Readers Write (Oct. 18): Residential development, Ebola, Obama's legacy, dorkdom

The Oct. 16 story about developers seeking to subdivide lots in an old Golden Valley neighborhood ("Timeout taken on dividing older lots") certainly spotlights the difference in motivation between outside business interests and the rest of us. Developers' focus is on making money — often without regard for damage caused by their projects. Homeowners' focus is on protecting the quality and character of their neighborhoods for themselves and for their children.

One of the developers cited in the story defended his position by saying that the older homes "don't meet modern standards." That spokesman also declared: "They're in rough shape." But he said that in the end, "we try to build what the public wants, what people will buy."

In a recent meeting with that developer, residents asked if building one large home on one large lot had ever been considered. The response was that such a course of action would not be profitable.

Homeowners fighting the developer invasion are, for the most part, longtime residents. They moved to the neighborhood because of its unique and very special qualities. They do get "choked up" about that being taken away.

It would appear that the city may be justifying its moratorium action on the basis of one of the objectives of the planning commission's comprehensive plan: "Protect and respect traditional neighborhoods."

Doctors Without Borders, the World Health Organization, the Centers for Disease Control and West African countries all say they need more money to accomplish their mission. The federal government has received a great deal of criticism for inaction and inaccurate statements to the press. In response, the president appointed a political ally, one with no medical experience, to recruit and head another layer of expensive bureaucracy — instead of providing the needed aid. Are there no qualified heath care leaders in the entire administration? Or is it that the president feels the country needs a better spin doctor?

• • •

At this time when our country so desperately needs information from someone "in charge," why we don't have a permanent appointee for surgeon general — someone who would fill that obvious void?

• • •

2014 U.S. Ebola deaths: One. Outrage!

U.S. gun deaths a year: Tens of thousands. Crickets.

• • •

If everybody worrying about Ebola invested that same effort in simply driving more carefully, thousands of lives would be saved.

• • •

Quality nursing care, within the hospital environment, has been and will continue to be the dominant force within health care for positive patient outcomes. A nurse brings compassion, care and a calming demeanor to the bedside.

As we work our way through the concerns of Ebola, I would ask that those who represent a portion of nurses come alongside all nurses and bring with them a drama-free public presence in a methodical, evidenced-based approach to the issues presented. The media has the ability to fan the flames of fear; let us remember that we are here to reassure.

The writer is a registered nurse.

The Oct. 15 commentary "Perhaps the verdict on Obama is not yet in" represents an academic spin on failed presidential leadership and a lack of understandable national or foreign-policy vision. The writer paints the Obama administration as a feather floating in the vicious hurricane of political partisanship, as if partisanship is some new historical political event, an utter absurdity. He tries to minimize the extent of Obama's own partisanship when early in his first term, holding supermajorities in both houses of Congress, he rammed through expensive, unpopular and ineffective health and economic policies with virtually no bipartisan input, resulting in his losing control of one house of Congress two years after first being elected president.

The Obama foreign "policy" is unintelligible and, coining a phrase from his campaign, "allowing the planet to heal" has resulted in death, destruction and pestilence to an extent not seen since World War II. I, for one, have seen enough of his "vision" and want no more of it.

• • •

It seems every day I read about President Obama's dismal job approval ratings. Here are the lowest approval ratings for the past nine presidents:

• Obama: 38 percent, in September 2014.

• George W. Bush: 25 percent in October 2008.

• Bill Clinton: 37 percent in May 1993.

• George H.W. Bush: 29 percent in July 1992.

• Ronald Reagan: 35 percent in January 1983.

• Jimmy Carter: 28 percent in June 1979.

• Gerald Ford: 37 percent in March 1975.

• Richard Nixon: 24 percent in August 1974

• Lyndon Johnson: 35 percent in 1968.

Obama's approval ratings this month have been above 40 percent.

For more than 46 years, we have done well in our careers and our marriage by being conscientious, following rules, working hard, being reliable and controlling our impulses. We thought we were being adults, and found the results kind of cool. Now an article in the Oct. 13 Variety section tells us that, for doing that, we are "dorks." Now we are questioning our whole approach to life, as well as our general self-worth. But with the enlightened help of articles like this, perhaps we still have time to become interesting people before it's all over.