|
Commentary/Politics -
Letters to the Editor
|
|
|
Wednesday, 25 April 2007 02:14 |
|
I
was appalled to read your article lauding The Seven Project. (See
"The Seven Project Means Hope for Teens," River
Cities' Reader Issue 627,
April 4-10, 2007.)
This
is a church-sponsored program, an evangelical effort of the
Assemblies of God church. However, your article (and the resource you
quoted) made no mention of that fact.
|
|
|
Commentary/Politics -
Letters to the Editor
|
|
|
Wednesday, 04 April 2007 02:19 |
|
Within
the next two weeks, the Iowa Senate will be debating
early-childhood-education legislation (HF877) to create new programs
that will provide voluntary preschool education for four-year-olds.
The concept is a good one, but the current proposal has some
problems.
|
|
Commentary/Politics -
Letters to the Editor
|
|
|
Wednesday, 07 March 2007 02:38 |
|
Although
I have not been a dedicated reader of the Reader,
I have never seen criticism of it as "anti-business." (See
"Defining Pro-Business News," River
Cities' Reader Issue 622,
February 28-March 6, 2007.) What people need to understand is that
criticism is often a great way for businesses to understand their
weaknesses and improve on them. Since a business can never
objectively look at itself, it should rely on the feedback of clients
and the community to identify and solve problems or expand and grow.
|
|
Commentary/Politics -
Letters to the Editor
|
|
|
Wednesday, 28 February 2007 02:17 |
|
Davenport
has a glorious history of birthing newspapers - 150 in 171 years.
Yet even the mud-caked, hand-cranked press of the old Daily
Gazette, which fell off the
gangplank into the river, could have printed a clearer picture than
the Quad-City Times
as to what Davenport citizens will lose if their council eliminates
all four standing committees.
|
|
Commentary/Politics -
Letters to the Editor
|
|
|
Wednesday, 07 February 2007 02:36 |
|
It
was the Gisswold v. Connecticut
case in 1965 that struck down state laws prohibiting married couples
from using birth control; the law was ruled unconstitutional because
it violated marital privacy, a right protected by the Constitution.
|
|
|
|
|
<< Start < Prev 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next > End >>
|
|
Page 14 of 50 |