×

So much for ‘civil discussion’

Dear Editor,

It is difficult to know how to respond to the commentary (Sept. 7), when the ranting, exaggerated, emotional claims by the author are scarcely able to be responded to with intelligent, well reasoned arguments.

That is, the writer clearly prefers hysterical terms such as “treasonous tyrannical Marxists” and “damn nasty conspirators” and “lying leaking liberals” when describing those who disagree with him rather than actually having a civil discussion. There is “free speech” and there is deliberate distortion in an attempt to provoke and misinform.

Many independent studies, including one by the nonpartisan Brennan Center for Justice at the New York School of Law found incidents of overall voter fraud “extraordinarily rare.”

Washington state, which has mail-in voting, referred 142 cases of suspected improper voting in 2018 to local election officials, or 0.004% of the more than 3.1 million votes cast.

Despite President Trump’s claims to the contrary, there is no evidence Democrats have an advantage with mail-in ballots. Unless the article writer prefers to believe in conspiracy theories and unsubstantiated opinions rather than the actual experience of people who run elections, the writer would do well to educate himself.

Locally, his claim that “the DNC has to knock on doors to … pay people to put signs out” is certainly not true around here. My wife had to be put on a waiting list to receive her Joe Biden sign and no one in the local DNC is aware of such practices.

Those “600 lawyers” the writer refers to are, in Mr. Biden’s words, an attempt “to fight any effort to exploit the pandemic for political purposes, support the countless state and local officials working like hell to make voting safe and accessible for citizens, especially the most vulnerable, or call out local rules that don’t adequately ensure access to vote.”

Mr. Trump could use his position to help elections officials and post offices deliver a safe and secure election rather than make false claims that mail in ballots are inherently fraudulent.

The writer opines that radio stations and newspapers are attempting to “censor our civil liberties of free speech,” and yet, as a registered Independent, I have heard all sides of every argument without even trying, for even the ‘liberal’ media present ‘conservative’ counterarguments if for no other reason than to refute them. Fox had their highest rated July and August ratings ever as more people watched during the pandemic — hardly censorship.

The writer goes on to make other specious comments about “one party prevents solving the pandemic” and “calling bloody riots in Democratic cities peaceful riots” as if either the pandemic or the protests are as simplistic as he would wish them to be.

The writer has been around long enough to know that racial injustice has been in America since the beginning and that the riots of the 1960s were far worse.

Many progressive reforms were enacted then, but blacks are continuing to be repressed in ways that whites are not, and they rightfully hope to further the equality ideals written into the constitution when they were referred to as three-fifths of a person.

The pandemic is an unfolding drama that has always been a balance between keeping the economy open and keeping people alive.

Virologists, who know more than the rest of us, say that COVID-19 mutates slower than the common flu so a vaccine should be more effective. Meanwhile, much has been learned about its spread and how to treat it, and as always, the elderly and others with certain conditions are the most vulnerable.

As for having a civil discussion without “name calling’ and “ having a fit, throwing a tantrum and screaming, ” I suggest the writer re-read his own words and explain his use of his inflammatory terms. Perhaps he forgets that Mr. Trump has referred to honest, sane, intelligent people as “nut jobs,” “losers,” “slobs,” “dumb” and so on.

Even the press, which the writer uses to publicize his views is referred to by Mr. Trump as the “enemy of the people.”

Is this the “civil discussion” to which the writer is referring?

At any rate, demonizing anyone is not helpful. We are all Americans and should start acting like it. That we are able to speak freely and criticize our leaders is a right that many people have died for. As the Buddhists would say, ‘All things in moderation’ and beware of “grasping for opinion” at the expense of peace.

Wes Jacobs,

Warren

Newsletter

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

I'm interested in (please check all that apply)
   

COMMENTS

Starting at $4.75/week.

Subscribe Today