Letters to the Editor - October 1, 2013

West Valley View's picture

Nullifying the nullifiers 2.0

Editor:

Mr. Nelson contradicted himself. First, he claimed to oppose abuse of power by the police and prosecutors (August 13th), but then tells us he opposed creation of Civilian Review Boards (August 30th) — which are designed to protect our freedom against such abuse! As usual, he’s a “channel” of misinformation!

I don’t care what he “thinks” or “believes”. I care about facts. He can believe the moon is made of green cheese, but that won’t make it a dairy product. Neither will “thinking” turn his nonsense about Nullification into truth.

That concept isn’t mentioned anywhere in the Constitution (neither expressly nor implied). As I’ve already noted, it has been rejected everytime it was raised: most spectacularly during the Civil War, and then (last century) during the fight over Integration. This isn’t a matter of belief, but of history! Nullification has never been part of the Constitution; after more than 200 years, it’s a little late to claim otherwise.

As for our legal rights, they most certainly come from the government — since in this nation “We, the People” are the government. We “ordained and established” both the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the 14th Amendment. (The latter prevents States from violating our rights, or can Arizona “nullify” that?) There can be as much “freedom” as we wish, but it must be established by the legal and constitutional process, not simply because he wishes it. Those are the facts, no matter what he “thinks”.

Finally, Ms. Maccree, the above applies to your nonsensical letter too. But (in addition) I must ask for some proof of the religious “muzzling” you mentioned. I know of none. (And I know of no Rabbi’s who ever provide “Christian guidance” on anything. There’s more than just one faith in this country, you know.)

Gordon P.R. Posner
Tolleson

 

Tax rates burden working class

Editor:

Well, thank you Mr. Tomaiko, for either completely not understanding my letter of September 16th, or not reading it, or for forgetting what it actually said during your anticipated response. My reference to your millionaire and billionaire leaders (I repeat — Limbaugh, Beck, Koch....) was to admonish you for using the aforementioned as heroes leading your Republican politicians on the course of constantly refusing to make the richest people in America pay the same tax rates as working class Americans, who can never get ahead because they have to absorb the burden of taxes for those silly government programs we need to remain a world leader. Those being, Social Security, Medicare, repairing or replacing crumbling infrastructures, disaster relief, health care comparable to the rest of the free world, National Parks, etc. etc. etc. I can’t help but throw in the Tea Party stuff right here. The Boston Tea Party was a protest of the Monopoly on American tea importation granted by Parliament to the East India Company (the richest tea company in the world).You know, like the monopoly the richest companies in this country have over tax incentives and deductions favored by your Republican politicians. I am glad that you have taken the responsibility to do some fact checking. The two republican legislation’s you refer to, however, favor international business in one instance and big business in the other, which is why they haven’t become law as of yet. Regarding your polls, remember they are the same polls that had you believing that both John McCain and Mitt Romney were your next Presidents!

P. Crocker
Goodyear

 

Spread the kindness

Editor:

In reference to letters from previous papers I thank those with a loving kind heart to remind us all that we are special. Each and every one of us. Letters from Roy Azzarello (Government is not the answer). (The answer is God) from Larry Cox and (The answer is Love) from Erin K.Y. Estes is a chain we must keep going. I do believe that many of us are relying on Government way too much to solve the problems in our nation. Each and ever one of us, one person at a time, can change the overall depression and fear that we are all feeling. Rich or poor, it doesn’t matter. If each of us reaches out and does something special for anyone we choose, even a stranger, our hearts will open up to what is really important in life. I’m sure many of you are doing this already but let’s take more time to do kind things. Spread the kindness everywhere you go. Tell the clerk at CVS her hair looks great today, help a woman at the gas pump, help your neighbor fix his fence, help someone carry their groceries, bake some cookies just because. The list can go on and on. As we do this, optimism will increase for all of us, to look forward to a brighter future.

