Sweetwater Reporter (Sweetwater, Tex.), Vol. 113, No. 334, Ed. 1 Wednesday, December 14, 2011 Page: 4 of 10
ten pages : ill.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Viewpoints
Page 4 ■ Wednesday, December 14, 2011
Sweetwater Reporter
DEDICATED TO PROUDLYDEUVERIN® LOCAL NEWS SI NTH 1881
T—\ Sweetwatei A
Reporter
P.O. Box 750/112 W. Third
Sweetwater, Texas 79556
325/236-6677
Fax: 325/235-4967
Website:
www.sweetwaterreporter.com
E-mail addresses:
publisher@sweetwaterreporter.com
business@sweetwaterreporter.com
advertising@sweetwaterreporter.com
editor@sweetwaterreporter.com
composing@sweetwaterreporter.com
TU"
MEMBER
2010
TEXAS PRESS
ASSOCIATION
Ron Midkiff
Publisher
Gloria Rudel
ad director
Danica Hickson
business mgr./
circulation mgr.
Tatiana Rodriguez
managing editor
Pablo Rodriguez
composing
Bleu Reyes
production mgr.
EDITORIAL POLICY
The editorial section of the newspaper is a forum for
expression of a variety of viewpoints. All articles except
those labeled "Editorials" reflect the opinions of the writ-
ers and not those of the Sweetwater Reporter.
Bill
Tinsley
REFLECTIONS
Decorations
Last weekend the first strings of light were stretched
across rooftops, lawns and windows. They punctuated
the otherwise dark neighborhood with brilliant flashes
of light. And, with each passing day, other houses added
their glow.
This weekend we pulled the Christmas boxes from the
attic where they have been patiently waiting since they
were packed away last January. Candles, candy canes
and crocheted snowmen took their places, surrendering
center stage to the nativity. The branches
of the tree that stands proudly in the
window bowed with the weight of memo-
ries: cardboard stars that were cut out
by chubby little hands long ago, names
printed on them with backward letters:
ornaments that remind us of vacations
where we laughed and played. We hung
stockings on the fireplace mantle, annual
symbols of expectation. They once held
the names of our children. This year,
they bear the names of our four grand-
children, reminding us of their sparkling
eyes and heart-melting smiles.
A large part of Christmas is prepara-
tion, expectation and anticipation. It feels right to me.
That is the way God sent his Son, after centuries of prepa-
ration, expectation and anticipation.
The prophets foretold His coming centuries before.
From Genesis to Revelation, the Scripture points to Him.
Isaiah said, "Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a
sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son,
and she will call His name Immanuel." (Isaiah 7:14). "For
unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the
government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name
shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God,
The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace." (Isaiah
9:6).
The Bible says that when Jesus was born, Joseph and
Mary took the child to Jerusalem where they met some
remarkable people who had been waiting a long time
for this moment. They met an old man named Simeon
who had been waiting for many years for God's promised
Messiah. The Spirit of God had revealed to him that he
would not die until he saw the Lord's Christ. When he saw
the child, Jesus, he took the baby in his arms and blessed
God saying, "My eyes have seen your salvation which you
have prepared in the presence of all peoples, a light of
revelation to the Gentiles, and the glory of your people
Israel." (Luke 2:25-35).
Mary and Joseph had hardly recovered from Simeon's
amazing declaration before they met Anna, an eighty-four
year old widow who had been fasting and praying in the
Temple for years waiting for the Messiah. "At that very
moment she came up and began giving thanks to God,
and continued to speak of Him to all those who were look-
ing for the redemption of Jerusalem." (Luke 2:36-38)
I guess that is why I like this time of year with all the
decorations. It reminds me of God's preparation and
God's promise. It reminds me of the One who is worth
waiting for! He has come, and He is coming!
letters to the Editor
To Whom It May Concern
This letter is directed at those individuals who feel it is
necessary to steal from our local businesses. These busi-
nesses employ honest, hardworking people who strive to
give each customer great service, yet get cheated by you
thieves by taking money out of our pockets. All because
you are too lazy to work and pay your own pay like we have
to do. You would rather cheat the system. Shoplifting may
be a game to you, just to prove to your buddy you can get
away with it. But believe me, your actions are not going
unnoticed and someday you will be paying for the error of
your ways. The MAN upstairs may forgive you, but when
your time on earth conies to an end, HE will not forget. You
will have to answer for your many sins against your fellow
human beings.
