Readers Speak

Biden his time

Dear Editor,

Once again we see the demonization of conservatives. We also see the beginning of a banana republic. When the only way to win an election is to lie and slander the opponent and take him out of the equation, we are in the throes of losing our democracy.

Going back to the Clintons, many citizens remember when Hillary “cleansed” her emails and destroyed servers; I never heard of jail time for her. In the 2016 election a hoax was perpetrated against Donald Trump by the Clintons, and she still lost the election. She “cried” about that for years. Did the left tell her to “get over it?” All accusations were proven false, but did she go to jail for that hoax, having spent taxpayer money and wasting thousands of man hours in pursuing her lies? No, that never happened either.

The socialist Dems have told Trump to forget the 2020 election, even though he truly thought it was rigged. There is more truth in what he says than what they want to acknowledge. An election can be fraudulent, even if voting machines are working in perfect order, there is ballot harvesting, write-in ballots, etc.

When you watch the October 2020 debate, Donald Trump was throwing a barrage of truths at Joe Biden about Hunter and the corruption we now see playing out in front of us. All Biden could do was spout the same rhetoric that no one in his family had anything to do with Barisma and other foreign entities. When a corrupt Department of Justice withholds vital information about a candidate,

Hunter and Joe Biden’s ties to foreign regimes, a factual, purposeful omission has occurred. Voters are denied the truth and not allowed to make a choice with all the facts. Yes, that is fraudulence. It’s time the left and media own up to their faults and admit that Joe Biden and his family are corrupt to the core; they have taken this country to the lowest depths, all under the guise of honesty and truthfulness.

He once stated he would be an interim president and only “serve” one term. Hopefully, as time draws nearer to 2024 that will become a reality. If he changes his mind and chooses to run for another term, it wouldn’t be hard to understand. In what other country could someone spend more time on vacation than working and be paid for it? The really hard decisions are made by some “secret” person or group, ready to clean up whatever gaffs are accidentally spilled in public.

According to USA Today, Biden faced criticism for waiting to visit Maui for nearly two weeks after the fires, a delay the White House said was necessary to avoid interfering with search and rescue efforts.

Really? Instead of shrugging off questions about the catastrophe, a kind word of encouragement would have gone a long way. Would a short trip much earlier than two weeks to bolster morale impeded efforts, or was it just another of the many excuses so often offered to the American public and blindly accepted by the liberal cohorts? When he did arrive He said nothing hopeful to a waiting public, just his usual gibberish. Signs along the parade route showed a telling tale: Biden go home. A short message but extremely truthful.

It is sad that POTUS is at an age where cognitive issues sometimes occur. It is refreshing to hear the leftist media actually admitting there are health issues to address, and no longer overlooking the obvious. Can it be that the reality of all his shenanigans is coming home to roost? Fifty years of Joe Biden in politics is about 44 years too many. It’s time he gracefully bows out before he is “kicked” out by an informed electorate. He won’t have a pandemic to hide behind, burying himself in the basement; he needs to face a country that is ready to hear something truthful from his lips for a change.

Norma Bankoske,


Don’t pursue ban

Dear Editor,

Youngsville Borough Council’s discussions on adjusting its cat-related ordinances (Aug. 16) should focus on the humane, nonlethal approaches that have become popular with the public. Any thought of a feeding ban for cats, however, should be off the table from the start, because such bans have proven to be ineffective and cruel to cats.

Feeding bans criminalize the compassionate acts of good Samaritans who feed the community’s cats. These bans are simply government-directed animal cruelty, bringing no benefit to the city. The idea is unenforceable and simply does not work.

Cats do not vanish after attempts to starve them to death–they just look for food in other places. As cats search farther for food, they become more visible, which will bring more calls to local authorities, not less.

Feeding community cats is critical to the implementation of Trap-Neuter-Return– the scientifically proven, evidence-based approach that long ago became the mainstream policy in cities and towns all over the U.S. Trap-Neuter-Return is humane, popular with the public, and continues to be embraced because it works. As sound public policy, it effectively and humanely manages the community cat population, reduces shelter intake and killing, and reduces calls to animal control agencies. With all these benefits, the policy saves money for taxpayers, too.

Today’s society demands solutions and lifesaving programs, not feeding bans that harm cats without achieving any positive outcomes.

Coryn Julien,

communications director,

Alley Cat Allies,

Bethesda, Md.

Taking sides on gender

Dear Editor,

When I was 6 or so, I was complaining to my mother that I envied my brother — 4 years older — because he could throw a ball really far, and I would like to do that too. Mother was a treasury of odd bits of information since she taught anatomy, and she explained that I probably would never be able to out-throw my brother, because boys just are born with longer collarbones, which made a difference. “Oh, OK,” I said, and went back to my dolls or cowboy hat or whatever.

Any child may envy the opposite sex for one reason or another, and it means nothing as a general thing. We go on into the gender we were born to. But for others there can be a clear, permanent sense of misclassification. And we (I refer to the middle-aged or older) grew up at a time when those who felt misclassified had only these choices: ignore it, cover it up, be edgy and miserable, be taunted or even tortured or killed. So we felt sorry for them or contemptuous (depending on our outlooks) and dismissed them from our concerns.

But it’s different now, folks! Science and medicine have the technology to make these changes for those who want them. Gender change is not just done on a whim. The tendency must be clearly felt and over a period of years. Psychology, body chemistry, DNA, and all other possible factors are considered before proceeding; progress is carefully monitored. But in any case, we now have the technology! And it is vile for the law to insist that a name written on your birth certificate must be yours forever in defiance of actual fact.

But I digress. I started out with the aim of considering how dealing with these questions seemed to lead to screaming fights on corrupting school children with inappropriate sex exposure.

I think that most 6 year olds can handle the idea that, though most couples come as M+F, some are M+M or F+F. If we go to the grittier question of how they get children, there are various possibilities for explaining it that are less embarrassing than it is to explain how M+F get children.

Most children I have known can cope with the idea, if calmly presented, that some people are different. So what do you say if your six-year-old asks why Charlie has two moms or two dads? I hope you will not say that those parents are doing wrong in the sight of God and will burn in hell. If you would, let me in turn ask this. Do you believe God created human beings? Then please explain why He arranged for 5% to 8% of every national population on earth to be somewhere on the LGBTQ spectrum. National leaders who say, “We don’t have any of that dirty stuff” are lying or have frightened their gender-minority populations into the underground by shaming, firing, intimidation, torture, or imprisonment.’

For pity’s sake, trust your schoolteachers! When you were very young, who were your primary examples of goodness and truth? One, your parents; two, your pastor; three, your schoolteachers. I believe that schoolteachers, with very few exceptions, still have high moral standards in spite of having more complex challenges than my Miss Penney back in 1945 ever dreamed of, and have no notion of exposing your children to “pornography.” But they try to deal with reality.

This week some parent somewhere has insisted on banning, as inappropriate, a school library book for 11-12-year-olds that mentions “periods.” I assure you, nowadays girls with periods at 11 are not a rarity. (Worth noting that in the late 1800s the average age for first menstruation was 16 — and here we are. Must be that cussed global warming.) And your average 14-year-old boy with internet access has probably seen a few things that would curl your toes.

There is such a thing as real pornography, and it can be terribly harmful. Pornography exploiting children is unspeakable. But to prohibit real, sensitive presentation of problematic concepts that kids do encounter in their lives does them no service. Ignorance can cause them unnecessary stress or even lead them into bad places.

Dr. Karen L. Black,



Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

I'm interested in (please check all that apply)
Are you a paying subscriber to the newspaper? *

Starting at $2.99/week.

Subscribe Today