Donna Arlands
Phoenix

 

Fraud is target, not food stamps

Editor:

I am writing in regards to the “Sack’s Opinion” cartoon on page 8 of the September 24, 2013 newspaper. I do not normally respond to Cartoons, but you had to go all the way to The Minneapolis Star Tribune to get this. The major problem is that it is obviously one sided.

Politicians to the right and center are not trying to stop the poor from getting the food and medical care they need. What they are trying to stop are the people committing fraud and those who can work but have no incentive.

There are many examples of people selling food stamps at half price and using the money to buy something unnecessary. This abuse was recently shown on a Channel 5 news report. The cartoon also doesn’t show the news footage of the woman who had the nerve to drive up to get the free turkey for the poor in her Cadillac SUV.

Most of the political arguments today are not about the law or constitution. They are about social issues. Most social issues were managed inside of the family or church. Things began to get out of control when the government started making life decisions with the use of money (of which some would call handouts). You can tell how valuable the family is when the government wants to run every part of life.

Lucretia Agostarola
Goodyear

 

Lawyer’s spin on Tea Party

Editor:

How do you know when a lawyer is lying? When his mouth is open. LOL.

Of course, that is not true of all lawyers. It is just one example of how every group has some bad elements.

However, when a lawyer starts pointing the finger at another group of people as being bad, doesn’t it make you want to laugh?

Such was the case recently in the Sept 24th letter by Mr.Posner where he baited the racism issue within the Tea Party again by saying, “...racists make up an unhealthy part of that [Tea Party] movement. Witness all the signs at their rallies depicting the President as a half-naked Witch Doctor.”

He failed to mention however, Tea Party organizers stressed that those who carry the signs are a few “bad apples,” according to the CNN article 9/18/2009.

He has also failed to mention the Tea Party has actually booted people found to be racist within their ranks.

Gotta love lawyers after all...they do make up an “unhealthy part” of our Congress, the Presidency, and the Judicial branch of our government.

If they would spend just half the time doing their jobs as they do spinning their opposition into being racists, this country would be a lot better off.

Perhaps it is time to get rid of the lawyers and replace them with teachers and merchants and doctors like Dr. Ben Carson.

Patrick Orr
Avondale

 

Spending cuts will hurt U.S.

Editor:

First, Mr. Nelson’s diatribe against “Obamacare.” His negative comparison of Congresswoman Pelosi to Fidel Castro is odious. The Affordable Care Act, that the Republican and Tea Parties have dubbed “Obamacare” is not unconstitutional as it was passed by the Congress, signed by the President and approved by the Supreme Court. It will not ruin the economy if enacted, as witnessed by the fact that hundreds of thousands of people will now be provided health coverage previously denied to them. Providing coverage to these hundreds of thousands of people will indeed increase the need for additional employees in the healthcare industry. The sequestration and the continued effort to reduce government spending will harm the economy and increase unemployment. Nor will seniors be killed due to the act, indeed, seniors are not even covered under the act, as they (and I) are covered by Medicare not “Obamacare.” Mr. Nelson’s opinions in his letter are completely without basis when one considers the facts.

Mr. Azzarello’s letter claiming that “opinions don’t need facts” is amazing. His attack on Mr. Posner for stating that facts are important is unbelievable. A high school freshman knows that you should not state an opinion unless you have facts to base your opinion upon. The trouble with much of the commentary we hear on the radio, television and internet today is that they are unsubstantiated opinions that completely without basis and yet people take them as facts without question.

Arnold Knack
Avondale

 

U.S. being subverted

Editor:

When very young, my family moved to Connecticut from Maine. I was enrolled in Catholic School and one of my many lessons from mom was that I show respect for all other Religions different from mine. Her logic was that we all have to find the road to God our own way. But until that time I should question the truth taught to me, she was law! So under this respect taught me is how all of us in America lived and as a child we all played together, stood together and loved together.

So why now is everything becoming subverted? Subverted it is!

It was on the news recently that our History books are being used to indoctrinate our children to Islam or Muslim as a very peaceful religion and how peaceful they are to those under their rule?