This also applies to customers who feel compelled to take
more than they paid for because they somehow feel they
deserve it or we owe it to them. This is stealing and you are
a thief and you are not welcome where I work and shop.
Another form of stealing involves those of you who waste
our time while you choose to talk on your cell phone, dis-
cussing something as mundane as what Auntie and Uncle
ate for supper. For those working for commissions, you are
costing us money because we must wait to finish a sale to
you before we can move to our next customer. Not only are
you both rude and inconsiderate, you are stealing both my
time and my respect as well as the time and respect of the
customers waiting in line behind you. Think about it the
next time you are shopping. If you really want to broadcast
who you slept with, how much you drank or who's beating
who, do us a favor: Leave your cell phone in your car and
take out an ad in this newspaper.
Sandy Womble
Maryneal, Texas
C- FORCE
Of Mammograms, Mustaches and Male Fertility
Q: Mr. Norris, I recently
heard conflicting reports
on mammograms and
that there is new evidence
that women older than 40
should have regular ones.
Hear anything about new
evidence? — Shirley F.?
Minneapolis
A: In 2009, the
U.S. Preventive
Services Task
Force recommend-
ed against routine
mammography to
screen asymptom-
atic women ages
40 to 49 for breast
cancer. But a new
study, presented
to the Radiology
Society of North
America, shows
that women in
their fifth decade of life
actually do benefit from
annua mammograms,
regardless of their family
breast cancer history.
CBS News reported that
the study's leader, radiolo-
gist Stamatia Destounis,
spoke against criticism of
screening younger women
"You find small cancers
that will never be a prob-
lem," Destounis said. "But
we found a considerable
number that can't wait.
Invasive breast cancers can
spread and kill."
Of 1,071 women screened
by Destounis and col-
leagues, 373 were diag-
nosed with breast cancer,
61 percent with no history
of the disease.
With more than 230,000
women in the U.S. alone
diagnosed with breast can-
cer in 2011 and more than
26,000 of them younger
than 45, it appears to make
good sense for women to
start routine breast cancer
examinations in their early
or mid-40s.
However, one word of
caution from Dr. David
Katz, who is the found-
er of Yale University's
GUEST COLUMN
Chuck
Noms
PreventionResearch Center
and wrote the following in
response to a similar study
about mammography in
2010: "As for harms, we
have long known that for
every breast cancer found
in women under 50, well
over ten times as
many women will
have false positive
results. Quite a few
of these women
will have biop-
sies. There are, of
course, potential
complications of
the biopsies. In
addition, the scar
tissue left behind
makes future
mammograms
harder still to
interpret, increas-
ing the risks of missing a
cancer when there actually
is one. And though small,
the dose of radiation from
routine mammograms can
actually contribute, slight-
ly, to breast cancer risk
over time."
Katz also called mam-
mograms before age 50 "a
50/50 proposition" and
"a toss-up," so it might
befit all women in that age
bracket to heed his further
advice: "There is no 'right'
answer for all women in
their 40s. But all you really
need is an answer that's
right for you, and that's
what good clinical care is
all about. Confer with your
doctor; consider pros and
cons; your risk factors and
preferences. And together,
make either heads, or tails,
of this particular toss-up."
Q: I am newly married
and heard that laptops can
reduce male fertility rates.
Tell me it ain't so, Chuck! —
"Ready for Reproduction"
in New Hampshire
A: The medical jour-
nal Fertility and Sterility
recently reported on a
study by Argentine scien-
tists who conducted tests
to see whether sperm count
lessens when in close prox-
imity to a laptop connected
to the Internet via Wi-Fi.
Their research discovered
that 25 percent of sperm
were inactive after four
hours of computer expo-
sure, compared with only
14 percent of sperm sam-
ples that were at a distance
from the computers. And
DNA damage occurred to 9
percent of the sperm next
to computers, three times
the amount of comparison
samples.
