What State of the Union letter writer missed
I just read the letter to the editor from Dave Price in Sunday’s Times (“Dems petty, childish during State of the Union”). Mr. Price clearly did not watch the entire State of the Union address. Perhaps he stepped away when the president started out by refusing to shake the hand of the Speaker, even though she offered it twice. He then implies that the Dems did not properly cheer for the centenarian Airman, the scholarship recipient, nor the returning military father. That is, of course, totally false. Both sides of the aisle cheered those people vigorously.
What I found “despicable” (Mr. Price’s word; not mine) was the presentation of a Presidential Medal of Freedom to a philanderer and drug abuser who has remained unrepentant no matter how often his amorality has been on display for all to see. No one since Joseph McCarthy has done more to divide America than Rush Limbaugh. He has admitted that even he does not believe all of what he says; he only says it to cause division in our country. This president clearly owes a debt of gratitude to the culture that Limbaugh has espoused. He has every right to thank him personally. I know that we all wish Rush well in his battle against cancer even though he railed against laws to protect others from his second-hand smoke and claimed smoking did not cause cancer.
I take umbrage though, in the presentation of an official medal to this man. A medal that was once reserved for heroes like Rosa Parks, Colin Powell, Bill and Melinda Gates, Shirley Chisolm, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Neil Armstrong has, to say the least, been tarnished.
I agree with Mr. Price that this nation is one of “precious blessings.” May we remember and embrace the words and deeds of presidents like Jefferson, Lincoln and the Roosevelts as we move forward. May we once again consider civility, dignity and knowledge to be among out greatest blessings.
Corynne B. Courpas
Westminster
Electoral college gives all states a voice
I am responding to David J Iacono’s letter Feb. 8 ("Time to get rid of the electoral college). Mr. Iacono states that the electoral college is a relic of the past and should be eliminated. The fact is that when the framers of the Constitution set up the electoral college, their intent was to not have New York, the most heavily populated state, be the deciding factor in elections. Less populated states, such as Maryland, would have much less influence.
This is true today. If only half of the population of the top five states voted, then they would decide the outcome of the presidential election. These states are California (38 million), Texas (28 million), Florida (21 million), New York (19 million) and Pennsylvania (about 12 million). Maryland, at No. 19 on the list, has about half the population of Pennsylvania. People living in Wyoming and Vermont (around half a million each), might as well stay home on election day.
This sounds like, once more, Democrats wanting to change the rules because they didn’t win the game. Mr. Iacono is not happy with the presidents that were elected when the electoral college was the deciding factor, but that isn’t the fault of the electoral college. As to his statement, “Bush also gave us the economic collapse of 2008...” the collapse was not caused by President Bush. The fault was with the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which caused banks to invest in subprime markets.
President Trump’s impeachment was based on Democrats searching for a way to get rid of a candidate that they can’t compete with. Democrats, specifically Maxine Waters and Rashida Tlaib, among others, were calling for impeachment before the inauguration. So, instead of eliminating electoral college, make changes to improve elections. To start, I suggest we stop having career politicians whose only interests are the power grab and getting re-elected. Term limits for all elected to federal office.
Karen Miller
Westminster
.