I question those words?? I haven’t seen or heard one ounce of peace in those people towards others who’s beliefs differ from their in over 55 years or more in my lifetime. Christian’s are being attacked everywhere on this planet. They come to America I assume to live in peace and there are no peace with them only a few.

Our President protects these murderers and murderers they are. The Boston bombers, the Texas base shooter. In Pakistan recently a human bomber went in a Christian church during mass and set himself off killing 81 people or more. His philosophy is (The Bomber) that he will receive seven virgins in heaven. What a shock for him when he stands before God and see’s the 81 murdered witnesses standing beside God looking upon the murderer sadly. The Bomber screamed as the darkness settled over him.

Killing in war is one thing. Killing indiscriminately is another.

Analie Maccree
Goodyear

Rate this article: 
Average: 1 (1 vote)

Comments

Gordon Posner    After reading all your comments, my opinion, based upon fact, which is the thousands of words you have been writing for years, is that there are none so blind as those who do not want to see. You Gordon fit that description perfectly.

Gordon Posner's picture

 

Dear Roy:

   Well, it's clear you're looking in a mirror again, because that perfectly describes you!

   (And hey, since all opinions are equally valid, that must be true.  Right?)

Gordon Posner's picture

 

 

Dear Ms. Maccree:

      When it comes to being “subversive”, I can think of nothing that better deserves that label than your piece of tripe. Not only is it subversive of truth, the Constitution, the things your mother taught you, but of simple human intelligence. (In fact, the latter is the reason for all the rest.)

      I wouldn’t be so quick to condemn Islam for violence, not given the track record of your own faith. To choose just the most obvious examples, there’s the Unholy Crusades, the Unholy Inquisition, and the Unholy Wars of the Reformation (during which Christians gleefully slaughtered one another over how to worship “the Prince of Peace”).

      And even though such violence has somewhat abated recently (due largely to the influence of the Enlightenment) there are still plenty of modern examples. (For example, the Bosnian Muslims slaughtered by Christian Serbs, The murder of doctors by “good” Christians in this country. And let’s not forget the attempts by Christians in Uganda to make homosexuality punishable by death!)

      On the other hand, during the Inquisition, and the Expulsion from Spain, guess where the Jews found refuge? Why in Muslim lands. (The Turkish Sultan actually thought the rulers of Spain had gone mad, since they were sending him all their best people!)

      Of course, similar incidents crop up in all religions, since there is no faith, or philosophy, human beings can’t muck up, and turn into an excuse for evil. Your faith is certainly no exception!

      It’s also apparent your mother didn’t instill in you a respect for “accuracy”. Pray tell just how the President “protected” the Boston Bombers? One of them is dead, the other will stand trial, and probably be sentenced to prison (or execution). If that’s “protection”, Obama’s doing a rotten job! The same thing can be said about the Fort Hood, Texas, shooter. Not much “protection” there.

      And how, pray tell, is the President responsible for what happens in Pakistan? (By the way, have you forgotten how many Muslims have been killed by Islamic extremists? How many Mosques they’ve destroyed? Apparently you have.)

      Our country was founded on respect for the rule of Law, and on principles such as Due Process (under which a person can’t be condemned without proof), Equal Protection, and religious freedom for all faiths. It’s part of what truly made America “exceptional” (until the rest of the world began catching up). Your obvious prejudice is subversive of all that.

      Your mother sounds like a wise woman. Too bad you learned nothing from her!

Arnold Knack after reading your comments about me in today's letter, my only question is    What planet are you from? You totally misquoted me to the point that I am wondering if you even read my letter or heard about it from a third party. If someone would take the time to go back nd read my letter from last week and then read your letter today and do some comparisons, I assure you that you would  probably look really stupid. Have a good day

Gordon Posner's picture

 

Dear Roy:

   As a citizen of the Bizarro World, you may be unfamiliar with the planet Mr. Knack is on.  It's called Earth, and (unlike your homeworld) the people here are capable of being rational.

