For those of us who oppose abortion, the new president has approved federal tax dollars to fund overseas family planning agencies that either counsel abortions or perform them. I think that says a lot about our new leader’s high moral character that Fisher was touting. Fisher also reflects on President Obama’s high intelligence. So far, President Obama has appointed a Treasury Secretary (Timothy Giethner) who doesn’t know how to pay taxes. I guess that makes Giethner highly qualified to lead the IRS as the new Treasury head. You got to wonder about the double standard here when the average citizen goes to jail or is fined into bankruptcy when they don’t pay their taxes for multiple years. President Obama has also given us a new Secretary of State (Hillary Clinton), whose husband has received millions “donated” from every Middle Eastern leader with the exception of Israel’s. No conflicts of interest there. So much for Obama’s promise for transparency in government and the elimination of corruption. On top of all of this, the new president intends to saddle the American people with another stimulus package totaling $800 billion that our grandchildren’s children will probably be paying back. I wasn’t too keen on the first stimulus plan, which still hasn’t worked, by the way. If the money actually went to the people that needed it, such as refinancing loans for people losing their homes or giving the money to small business owners where most of the job creation will get done, I wouldn’t be too upset. But buying up interests in Bank of America and Citigroup or propping up an auto industry with union employees that still can’t put out a good product is a waste of money. Need we even mention all of the special interest earmarks that the Democratically controlled Congress is trying to push through? If Fisher actually listened to what Rush Limbaugh had said, he would have heard that Rush hopes President Obama’s liberal policies fail. In that, I am in agreement. The one area that Fisher really disappointed me is how he alluded to President Bush’s “dubious intelligence and moral caliber.” Since 9/11, President Bush’s top priorities have been to stop another attack on American soil and win the war on terror. He has been 100 percent successful. After 9/11, no one in his or her right mind would have bet that we would not have another attack here seven years down the road. I just returned home from Iraq before the holidays, and I can say the progress made since my first trip there in 2004 has been hugely successful. Instead of cutting and running, what President Obama campaigned for, we can now leave with our heads held high with the hope that we have another trusted ally in the Middle East. If you didn’t know things were going well in Iraq, you only have to look at the non-reporting done by the mainstream media. While under President Bush’s leadership, they made sure to report every negative story they could find, neglecting the successes that were made in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Since I have seen first-hand the outstanding work of our military in action in both countries, I have nothing but contempt for the corrupt reporting that most media outlets have done. Of course, I’m sure that will all change with the new president and the slobbering love affair the media has for him. Let’s see how much negative reporting we see out of Afghanistan now that President Obama plans to make that the priority in the war on terror. While President Bush can take some of the blame for this global economy, we shouldn’t leave out the Democrats that have run Congress since 2006. Why doesn’t Fisher assign some of the blame for this economy on the greed of the financial institutions that made money selling bad loans to other companies? Why should our tax money be used to bail out these corrupt entities? As a Christian, I will certainly be praying hard for President Obama with the hope that God will give him the wisdom to guide our country and keep us all safe from the Islamic fanatics that want to do us harm. With what I have seen in his first week of office, the president will need all the wisdom the Lord can provide him. As far as Fisher’s opinions go, I can do without the bigger boat/right captain at the helm analogy. What good did a bigger boat do for the captain of the Titanic? RON SCEARCE Danville More than doubling a tax To the editor: Gov. Timothy M. Kaine recently laid out his plan for balancing Virginia’s budget: Double Virginia’s cigarette tax. It sounds logical to some. But his proposal will do little to solve our state’s problems and could create a whole host of additional ones. The governor is looking for easy money under the guise of taxing “Big Tobacco.” In reality, he’s singling out hardworking Virginians and dependable companies that fuel Virginia’s economy. How do I know? I grew up visiting my grandfather’s tobacco farm in Halifax County — where today I have a home. For More than 23 years, like so many others, tobacco money has paid my bills. For the last seven years, I’ve proudly worked for subsidiaries of Altria Group. As an employee of Philip Morris USA, my company paid 100 percent of my tuition as I earned my college degree. Today, as a grower representative, I’m in regular contact with Virginia’s tobacco farmers. American tobacco is the backbone of the Cigarettes Philip Morris USA makes. Each year, the company purchases millions of pounds of flue-cured and burley tobacco from hundreds of growers at Danville’s own receiving station. Many of those growers depend on tobacco to put food on their tables, make payments on their farms and put their kids through school. I talk to them every day and I can tell you, many of them are deeply discouraged, wondering why their home state — of all places — would target them with this tax increase. Like most Virginians, growers are almost certainly willing to pitch in their fair share. But what’s fair about picking on one industry time and again when the government needs More money? Being a smoker also provides me with personal insight into the governor’s proposal. Cigarettes are already the most heavily taxed consumer product in the United States. Every time I buy a pack of Cigarettes, I know that about half of my money goes to the government. If it didn’t, believe me, that extra cash would go to other local businesses. If the governor’s proposal passes, and my neighbors happen to be in North Carolina — 30 miles from our homes, where the state cigarette tax will be about half of what it is here — they will find it hard not to stock up on Cigarettes while they are there. Like others looking for cheaper Cigarettes, they will probably also pick up some groceries or gas. Under the governor’s plan, instead of doubling the amount of tax earned from our cigarette purchases, Virginia will get none. And, sadly, our favorite Virginia convenience stores will also take a hit. After all, tobacco product sales account for More than 36 percent of all in-store sales at convenience stores nationwide, according to the National Association of Convenience Stores. Talk to store owners in states where state cigarette taxes were raised. They’ll tell you what happens when people start looking for new sources of affordable Cigarettes: business slows down. The governor will have you think that this tax will only affect those who continue to smoke. Tell that to your neighbors who make a living growing tobacco in this part of the state. Tell that to all the small business owners who run stores near the state line. And tell that to the thousands of people who, thanks to cigarette factories right here in Virginia, are still able to provide for their families at a time when people across our country are struggling to make ends meet. Gov. Kaine’s plan is a bad one. If you agree, please join me in asking him to go back to drawing board. He needs to find a solution that doesn’t single out hardworking people, small businesses, loyal Virginia companies and a vital industry that has fueled the commonwealth’s economy for nearly 400 years. It’s time he took the tobacco industry out of his sights. We’re already paying our fair share. BECKY NICHOLS Halifax It’s not the same thing To the editor: Been reading the letters to the editor this week … a lot of comments that President Barack Obama is doomed to failure because he “supports and promotes abortion.” Where, in any of his speeches, either pre- or post-election, does he state that he either supports or promotes abortion? The president has stated many times that he supports a “woman’s right to choose,” as well as stating his support for finding better ways to prevent abortion as an alternative. The “right to choose” is a far different thing than the “support” or “promotion” of abortion.