According to a Fox News
report, the scientists who
did the study say that the
culprit is "electromagnetic
radiation generated during
wireless communication."
In a couple of recent arti-
cles I wrote on electrosmog,
I discussed the potential
dangers of an electromag-
netic field, or EMF — a
collective mass of energy
created by electrically
charged objects that sur-
round our lives and bod-
ies. Individually, the health
risks of the electrical appli-
ances, devices and gadgets
that engulf our lives may
be minuscule, but cumula-
tively, they raise the health
stakes, especially when
placed right on or next to
the human body.
This study needs to be
verified by further studies,
but I'm a firm believer in
erring on the side of cau-
tion. Though the conve-
nience of laptops is, indeed,
found in their portability
and placement and their
EMFs are few and small,
do we really want to be a
generation of guinea pigs
by daily placing them right
next to our reproductive
organs?
The answer is simple
and common sense. If pos-
sible, don't place your lap-
top computer directly on
your lap. Place it on a table,
or, at the very least, use
protective pads and even
an anti-radiation shield
between your body and
computer.
In related men's health
news, it was great to hear
that mustaches raised
awareness and more than
$75 million around the
world in November for
cancers particularly affect-
ing men. It's true!
The November global
charity movement, which
began in Australia in 2003
with 30 participants and is
now more than 800,000,
is simply based upon each
male participant's starting
the month with a complete-
ly shaven face and proceed-
ing to grow and groom his
mustache in an effort to
raise funds and awareness
for men's health. One per-
son described it as a walk-
athon but with facial hair.
The millions raised will
go to the Prostate Cancer
Foundation, Livestrong
and the Movember
Foundation, among other
men's health partners.
Congratulations, chari-
ties and men around the
world!
If the movement ever
advances from mustaches
to beards, I think I can
give anyone a run for his
money!
Write to Chuck Noiris
(info@creators.com) with
your questions about
health and fitness. Follow
Chuck Norris through his
official social media sites,
on Twitter @chucknorris
and Facebook's "Official
Chuck Norris Page." He
blogs at http://chucknor-
risnews.blogspot.com.
To find out more about
Chuck Norris and read
features by other Creators
Syndicate wiiters and car-
toonists, visit the Creators
Syndicate Web page at
www.creat0rs.cOm.
Obama Is No Teddy Roosevelt
Barack Obama chan-
neled Teddy Roosevelt
this week in a speech
in Osawatomie, Kan.
Supporters are calling
it the most significant
economic speech of his
administration.
But critics rightly
point out that the Teddy
Roosevelt whom Obama
invoked was not the
beloved 26th
president and
standard-bear-
er of the GOP.
Instead, it was
the radicalized
third-party can-
didate seeking a
third term and
the man whose
progressivism
was a precursor
to the rise of big
government in
the later 20th
century. What's
more, President
Obama's speech
was so full of reckless accu-
sations and misinforma-
tion that The Washington
Post's Fact Checker blog
gave it three Pinocchios,
signifying "significant
factual errors."
President Obama has a
history of comparing him-
self to American giants
— from Abraham Lincoln
to Ronald Reagan. So it's
no surprise that he would
choose to give his speech
in the same town as Teddy
Roosevelt's 1910 address.
But whenever Obama
invokes past heroes, he
ends up looking smaller
And this week's speech
was a prime example.
Roosevelt at least
acknowledged that he
was launching a radical
platform; whatever one
might think about the
progressivism he was try-
ing to usher in, Roosevelt
was man enough to admit
that what he was propos-
ing was a huge departure
from the past. Obama, on
the other hand, tried to
Linda
Chavez
cloak much of what he
said in soothing rheto-
ric, invoking his grand-
parents' Kansas roots
and depicting a long-lost
time when "hard work
paid off, responsibility
was rewarded, and any-
one could make it if they
tried — no matter who
you were, where you came
from or how you started
out."
This president
seems to think
that period in
American his-
tory is now gone
— and he blames
corporations
and the rich for
destroying it.