   Knack "quoted" the title of your letter, which summarized quite accurately the "substance" of what you said.  (What little there was.)  You expressly declared that opinions need not be based on facts.  Of course, that subjective attitude means that all opinions are equally valid.  In which case, why should any of us pay attention to yours?  The opposite points of view are just as valid, and deserving of respect.

   Except, of course, you don't really practice what you preach.  You constantly inveigh against "Progressive" opinions, and declare them a threat to the nation.  (Never bothering to prove your statements, of course.)

   Sorry, Roy, but you're the one who constantly appears stupid.  And that's my opinion!

yesyesyesyesyesyes

Ok Roy I give up. I re-read both your silly article, and Arnold's response. Exactly how did he misquote you??

Or is it just your "factless opinion" that he misquoted you?

I think Gordon was wrong, you are not a comedian. However your writing is a joke!

Gordon Posner's picture

 

Dear Dennis:

   Well, maybe.  But I deign to point out that I was making an aesthetic judgment, and therefore facts and reason aren't necessary.  So, while I might have been wrong to consider Roy I commedian, in keeping with his "principles" I beg to state that my opinion on that topic is just as good as yours.

 

;-)

Dear Gordon,

I guess I have less tolerance for Roy's silly tirades than you do. I knew what you meant, it's just that he rarely writes anything of any value. If he is challenged, he simply says he was misquoted. Apparently he doesn't realize that the internet is forever.

Roy rather reminds me of Ev Mecham, nothing to say, but that doesn't stop him! lol

Dennis

P.S. I absolutely agree with you that Limbaugh is a comedian. His "ditto heads" are his dupes!

Gordon Posner's picture

 

Dear Dennis:

   To quote Judy: "Well said!"

yes

Patrick Orr   You really took it to Gordon, did you not? Although I thought you took no prisinors with your straight talk, I don't think Gordon is used to that kind of stuff being directed at him. Although that is exacctly how Gordon talks when he wants to straighted people out. All in all you told it like it is. Keep writing those letters.

Gordon Posner's picture

 

Dear Roy:

   Hate to burst your bubble, but I'm quite used to such abuse being heaped on me by "conservatives" with nothing of substance to say.  However, unlike you, I don't whine and cry about how they're trying to silence me (as you've done repeatedly on these pages).  Instead, I give as good as I get!  (With the critical difference being I provide facts to back up my statements.)

   As for Mr. Orr's tirade, he should be a little more careful before accusing someone of lying.  That kind of defamatory claim could end up getting him sued in to Bankruptcy!

   However, let's employ his own standard.  He claims I'm a liar because (allegedly) the Tea Party rid itself of its "racist elements" back in 2009.  So I guess we can rest assured that all such persons have been "purged" from a Tea Party that is now white as snow.  (Pun intended.)

   Too bad here's what I found with some quick research:

  1. Back in 2011 (a year after Mr. Orr's claimed "purge") your "beloved" (Glen Beck) was musing about there being racism in the Tea Party.
  2. In 2012, Inge Marler (Arkansas Tea Party Leader) made a racist joke at one of their events.
  3. This year, Danita Kilcullen (Fort Lauderdale Tea Party Leader) advised singer Toni Braxton to "Go be an African", after the latter expressed disappointment in the Zimmerman-Martin verdict.

   In short, racism just keeps seeming to pop-up in the ranks of the Tea Party, especially in its leadership.  Which may be why one of the early founders of that movement (Phil Russo) has complained about racism (and hypocrisy) being rampant in it. (Source: http://thegrio.com/2013/04/09/tea-party-is-over-ex-activist-says-racism-...)

   I merely made the eminently supportable statement that there were racists within the movement, not (as Mr. Orr seems to think) that the Tea Party was controlled by them.  (Though, given the above I may have to revise that view.)  But then, I believe in forming my opinions based on facts and reason, not just on whatever I wish reality was like.

   I note, as well, that Orr didn't respond to the rest of what I wrote, about the ignorance (some might say sheer stupidity) prevalent among too many members of that movement.  But given the above facts, and applying Mr. Orr's apparent standard of absolute accuracy, I have to ask: Who's the liar?  Rational people will say it's not me.

