
Cardin’s also high on tourism. ‘Nuff said.
How about other cognitively dissonant policies
pushed by Cardin and his compatriots?
How do politicians seek to make firearms
illegal which have been legal for many years,
yet intentionally increase the carnage on our
highways by forcing Detroit to build smaller,
lighter, and more dangerous vehicles?
The Heartland Institute estimates an additional
1,300 to 2,600 people have died every
year since 1975 due to government mileage
That is about 70,000 additional Americans
sacrificed at the altar of energy efficiency,
which is more than perished in Vietnam, Iraq,
and Afghanistan combined.
Did Cardin drive to mountain Maryland in a
These deadly gas mileage rules are intended
to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
Yet Cardin’s party wants to stop positive
efforts for energy independence such as the
Keystone pipeline and to severely limit or stop
fracking in our own country.
No one will argue against the safest, most
cost-effective gas and oil exploration and
extraction, but is it rational to seek a complete
ban, or study the issue to death, which is the
obstructionists’ strategy du jour?
Instead, let’s keep killing a couple of thousand
people a year who have to drive kiddiecars?
Logic hurts, doesn’t it?
Then there’s life.
Somehow it’s OK to snuff out 3,000 innocent
lives each day (yes, each day) without due
process, but our Maryland Democrats seek to
preserve the lives of those who deserve society’s
most severe consequences for their
Has the world gone mad? Any death penalty
case should be proven using the most stringent
standards, but consider the unintended
consequences of abolishing the death penalty.
In the past several years we’ve seen a number
of murders at our local prisons. The press
then dutifully reports that the perpetrator,
who is already serving a life sentence, will
serve an additional 20 years. How? Embalm
him when he dies and prop him up in a corner
for 20 years? It’s laughable if it weren’t so serious.
Suppose you’re already serving a life sentence
and you really don’t like a particular
We’ve already had many attacks on guards
here. Or you put a hit out on the district attorney
and police officers who put you away for
life. Worse yet, their families are targeted for
What’s the worst that can happen to you if
you’re already a lifer?
And suppose you are such a loser that the
next serious crime you commit will result in a
life sentence. If it is a crime against another
person, will you let that person live to possibly
help put you away, or cover your tracks and
eliminate witnesses when the penalty is the
Innocents die while the guilty go on. It boggles
How do some politicians hold so many conflicting
or contradictory views in their minds
at the same time? It would drive most of us
mad. Maybe they’re already there.