Letters to the editor for Sunday, March 25, 2018
The times they are a-changin’
In following my thoughts in a recent letter I wrote to the editor regarding older men and their inability to change:
The world is changing! This changing world is evident in the election held in Pennsylvania congressional district 18. Just look at the optics, Lamb vs. Saccone, a young Marine vs. an older legislator.
The era of grumpy, angry, senior, conservative white men is ending. The world view of the ’30s, ’40s and ’50s that these men grew up in is no longer effective. These men have to be willing to change. Our elected officials need to be futuristic and listen to the wants and needs of today’s people. We want smart gun laws and immigration laws and laws and regulations that work for the future, not the past or just your pocketbook.
Look at our teenagers across this country. These are the people of the future. Our senior men need to set examples of integrity and wisdom looking to the future. It is going to happen! We need to respect the rights of all human beings. Our elected officials have to do the right thing.
To all the old white men, thank you for your service. Sadly, if you can’t grow with the times, then your service is no longer needed.
Controlling guns is really about controlling people
Following every tragic shooting, there is the hysterical cry for gun control. It may be about bump stocks, assault rifles, semi-automatic weapons, age limits, mental health evaluations, high-capacity magazines, or any number of complaints against the NRA. In response, there are always the arguments based on self-protection, the Second Amendment, sports and hunting, history, and the bad performance of gun control measures in many areas.
What is forgotten is that the left uses the emotional pleas of “protecting our children,” “safe streets,” “domestic violence,” “law and order,” or “do-nothing politicians” to frame their arguments. But, those are all smoke and mirrors. What they really want is to disarm us all, just like fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, Red China, Communist Cuba and North Korea.
Whether it is International Communism, National Socialism, Democratic Socialism, Fascism or the New World Order under the United Nations, the goal is the same — CONTROL. That control is impossible when the civilian population is armed and prepared. Every tyrant from Xerxes to the present understands that principle. Even Machiavelli warned Lorenzo de’ Medici of this in “The Prince.” Every civilization that hasn’t recognized that fact has paid the consequences.
In truth, the left doesn’t care about any of their “arguments” for gun control. What they are after is PEOPLE CONTROL. If they can’t get their way by legitimate means, they will impose it on an unarmed people. Once we realize this truth, we can actually do something constructive about the situation. Meanwhile, money, time, energy and lives get wasted.
Eugene C. Duncker
Hypocritical liberals too harsh on Trump
Based on what I read in the letters to the editor, I am wondering, what do liberals really believe and what do they want? My conclusion is that they have no solutions to the issues facing our country but are quite good at attacking anyone who expresses views contrary to their own. The attacks are vicious and often quite personal.
Fred LaSor, whose columns are very well written and factual, is a frequent target as is our president, Donald J. Trump.
Even Guy Farmer, whose column I look forward to reading, occasionally goes off the rails when it comes to Trump. “Racism,” “sexism,” “homophobia,” are terms that are frequently used by liberals when they have no facts to support an opposing viewpoint. Hypocrisy runs rampant with the liberals when it comes to defending their positions on abortion, gun control, immigration, border security, taxes and other significant issues. Identity politics seem to be high on their list of priorities, and I can’t think of a more divisive political strategy. How about middle class tax cuts, job growth for all citizens, low unemployment and the highest rate of employment for minority blacks and Hispanics in history, economic growth approaching 3 percent GDP, thank you, DJT. Obama could only dream about such growth and employment numbers.
Trump’s list of accomplishments in his first year are impressive and too numerous to mention here and never forget that in Obama’s first term it took two years for Harry Reid to get Obamacare passed, and now it is slowly being dismantled.
Clearing up language of the Second Amendment
I read Mrs. Paslov’s thoughtful commentary on the Second Amendment, and I agree with her wholeheartedly, but I would add the caveat that you must read it in its entirety with knowledge of the language AT THE TIME it was written.
Specifically, her attention to the term “well regulated.” At the time the amendment was written, “well regulated” meant “in good working order.” Thus, while it would be nonsensical to have a “well regulated clock” in the legal sense, it is perfectly clear when we find that term being used to describe clocks as early as the late 1600s, and in fact many clocks from that era proudly have that term embossed upon their back plates.
“Well regulated” was also used to describe a business office that performed its duties in a particularly efficient manner, but nowhere, at the time that the Second Amendment was written, is “well regulated” used in a legal manner.
So, why is that term used in the Second Amendment? Simple, for a militia to be in good working order, the guns, too, must be in good working order, so the people kept the guns at home.
No apologies for correcting the facts
Otto Mark Tarvainen thinks I owe Fred LaSor an apology for debunking his conspiracy theories. I don’t think so. Otto claims that Eric Holder was found in contempt over Fast and Furious. House Republicans convinced themselves the AG had prior knowledge of the operation, and when Holder asserted executive privilege over thousands of internal DOJ documents, he was charged with criminal contempt on a party-line vote. That charge was thrown out of court, but all documents were provided, and they showed that the ill-fated operation had been planned and executed by an inept group of ATF agents in Phoenix, as Holder had testified.
The sale of Uranium One to Russian interests required approval of nine federal departments. State Department approval was the responsibility of Assistant Secretary of State Jose Fernandez, who testified that Secretary Clinton “never intervened” in such matters. Also, 90 percent of the $145 million Clinton Foundation donations associated with Uranium One came from Frank Giustra, the company’s Canadian founder, who sold his stake in 2007.
Otto doubles down on Fred’s claim that the IRS targeted conservative groups in their investigation of tax-exempt advocacy groups. In reality they looked at all “dark money” groups, including the National Rifle Association, Planned Parenthood and the Sierra Club, without political bias.
Otto goes onto repeat Fred’s erroneous claim that the FISA court was not told that the Steele Dossier was created as opposition research on behalf of both Republican and Democratic campaigns. Not that it mattered, as the FISA court is only interested in the credibility of the source, and nobody has more credibility on Russia than former MI-6 master spy Christopher Steele.