   (Of course, neither you nor Mr. Orr qualify.)

porr000's picture

Gordon Posner wrote:

As for Mr. Orr's tirade, he should be a little more careful before accusing someone of lying. That kind of defamatory claim could end up getting him sued in to Bankruptcy!

Is that a direct threat sir?

Did you seriously write that I am accusing anyone of lying?

You honestly couldn't be attempting to hurt my credibility in an online opinion forum by persuading the readership I did something I did not do?

Are you actually warning the readership that you will bring a law suit against anyone that opposes your viewpoints???

If so, then I believe it is a dark day for the exchange of ideas and opinions in journals and further tarnished the reputation of lawyers everywhere.

Gordon Posner's picture

 

Dear Mr. Orr:

   The only "threat" is that if you continue such conduct you may one day find yourself being sued.  I made no statement that I would be the one to do it.  Once again we see you creating a "strawman argument" by putting words in my mouth.

  Gee, you start your letter by commenting on lawyers lying. You then go on to talk about "a lawyer" who "starts pointing the finger at another group of people as being bad" (something I did not do, by the way).   Golly, sure sounds like you were accusing that particluar lawyer of lying.  (And the rest of what you wrote was more of the same.)

  Of course, both there (and in your Comments here, and to other issues) you've accused me of deliberately failing to mention pertinent facts.  A "lie of omission" as you correctly call such actions.  (Best illustrated by all the things you keep leaving out.)

   And talk about looking in the mirror!  You have constantly claimed "I did something I did not do" (accuse the entire Tea Party Movement of being racist).  Indeed, that lie is the basis for everything you've written!  All I have ever claimed is that racists make up an unhealthy part of that movement.  (Or, in your own words: "every group has some bad elements in it (the Tea Party Patriots included)".  I guess I should ask: were you lying when you denied the truth of what I said, or were you lying when you said that!

   (And before you try to weasel out of that one: Yes, I know you spoke about the Patriots, but they're a part of the Movement - so even if they were the only racists, or the only ones with racist members, there'd still be a racist part to the Movement.  Thus my words are still true - unless you think racism is healthy!)

   The "dark day" is already here.  I consists of people like you who feel you can freely defame others.  That works with public figures, thanks to "Progressives" on the Supreme Court who truly believe the First Amendment means what it says.  But that shield doesn't apply to private people.  (Whether any of us qualify is an open question.)  Furthermore, the shield falls if it can be proven you acted either knowing what you say is untrue, or with a reckless disregard for whether or not it's true.  Again, I think your behavior comes dangerously close to that.

   There plenty of people, public figures included, who have no qualms about suing for defamation.  Be careful should you try the same sophistry with them that you are employing against me.  As I previously told both Roy, I can take it, they may not.

 

porr000's picture

Your whole diatribe is based on your misunderstanding.

porr000's picture

Mr. Posner wrote:

"You have constantly claimed "I did something I did not do" (accuse the entire Tea Party Movement of being racist)."

Nope, not even dude. I never accused you of that.

Nowhere will you find me saying that YOU did that. You will however find me not understanding how Mr. Nelson could say that.

Again...well said, Mr. Orr.

Gordon Posner's picture

 

Dear Judy:

   Lather, rinse, repeat.

porr000's picture

In response to Roy's comments about my letter, Gordon Posner wrote he is "quite used to such abuse being heaped on me by "conservatives"

Well, I'm not entirely sure if he was referring to my letter or not, or to me, but my letter was completely non-partisan.

To suggest otherwise would mean opposing Posner equates to being conservative, and that couldn't possibly be what he is trying to say?

Gordon Posner's picture

 

Dear Mr. Orr:

   Really? Which part?  The part where you deliberately ignored what I had written in order to defend the Tea Party Movement (which, last I checked, was pretty much composed entirely of "conservatives" - though not all of them are racists).

   Or, maybe, it was in your Comment, where you quote a Republican to the effect that all the criticism about the Movement being "rascist" was a ploy by "Progressives".   Again, maybe I'm misinformed, but it seems to me that such accusation is coming entirely from "conservatives".

