Email letters, Oct. 28, 2011
Ballots must be in on Nov. 1
Just a reminder to all interested parties that your ballots for this year’s election are due on Tuesday, November 1, not November 8. Thanks to all of you for the lively debates about Referred Measure 3B and I encourage all of
you to vote “yes” on 3B because it is about the children, not the staff or the state. All the money stays in District 51. Be as involved as you want to be in how the money is distributed by attending the School Board meetings
and be informed. You can form your own opinion based on fact instead of forming your opinion off hearsay.
While I am at it, it is imperative that Cindy Enos-Martinez be reelected to the School Board for her unbiased views about funding public education to its fullest extent while not spouting gibberish about “rewarding” excellent teachers. Where will candidate Ann Tisue find these rewards”? Without the passage of 3B, there will be more cuts,
Editorial on protest was small minded
I found The Daily Sentinel’s Oct. 14 editorial tacked to my parents bulletin board on a recent visit to the Grand Valley, and I found it small-minded, under-researched, exclusionist, and adorned with hand scrawled expletives
from my mother. Titled “Protests are ‘occupied’ by publicity seekers”, the opinion piece called out the obvious. In eleven paragraphs the Sentinel managed to state, negatively, though the verbiage is far from volatile,
that the Occupy movement has no real demands. I would like to point out that the official demands are free health care and food for the occupation. Beyond that, the Occupy movement has no platform as a matter of course. While
not offering policy changes, ‘Occupy’ protesters offer something of greater value to our political discourse.
Surely the editorial staff of The Daily Sentinel have noticed the effectiveness of lawmaking and policy introduction in the United States. How’s that health care bill going, huh? Or even passing a balanced budget, hmm? Occupy asks for some critical thought of an observer, it asks “how can we surmount these obvious discrepancies between us and a truly enlightened society?” In the face of such profiteering as Wall Street engages in (Wall Street as a concept as oppose to geography, if I may), Occupy, with their disparate messages decrying whatever injustice or whatever inhumane malfeasance, offer the abstract notion that injustice, corruption, and manipulation occupy our every moment, and here we (citizens of the United States, fringe or no) will sit with our diverse signage condemning it.
It is an easy reaction, and an enlightened reaction, to just sit, occupy, and bring a statement. Demands become irrelevant within the context of “stop and think about it.” This non-violent demonstration has given the editorial staff of The Daily Sentinel, an opportunity to participate in real democracy, and you belittle it by your mediocre editorial. Citizens of the United States camping on public land are a perfectly harmless expression of democracy. Public lands, United States citizens, first amendment rights, and the primary constitutional right to assemble add up to the primary tenets of this nation. And you ask for a platform of demands or policy. It is as though the fumes of the presses have clogged your integrity circuits. The multiple demands of the diverse participants escape your notice. Occupy says “it’s possible, we can conquer injustice” and you say the participants are publicity seekers. Shame on you.
I challenge The Daily Sentinel. Your debt to the free-thinking journalists of this nation remains unpaid. Journalism by its very nature deals with the abstract; the Sentinel’s contribution being primarily the written word. A newspaper should embrace the abstract, and the Occupy movement exemplifies it. Occupy says “this or that” is wrong. And you know, “this or that” is wrong. More importantly, why not let people know “this or that” is wrong until it is right. Someone will create the policy. In the meantime, thank the stars above that someone brings a sign to the park condemning the outlandish profits of Wall Street, or condemning whatever injustice really. The Occupy movement has a statement of hope. It says I noticed injustice and I believe it can be solved somehow. The editorial, though it provoked this response, was not as hopeful.
Last bits: the comparison to the tea party I found distasteful and pandering; the inability to make a call to action I found irresponsible. While the writing of the editorial was far superior to the Sentinel of my youth, the message left something to be desired. Come on people, get on your horse and ride. What would Ed Murrow say, hmm?
O. MAX JOHANSON
End of the global warming debate
For billions of years the seas have risen and fallen as the earth warmed then cooled, glaciers formed and melted. Geologists, physicists, climatologists and other scientists have speculated and debated for over 100 years on the causes of these cycles. It has only been in the last decade or so that the solution to this problem has been rendered so crystalline clear by some of the greatest political minds the earth has ever known.
Not since the great religious scholars of Galileo Galilei’s time have such powerful minds been able to gain such far reaching truths on such confoundingly complex matters. Not even the great Albert Einstein was able to crack the problem. Indeed, we are privileged to be alive at this moment in time.
Living scientists have been blessed to be able to hone their expertise under the tutelage of probably the single most ambidextrous mind in the political realm, Al Gore, aided greatly by the federal grant process.
Al and the political science grantees (the Al-ees) have been able to explain 100 percent of the current global warming as originating solely through the actions of man’s presence on planet Earth. Al and the Al-ees, I suspect, are preparing to push even further into the unknown to determine how many of the cycles occurring during the previous two billion years were caused by the same factor. Delays in beginning the new assault for the truth has been attributed to insufficient grant moneys due variously to repeated failures by other great minds to get the economy back on track, and to backorders for additional printing presses.