Awful Yoder ads
Why would a seasoned politician allow or condone such inane political ads as the two currently meant to persuade me to vote for Rep. Kevin Yoder?
The worst ad has his opponent, Sharice Davids, supposedly agreeing to the idea of abolishing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement — her agreement obviously spliced from past conversations, which she has since clarified and disavowed.
And the other one, which Yoder actually endorses, wants you to believe that Davids’ only purpose is to bring down government as we know it. I got a real chuckle when the ad said Davids would bankrupt the country. It makes me wonder if Yoder has ever checked the monstrous national debt. It’s probably easier for him not to look.
Sign Up and Save
Get six months of free digital access to The Kansas City Star
In fairness, Davids’ political ads promise bipartisan solutions to some very difficult governmental issues — not as funny or as inane as Yoder’s ads, but given the current political climate, also not realistic.
It may be time to use the world’s greatest political document: the Constitution of the United States. It’s time for some new amendments: balanced budget, term limits, elimination of campaign contributions, abolishment of the Electoral College so the popular vote determines the president and a voting system made so technologically easy that if you don’t vote, you pay a large fine.
It’s also time for Yoder to get better political consultants.
A water plan
I just read that the National Weather Service estimates Hurricane Florence may have dropped 8 trillion gallons of water on North Carolina. And then the thought occurred to me that most of the western United States could sure use some of that moisture.
It seems to me that the greatest and most technologically advanced country in world, which can transport oil and gas through pipelines to virtually any location the energy industry wishes, ought to be able to develop an infrastructure to store and transport excess water from flooded regions to areas of our country in desperate need.
A system of reservoirs and delivery pipelines and canals would, of course, be required. There are several obvious benefits:
▪ Transferring water to areas suffering drought.
▪ Providing irrigation for agriculture, versus using water from aquifers and depleting these water sources for future generations.
▪ Resupplying aquifers.
▪ Watering forests to enhance growth and to limit the rapid expansion of forest fires.
▪ Turning deserts into oases.
▪ More recreational reservoirs.
Think about the jobs that would be created to build and maintain this water storage and delivery system. Yes, the costs would be astronomical, but can anyone deny the benefit to future generations of Americans?
Ted Steinmeyer Jr.