  Of course, to be technical, I merely said I was used to getting such abuse from "conservatives", not that it only came from conservatives.  (Remember, I was responding to Roy, who is most definitely a "conservative".)  For the record, I've endured similar sophistry hurled at me from the "left".  (It's remarkable how similar ideologues on either side tend to be.)

porr000's picture

Mr. Posner,

You misjudged my opposition to your baiting the issue once again with defence of the Tea Party? That is a twisted way to look at it.

I was not defending their actions, I was opposing yours. You keep baiting this issue with incomplete and unbalanced examples. Each time I look up a one of your "facts" I discover there is a lot more to the story than your version.

Let me be perfectly clear, setting a record straight is NOT being partisan or conservative. It is simply being truthful. I don't understand why you would be so contrary to it.

porr000's picture

Mr. Posner,

I'm sorry if you didn't care for my letter or Mr. Aazzarello's comments about it, but you have completely missed the point, that every group has some bad elements in it (the Tea Party Patriots included) and your race baiting about them is preposterous to say the least.

Instead, your comments focused entirely on the negative.

You even cited one example that supported my argument that the Tea Party has booted people found to be racist among their ranks when you mentioned that in 2012, a Tea Party Leader made a racist joke.

You failed to mention that she ended up having to resign over it. You failed to mention her comments were condemned by Tea Party in that state. You failed to mention her comments were not in the AK Tea Party approved speech that she was supposed to give.

There are many types of lies. Lying through omission is one of them, and lawyers are adept at it.. former arland Gov. Robert Ehrlich wrote a Baltimore Sun arguing that the racism charge is being used by progressives seeking to disredit the Tea Party and I agree with him.

As I have stated before in the comment section of my letter Sept. 10th, since you chose to attack my research rather than the proven falsehoods of Mr. E. Nelson on this subject, I just hope one day you and others will see the damaging effect you are having on this nation with your race-baiting and will seek redemption for your wicked actions. It is destructive by its nature and will not result in any positive outcome.

Gordon Posner's picture

 

Dear porr000 (or Mr. Orr):

   I missed no such "point" because, in fact, I made it first - in the very letter you take offense at (mine of Sept. 24th).  Allow me to quote its second sentence:

"While it's wrong to accuse the entire Tea Party of racism, there's no denying that racists make up an unhealthy part of that movement."

   Tell me sir, which of the words "wrong", "entire", or "part" were too difficult for you to understand?  You're so quick to accuse me of being a liar (when I could merely be misinformed), yet if we apply your (apparent) standard of absolute accuracy - what should we call you!

   As for whether or not people have been booted from the movement for racism - that's irrelevant, precisely because I never claimed racists make up a majority of the movement, only an "unhealthy part".  That, of course, means there are non-racists who will (hopefully) eject the racists in their midst.  But, sir, have they all been purged?  You can't honestly make that claim, can you?  I'm afraid the Tea Party Movement still has "some bad elements" in it (not just racists), though I hope they don't comprise the majority of its members.

   And that, of course, is the point of the stories I referenced.  I'm not claiming it proves the entire Tea Party is racist, only that racists keep popping up in their ranks.  Yes, there are many forms of lying, and deliberately distorting what I write, ignoring key parts so you can "spin" it into a "strawman" to knock down, is one of the worst!  If there is any liar in this debate, it's not me!

   By the way, why the silence about the accusations of racism in the Movement made by Mr. Beck and Mr. Russo?  If I'm a liar, I have plenty of company - "conservative" company!  So much for Mr. Ehrlich's attempt to blame this entirely on "Progressives".

   (Incidently, at least according to the Wikipedia article about him, Ehrlich knows all about lying for political purposes!)

   Kindly spare me your sanctimonious hypocrisy, sir.  Based on your "performance", I'd say it's a case of "people who live in glass houses"!

P.S. - And let me renew a warning I've made elsewhere: You are treading dangerously close to an action for Libel, where you will learn the importance of having facts to back up your opinion.

porr000's picture

Mr. Posner,

With all due respect, if you think you made my point first, then you did, most definitely miss my point. It is not the same.

