Seeking answers to ongoing issues with the Lake and dam areas.
I have been preaching for some 25+ years regarding our Scotts Creek Dam. If they had built it 25 years ago when I was complaining it would probably have been one half the cost. All the plans, research, drilling for the dam, spillway and the head of the dam would have been completed more than 25 years ago.
All we need today is money to buy out the property owners in the dam area. Let’s face it this is a no brainer. wouldn’t it be nice if the dam would have been built 25 years ago? Right now we would be having water running down Scotts Creek over to Middle Creek and into Clear Lake and go out in Capay Valley to charge the wells in that area. But instead we choose to ignore the fact so we get big winters flooding everyone on Clear Lake ruining very nice houses along the lake in Corinthian Bay, Lands Inn, and Buckingham Park where all the expensive homes all get damaged by the floods. The floods go right down to Capay Valley and the politicians choose to ignore all of that.
Now if we do nothing about the dam in the very near future we will have to change the name from Clear Lake to Algae Lake, Mud Lake or Stink Lake, because of the lack of water in Clear Lake. It does not take many brains to figure out what we should be doing. I would like someone to give me an answer to what our future plans are for water, upgrading our lake or business as usual.
The time is now for all our politicians big, small, little and in between to get together and come up with a plan. After all, the people of Lake County have been hurt year after year, flood after flood, drought after drought and nothing happens. Everyone knows how to get a hold of me if you have any questions call me, my cell phone is in the front of the Penny Saver weekly with my solar advertisement. So you can call me on the phone and give me your opinion.
I know John Garamendi and Mike Thompson are very smart people and above all, everyone in Lake County still votes.
—Ron Rose, Lakeport
Countering Coulter’s ‘Voting Rights’ article
It is tempting (and laughably easy) to counter Coulter’s ridiculous tome from June 14, 2021 point for point with reasoned arguments. But the question that continued to haunt me when I began was “Why bother?”. Essentially, her assertion is that the “sleazy election bills” Democrats propose to combat the many unfounded voter suppression bills racing through state legislatures are intended to give an advantage to Democrats.
The main problem with that assertion is that many of the same state legislators made it easier for citizens of their states to vote because of the COVID-19 pandemic. The reasoning was that mail-in ballots, early voting, and other such methods were necessary because democracy depends on the right to vote to be as unhindered as possible. The theory was “unmotivated voters” will be vastly outnumbered by the “good voters” who are blessed to lean Republican. There was no concern about voter fraud because there was no significant evidence to show any risk. The great danger to democracy that COVID-19 posed, would be conquered, which was attested to by the Republican officials of those same states who certified the 2020 election results.
Coulter herself sums up the blithe attitude about the non-voters Republicans counted on to win the election for Trump:
“The Democrats have a lot of what we call ‘unmotivated voters.’ Risk their lives to vote? They won’t risk missing a couple hours of TV. These are people who don’t pay attention to the news (that’s why they’re Democrats); don’t speak English (that’s why they’re Democrats); or don’t have a fully developed pre-frontal cortex because they’re under the age of 26 (that’s why they’re Democrats). And so on.”
So what went wrong for Republicans? Why does Coulter so tellingly undercut her own ridiculous position in this article? Well, to put it simply, the unmotivated voters were motivated to show up in numbers that exceeded any historical precedent.
It is telling that Coulter does not mention Republican efforts at voter suppression once in her article. Instead, she uses the same tired old Coulter-ish ad hominem attacks against her favorite Boogey people.
Democratic bills to counter voter suppression attempts are greeted with the now vogue post-truth double-speak of Republican racism: “Unless Republicans agree to ludicrous voting rules that give Democrats a partisan advantage, they’re racist.” Ahh… she doth protest too much!
—Clovice A. Lewis, Jr., Kelseyville
Crowing without feathers (in one’s cap)
Today our politicians are crowing loudly about 55% of targeted Americans being partially vaccinated, and maybe 45% being fully vaccinated, as if these numbers are the equivalent of summiting Everest.
Am I missing something here? At school, getting it 50% right would earn a student a grade of F.
I get that most people don’t trust the government and most never learned much science in school. But these social failures are the fault of leadership.
The founding fathers were clear about what was needed for real political leadership: knowledge, experience, and virtue (selfless personality).
The founders wanted leaders who had knowledge of political science, and particularly the difference between republicanism (“democracy”) and elected monarchy.
The founders wanted leaders who entered local public service and stayed there in a variety of capacities for a long time.
The founders wanted people who did not care for fame, fortune, or control, but merely the opportunity to educate others, serve the majority, and preserve the rights of the minority.
Is there one such politician serving anywhere in the United States today?
—Kimball Shinkoskey, Woods Cross, Utah