But he pulled his
punches in the
speech, never
quite owning up
to the implica-
tions of what he
was saying.
For example,
when Obama claimed
that "huge advances in
technology have allowed
businesses to do more
with less and made it
easier for them to set up
shop and hire workers
anywhere in the world,"
he never quite had the
nerve to describe how he
would solve the problem.
Teddy Roosevelt thought
big corporations were
the enemy of the com-
mon man and proposed
a Bureau of Corporations
to control their power.
Would Obama like to
prevent companies from
shipping jobs overseas?
No doubt he would — but
le won't say it directly.
Doing so might risk
his ability to raise politi-
cal contributions from
donors whose wealth
comes from profits made
because cheaper labor is
available offshore. And
it might offend many
middle-class, even poor,
people who realize that
their lives are better
because they have access
to cheaper goods made in
China, Thailand, Mexico
and elsewhere — goods
they couldn't afford if
American workers were
producing them.
So instead of launching
into a radical critique of
American capitalism, the
president hints around
the edges. He plays class
warfare, even while he
protests that he isn't.
Instead of embracing
redistribution of wealth
directly, he creates straw
men, as he did over and
over again in the speech.
He claimed that it's
unfair for construction
workers, teachers,, and
nurses earning $50,000
a year "to pay a higher tax
rate than somebody pull-
ing in $50 million," and
that a "quarter of all mil-
lionaires now pax lower
tax rates than millions
of middle-class house-
holds." He even said that
"some billionaires have a
tax rate as low as 1 per-
cent."
But as The Washington
Post pointed out, of the
top 400 wealthiest indi-
viduals in the U.S. in 2008
(the last year for which
such data is available),
most paid in excess of 35
percent in taxes and "only
17 had a marginal rate of
zero to 26 percent." Even
the Post acknowledged
that for this handful of
individuals, there might
well be reasonable expla-
nations why they paid so
little, including "that they
earned little or nothing
that year.
If Barack Obama were
really another Teddy
Roosevelt, he'd take his
chances and say what
he means. If he wants to
redistribute wealth and
tell corporations how
much profit they can earn
and how many work-
ers they must hire, let
him take his case to the
American people.
Linda Chavez is the
author of "An Unlikely
Conservative: The
Transformation of an
Ex-Liberal." To find
out more about Linda
Chavez, visit the Creators
Syndicate Web page at
www.creators.com.
NOTICE
If you miss your
Sweetwater Reporter you
should call evenings from
5:30-6:00 p.m.
Monday thru Friday.
If you miss your Sunday
paper please call from 8-
9:30 a.m., and we will con-
tact your carrier.
236-6677
The swi.r.rwMt.R reporter
rpWS 5300-8SGS is published daily
except Saturdays and holidays by HPC
of Texas Inc. (Periodical Postage Paid)
112 W. 3rd, Sweetwater, Texas 79556
Postmaster: Send address changes to:
SWEETWATER REPORTER
P.O. BOX 750.
SWEETWATER, TX 79556
City Delivery $9.00 per month, $90.00
per year, 6-months $50.00, 3-months
$26.00. By mail In-County Rates
3-months $36.00, 6-months $65.00,
12-months $115.00. Out-Of-County
Rates 3-months $50.00, 6-months
$88.00, 12-months $140.00.
Correction Policy
Editorial:
As a matter of policy, the
Sweetwater Reporter will
publish corrections of errors
in fact that have been print-
ed in the newspaper.
The corrections will be
made as soon as possible
after the error has been
brought to the attention of
the newspaper's editor at
236-6677.
Advertising:
Publisher reserves the right
to reject, edit or cancel any
advertising at any time with-
out liability. Publisher's liabil-
ity for error is limited to the
amount paid for advertising.
DEDICATED TO PROUDLY DELIVERING LOCAL NEWS SINCE 1881
V
__ Sweetwater
Reporter
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Sweetwater Reporter (Sweetwater, Tex.), Vol. 113, No. 334, Ed. 1 Wednesday, December 14, 2011, newspaper, December 14, 2011; Sweetwater, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth229637/m1/4/: accessed June 29, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Sweetwater/Nolan County City-County Library.