I do note however, that you just happen to keep bringing the subject of the tea party and racism up over and over again for the last two weeks and will not let it go. I believe your actions are speaking louder than your words.

I believe I have made my feelings earlier on the subject of race-baiting quite clear.

You now need to cease and decist saying I don't understand what you said originally. You need to quit saying I called you a liar. I never used that word on you. You need to quit asking me irrelevant questions about what anyone else has said and done. Purged was you word, not mine, and my point was every group has bad elements. So, hammering on about just one group is completely irrelevant.

Furthermore, if you want to warn someone of a legal action/term, why don't you give an example that demonstrates your point so they can understand what you are referring to? Looking up the term libel doesn't tell me what I said that compels you to warn me. Specifically, what is it I said about anyone that meets all the criteria for libel? Even if I did specifically call out that anyone is a liar, can they prove they are not?

Gordon Posner's picture

 

Dear Mr. Orr:

   Almost forgot, the reason I didn't deal at greater length with Mr. Nelson's remarks is to be found in that same second sentence.  Maybe it was too subtle for you, but who do you think I was admonishing for being wrong in calling the entire Tea Party Movement racist?

P.S. - And why don't you change your account, so that your actual name appears instead of porr000?  Judy and I managed to do it.

Well said, Mr. Orr.

Gordon Posner's picture

 

Dear Judy:

  How?  Unless you think composing an evasive "response" that consists of twisting my words, to spin them as he saw fit, is something to praise.  Most people would call that dishonest!  (But then, we already know that "accuracy" isn't your strong point, so why should you demand it of others?)

porr000's picture

Gordon,

You can't claim someone twisted or spun your words if they never even quoted or redefined them to begin with.

All I did was add on the parts of the event that you conveniently left out of your spin to show the whole truth of the event mentioned so the readership had all the facts.

The only evasion going on here was your leaving out the other side of the story.

I'm sorry if that upsets you but until that was done, your version was not very accurate.

Donna Arlands  Your letter was absolutely to the point and refreshing to read. You are so correct. Government is not the answer God and love is the answer. I think most everyone would agree with that statement. Keep writing those letters. Thank you for speaking up ,for the truth

Gordon Posner's picture

 

Dear Roy:

   Really?  Then why bother with the (highly expensive) Military, Police, Prosecutors, Criminal Courts, and Prisons?  Why bother having the Granite Mountain Hotshots to fight the Yarnell Hill Fire?

   I'm sure that if we just concentrate on spreading kindness, and rely on God (Which god, I wonder?)  Al-Queda and the Mafia will melt away, robbery, rapes, and drug pushing, and murder will become passe', and natural disasters (or even unnatural ones like wildfires) will become a thing of the past.

   Yeah, and there's a bridge in Brooklyin I can sell you - cheap!

Gordon Posner,   After reading just 62 words of today's letter, I knew you wrote it. It was your typical nonssense. It could have been worse, however. You could have attacked me instead of Karl Nelson I am thankful for small favors. I know you write from the heart as I do. You are a legalist and I can only repeat that your commentary is much better suited for a courtroom than for the opinion section of this paper.                                                 

Gordon Posner's picture

 

Dear Roy:

   The difference between us is that I use my head when I write, so I can be sure that what my "heart" says is true.  Sadly, neither you, Mr. Nelson, or Mr. Orr seem to, or even care whether what you spew has any basis in fact.

   If you bothered to go back and read the August 30th letter I referenced, you'd see I was responding to attacks he made on me (as well as to his attacks on the what the Constitution truly says).  But, as I've observed many times before, you "conservatives" often behave like school-yard bullies: you dish it out, but you can't take it!

   And, yes, since the topic in question was the Constitution (and the unconstituional concept of "nullification") I'd say a "legalist" approach is exactly what's called for.  Don't believe me?  Try committing a crime, and then claim the law is "nullified".  I promise to visit you in prison!