Readers’ Comments 3-23-18

Quitting the democrats

Dear Editor:

In response to “Another open letter” published in the COURIER on March 16:

The writer suggests that the time has come for Democrats to resign from the Democratic Party. Given the world of Trump we find ourselves in these last 14 months, with its record-breaking hiring and firing, its war on the media and on the FBI (this from the party of law and order, by the way!), its loose handling of truth, not to mention the ever-present chaos and crass behavior, I would suggest this is the time, if ever there were one, to embrace the inclusiveness of the Democratic Party.

I fully understand that to some Republicans the mere mention of “Democrat” causes a reaction somewhat akin to Linda Blair’s projectile vomiting and head spinning in the ‘70s film The Exorcist, but I see absolutely nothing to attract me to the current Republican Party.

Even many thoughtful conservatives feel the party has abandoned them. I don’t want to go back to the 1950s fantasy land of Father Knows Best and Leave It To Beaver, to an America that was mostly one shade (white), in which women were largely marginalized, and the closet was standing room only.

Those ships have—mercifully—sailed, and while we still have a lot of work to do as a country, I refuse to be motivated and governed by fear and paranoia (the wall-builder mentality); rather, I choose to embrace a diverse and inclusive society.

We may not be perfect, but perfection is not easy to come by in a country of roughly 325 million. Thus to the writer’s assertion that the Democratic Party leadership is rife with sex offenders and corrupt criminals, I would suggest that neither party has a lock on the purity that allows for the throwing of stones in glass houses. 

Further, I do not see evil only in my ideological foes; rather, in those who narcissistically embrace a brand of authoritarianism that is about as anti-American as it gets.

Don Linde

La Verne

 

City council, be polite

Dear Editor:

My disclaimer is I don’t know anyone who works for Edison. This is regarding the city council for scolding Edison Company for an extended outage. Shame on you. If my child said to your child you deserve a black eye that would be bullying.

The Edison company had two unpredicted events leading to the prolonged outage. There was water in the work area, and a person responding to a 911 problem. They were also working in a very small space. Working in water with electricity sounds dangerous to me, so it would be better to work slower and not get electrocuted.

I am sorry the business owner lost income for the day. We have many events such as wind, fire, earthquakes, car accidents and power lines down that can cause unexpected loss of electricity. Maybe the business (and individual households) should invest in a generator. Natural unpredicted events can happen.

Maybe the council members could have reached out to the businesses explaining to them the problem Edison Company was having instead of fueling the anger and antagonizing them.

We should be building good relationships with our utility companies. Instead of placing blame, take this as an opportunity to reinforce to businesses and individual households that we should be prepared.

Mary A. Krahn

Claremont

 

How Lowe can you go?

Dear Editor:

This letter is in response to the delusional, disrespectful and frankly disturbing letter Donna Lowe wrote to the COURIER last week.

I had to read it several times to try to figure out if she was actually serious or just attempting to be funny or ironic. Sadly, I determined it to be the former.

From the truly disgusting analogy of Democratic organizations offering “candy that the stranger offers the child if he or she gets into the car” (who would even think to use as an example like this?), to admitting that all of her research is “just made up” (I guess facts do not matter to her), I am beyond saddened and shocked to read these words from someone who once ran for public office (and lost). This is party politics at its worst.

Ms Lowe’s letter stated that “Democratic members are not serial sex offenders or corrupt criminals,” but that the “organization itself keeps putting such people in positions of leadership.”

Although her letter was completely fact free, perhaps she should try these: Donald Trump endorsed accused child molester Roy Moore. Our president—and I don’t care what political party he is attached to—is being sued by a porn star for an affair that allegedly took place soon after Melania gave birth to their son. Further, Mr. Trump’s personal attorney paid $130,000 in hush money to cover it up.

Two more women (a Playboy Playmate and an Apprentice contestant) this week have come forward and are also claiming sexual misconduct and filing suit, along with 17 to 19 other women. I lost count of how many women who have come forward with similar complaints.

In his own words and voice that we all heard (and that was not altered), he has bragged about assaulting women because “he can do anything,”?up to and including grabbing their private parts.

