Eddie Mae Binion:
A force of nature
The St. Louis community recently lost a tireless advocate for justice with the passing of Eddie Mae Binion. Eddie Mae worked on behalf of the poor and disenfranchised for over 40 years. Eddie Mae knew firsthand the struggle of poverty, against which she worked passionately. While raising her family in the Darst-Webbe housing project, she started the South Side Welfare Rights Organization, which is dedicated to fighting for the rights and promoting the dignity of those who receive public benefits in Missouri.
Eddie Mae always spoke "truth to power." She never was afraid to say what she believed on behalf of those who needed a voice. Over the years, she served on countless boards and commissions, including the State Medicaid Commission.
We at Legal Services of Eastern Missouri are proud that Eddie Mae served on our board of directors for 28 years. She truly understood and helped us to follow our important mission of equal access to justice for all as we provide civil legal representation to low-income people.
Ms. Binion received many awards and honors for her advocacy over the years. She was a force of nature — a force for good and a force for change. She made a real difference as a champion of social justice. We are all the better because of Eddie Mae's efforts on behalf of those in need.
Daniel K. Glazier — St. Louis
Executive Director & General Counsel, Legal Services of Eastern Missouri Inc.
Have pity
"Deeper state cuts loom" (Oct. 28) mentioned that there would be cuts to nursing homes and other things that touch the lives of older folks.
I don't know if the people in Jefferson City have loved ones in nursing homes, but if they did, they would know that conditions are not always the best and more cuts are not needed. If you have a family member in a nursing home, you want him to have the best care possible.
How would the politicians feel if they had to take a big pay cut to help with state finances? Or how about cutting their pensions, even for those now receiving them? Would they sit there and take it?
How can they easily take from people who have less than they do? They should have pity on those who are poor or need treatment and take the money from something that does not have feelings.
Roger Dieckhaus — Wentzville
Bailout assumptions
Regarding "Confidence: The fatal conceit" (Oct. 28), David Brooks column on executive pay: I disagree with Mr. Brooks' assumption that Washington is overconfident. I would say Washington just now is getting confident.
Mr. Brooks assumes that all these overpaid executive types are irreplaceable. I learned a long time ago that none of us, including high-paid executives, is indispensable.
If these executives really are worth what they are being paid, the economy would not be where it is today and their companies would not have required federal bailout money.
Mr. Brooks's comment that future Dick Cheney types would build on the authority to set executive pay assumes that future companies would require federal money to stay afloat. Not so. The only salaries affected are those of the executives of companies that have taken federal bailout funds.
Geraldine Jacobs — St. Charles
Fear for fear's sake
Job loss or finding a lump can be life-changing moments that can happen to anyone. For most Americans, the word "socialism" has a negative connotation. Politicians with taxpayer-funded insurance throw the word around in an attempt to discount the need for health care reform.
However, according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, socialism is "economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods."
Profit-driven motivation for the recent denial of coverage for a chubby baby and a skinny tot show that private insurance companies already are making choices in health care.
Former President Ronald Reagan's dire prediction that Medicare would dictate where doctors could live and practice has not come true. Seniors would not have been able to get any insurance without Medicare, as nearly all of them would be denied under the current system or would be required to pay discriminatory age-related premiums.
Single-payer or a public option with no opt-outs would get our nation back on track and restore our economy.
Just like the death panels, "socialism" is an attempt by the insurance industry to block reform. Please don't listen to the fear-mongers. Let's resolve this crisis that is stripping people of their savings, driving our economy into the toilet.
Karen Clark — Lake Saint Louis
Forget bipartisanship
For at least the last eight years, government regulators were not allowed to do their jobs. The country now is in an economic recession. The same people who caused the problems are trying to keep our leaders from fixing it. As a block, they are doing all they can to cause failure.
Every effort at bipartisan solutions is met with a unified "no" from the right, which even has its own news network to put out party propaganda filled with outright lies and distortions.
I hope our leaders will stop trying to be "bipartisan" and get on with making the changes they were elected to make.
Turning the other cheek to abuse from those who would turn back the clock to allow the robber barons to feast on the labors, strife and oppression of American is not the answer.
We need to show the right that it is wrong and that we're not going to take it anymore.
Richard W. Danyluck — Kirkwood
An unwinnable war
President Barack Obama soon must decide a strategy for the United States in Afghanistan. The strategy that would best serve the United States would be rapid military disengagement. The United States is fighting an unwinnable war.
Afghanistan is a thicket of tribes and subtribes, each fiercely independent, having its own agenda and suspicious of strangers. Even the Taliban is a loose alliance of groups. In Afghanistan, corruption is endemic and society is profoundly conservative. It is here where the United States must successfully defeat the Taliban. It is unlikely to do so.
The Taliban is ubiquitous, well-armed and organized, highly resourceful and motivated. The forbidding terrain and primitive infrastructure can deter the U.S. Army. Most Afghans don't like having Americans occupying their country. It is a stretch that Gen. Stanley McChrystal's counter-insurgency strategy — military occupation of thousands of villages and towns so as to protect and win over the local population that sustains the Taliban — can succeed.
The other reason to get out of Afghanistan is that what is happening there — and in Iraq — is important only for the people who live there.
The United States' deep involvement in the internal affairs of those countries has distracted and kept it from influencing the forces that are shaping parts of the world that really do matter — India, China, the European Union — while diverting attention and resources from its domestic problems.
Mr. Obama must extricate the United States from Afghanistan or the war will destroy his presidency.
J.M. Haas — Kirkwood
