Typical liberal reply wasn't about issues

This letter is in response to the ad hominem attack on me in an Oct. 2 letter by Shelia Burris of Elgin.

Apparently, Burris took issue with my letter criticizing how Democratic presidential candidate Edwards would pay for his utopian schemes to cure the ails of America.

Instead of debating the issues, Burris accused me of sounding "like a very, very self centered person" and one who "must be one of those rich" who is favored by tax cuts.

Burris continues her diatribe against me by saying that I don't care for those families who have lost loved ones because I favor the war on terrorism.

Hers is a typical response from a liberal who cannot discuss issues without resorting to personal attacks.

For her information, I have spent most of my adult life providing services for those with limited means. That does not qualify me as being rich in the monetary sense of that word. I have also worn the uniform of my country fighting in the jungles of Vietnam and have seen up close the destruction and experienced first hand the deprivation that soldiers face on a daily basis.

I care very much for those soldiers on the front lines. These men and women are making sacrifices that only a veteran truly understands. The war on terror is not just a slogan for a bumper sticker, as her hero, Edwards, would have you believe.

Freedom comes with a price that few are willing to pay. It's much easier to talk about spending money "for the children" and "free health care for the poor."

Well, the devil is in the details. The late economist, Milton Friedman, said it best, "There's no such thing as a free lunch."

As a conservative, I have a healthy suspicion of anything that's "free" and that will solve everything, because in my experience, there's always a hidden cost and every solution breeds its own problems.

Tom L. Jones

Pingree Grove