He also just called war criminal and US adversary Vladimir Putin to congratulate him on his reelection win even though all of our intelligence agencies agree that Russia did in fact meddle in our election process; not to mention that he has been implicated in nerve gassing a father and daughter in London this week.

And finally, the revolving door of almost 50 percent of his own top-level government appointees (32 of 65 as of March 15) either quit or were fired, with more rumored to be on the way out. And how about the four Trump advisers who have either been indicted or who have already pleaded guilty to felony charges? And all of this, and more, chaos in just over a year.

This is not an anti-Republican response. There are bad politicians on both sides. There are good politicians on both sides. But when Ms. Lowe concluded that Democrats “see evil never where it actually exists, but always and only in its ideological foes,” I have to wonder: Did she read what she actually wrote before she sent it in? Ironic indeed!

Mari Cruz

Claremont

 

Accident waiting to happen

Dear Editor:

I have witnessed multiple near-misses between cars driving too fast along Sixth Street and people jaywalking across Sixth from Amherst Avenue. As such, I am greatly concerned that someone is going to be hit sooner or later.

Although people should wait for a crosswalk, many people would have to walk out of their way to get to the other side of the street, and as such choose to cross where it is convenient.

Furthermore, long boarders and the like tend to shoot straight down Amherst, crossing Sixth without slowing down. This foolish action is risking severe harm to both the person in the car and the person on the street.

To prevent a fatal accident, something should be done. Either Claremont police should begin to enforce jaywalking laws, or the city needs to install some sort of signage warning drivers that that intersection has heavy foot traffic. Otherwise I am fearful of a horrific and preventable accident in the future.

Grace Wilson

Claremont

 

I won’t quit

Dear Editor:

Resign from the Democratic Party? No way! Despite the human frailties and errors that afflict all human organizations, I will always support the Democratic Party. Here’s why.

Since the late 1800s, the Democratic Party has supported trickle up economics, while the Republican Party has supported trickle down.

Trickle-up economics really works.  Employees, the unemployed and their family members spend the bulk of their income on goods and services. This creates revenues for businesses, which in turn need to hire more employees, buy supplies and equipment, and rent or buy space to meet customer demand.

The economy grows, producing more jobs, income, goods and services for all.  Everyone benefits—rich, middle class and poor—and this further increases the trickle-up in a virtuous cycle.

Trickle-down economics is unreliable and can even be harmful. Businesses only invest in more employees, supplies, equipment and space if they need them to meet customer demand, i.e., if there’s growth in trickle up. So trickle down only works in response to trickle up. 

Otherwise, instead of increasing production, publicly-traded businesses buy back their own stock to boost its price or buy another company to reduce competition. They even borrow to do so, because their revenue from consumer purchases isn’t enough to pay for it all. 

The wealthy buy assets (like stocks, bonds, works of art and classic automobiles), thereby pushing their prices up.

Consumers borrow to get an education and to maintain or improve their standards of living, because their earnings aren’t keeping up. These things are happening now. Eventually business and consumer debt becomes burdensome, price bubbles in securities and collectibles burst, and there’s a recession. I would call that a vicious cycle.

Government policy on taxes, labor relations, minimum wage, overtime and other economic factors should support increases in the spendable income of middle- and lower-income residents, thereby creating the virtuous cycle of trickle up—instead of increasing the income of the wealthy who already have more than enough money and who won’t buy enough consumer goods and services to create the virtuous cycle and instead of merely decreasing the taxes of corporations without creating conditions for growth in their sales. 

The Republican Party won’t do this; in fact, it’ll do the opposite. The Democratic Party will work to overcome Republican Party resistance to it.

Bob Gerecke

Claremont

 

Safety solutions

Dear Editor:

A question for Leslie Watkins: Can you explain, in detail, how exactly does one go about “being in charge of their own safety in public” when facing down the barrel of an AR-15?

Also, the statement that no one has a duty to protect students is incorrect. Besides their parents and teachers, a decent society has a duty to protect children.

Gina Ortiz

Claremont

0 Comments

Submit a Comment

Share This