Ask yourself
Bill Wink’s argument to vote for Trump was quite concerning. He wants us to “…ask yourself if you want her (USA) to survive as the Country our Founders gave to us …” Does this mean the one with slavery and women weren’t allowed to vote? Where three fifths of all slaves were counted for House of Representatives purposes but not allowed to vote?
When Mr. Wink says, “Trump is promising a return to law and order …” does he mean that ‘stop-and-frisk’ is OK? That profiling is OK? That electronic surveillance without warrant is OK? He appears to be saying that there is, currently, no law and order.
And the Constitution meaning exactly what it says? I thought that when the second amendment starts with, “A well regulated militia …” that the single sentence would have something to do with State militias. The Supreme Court appears to disagree with that assessment. And not even all of the members of the Court appear to agree with each other on what the meaning is. Can this mean that the exact meaning of the Constitution is up for debate?
And what is this with Trump wanting to change the libel laws so when a newspaper prints “untrue” things about him, he can more easily sue them. Is this the freedom of the press our founding fathers envisioned?
Kevin Bracken, Kelseyville
A demonstrative pronoun
I neither know Miss Thomas nor her teacher in Lower Lake, but I do know an unfair rant when I read one! Miss Thomas has refused to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance in protest for the unfair treatment of her Native American ancestors. People protest in order to right a legal or moral wrong. How can the wrongs that the Native Americans suffered until late into the 19th century be made right today? (Genocide and Vendetta describes the horrible atrocities committed against the Native Americans in Mendocino and surrounding counties.) The fact is that the victims and the victimizers are dead and have been dead for over a hundred years.
There is no way the victims can be saved or the perpetrators of their suffering be punished. Thus, when the teacher apparently stated, “Those people, they’re not alive anymore, your ancestors,” the teacher was attempting to communicate this point to the young lady. Mr. Wong wrote an essay, attempting to show that the choice of the demonstrative pronoun “those” was an indication of racism. Would the sentence have been different if “those” were changed to “these”? What about, “Your ancestors are not alive anymore,” which means the same thing”? If the teacher is to be castigated, it should be for mangled syntax, not racism!
The point is that protesting something that happened over 100 years ago is meaningless since no redress is available. A protest only has meaning if one is attempting to publicize a redressable action. Miss Thomas should be trying to change the reservation system, which is the worst action ever taken against Native Americans and still exists today. The reservation system has kept Native Americans from being integrated into the general culture. Native Americans feel left out, isolated, alien. The reservation system heightens these feelings because it suggests that
Native Americans cannot “make it” in the general culture, which is wrong. The result of the reservation system has been all of the ills that Mr. Wong listed in his letter.
Charles Moton, Lucerne
Where it belongs
No question the Konocti Challenge brings economic benefit to some in Lake County. No question that the Konocti Challenge brings major traffic inconvenience to ALL in Lake County. Not all the Challenge routes have adequate bike lanes. Scotts Valley Road has weeds going out-to and in some places weeds are on the fog line! No bike lane — forcing bike riders into the traffic lanes. In addition not all riders ride single file. The Konocti “Challenge” is a race. Races belong on race tracks. When are we going to “Share the road” with NASCAR?
John Daniels, Lakeport
The first debate
Remember the movie Rocky? The debate featured the lifelong professional politician against the rookie and it went the full fifteen rounds.
I felt with all the help from the referee the professional was still only able to land a couple punches and was on the ropes herself a couple times only to have the referee step in and provide a couple body blows to the rookie to set him back.
That being said, there are two more debates to go and now the rookie has one under his belt. Now he knows how it feels, he has experienced her attacks and watched the referee run interference. He danced around the ring and managed to stay upright the entire time and just that fact says he was a big winner.
Now he, the rookie, can study the tapes and watch the professional’s behavior and he will learn her attack mode and he can evaluate his own performance against her. For the first time ever he has 90 minutes of video tape featuring himself against the professional to study and evaluate.
The professional on the other hand, even with the referee’s help was unable to put her opponent, the rookie, away. With her experience she should have won hands down instead of walking away watching her once lead in the poles dwindling. She brings so much baggage into the ring that sooner or later just the sheer weight of it could take her to her knees.
For the rookie, patience, the election is still many days away and there is plenty of time for the rookie to improve on the new skills he is acquiring in the political arena.
If I were in the professional’s corner I would be worried that we didn’t bury the rookie in round one because he will only get better.
And another issue is the need of the cut man. The professional has many signs she may require medical attention at any time, so will the cut man be able to keep the professional in the ring?
Bill Wink, Hidden Valley Lake
