|
WW
welcomes
letters to the editor via mail, e-mail
or fax. Letters must be signed by the author and include
the author's street address and phone number for verification.
Preference will be given to letters of 250 words or less.
YOU DON'T KNOW FROM CURSES
As a native New Englander
and lifelong-suffering Red Sox devotee, I take umbrage at
your pitiful comparison of the Blazers' loss to the Lakers
to Boston's century-long cycle of violence to its fans ["The
Curse of the Blazers," WW, June 7, 2000]. But I take
no pity on Blazer fans, for if this is the best you can
do for heartbreak, then clearly you do not know pain.
Last Sunday, the Blazers lost--admittedly in sorry fashion,
but to a clearly better team. The fact that they dragged
the series out to seven games is almost a miracle. In 1986,
as the Bosox blew a three-run lead and a 3-2 World Series
(not, mind you, semi-final) lead against an inferior team
(really! the Mets?), I cried; I raged; I literally banged
my head on a solid brick wall. Why? Because it hurt less
than watching the toilet flush on yet another magnificent
chance at greatness.
Compare this reaction to a Blazer fan's. We cursed, we
lamented, then we drank our microbrews and had a fine sunny
evening. Ho, hum. Go Pacers.
So it's been 23 years for the Blazos. Big whoop. Stencil
this on your travel mug: 1918. My granddaddy dies waiting
for a Red Sox championship and, I've a feeling, so will
my grandkids. And let me give you a few more fun numbers,
blown chances all: 1946; 1949; 1967; 1975; and 1978, the
worst one of all to a true fan, when a pint-sized shortstop--and
New York Yankee--homered to win a one-game playoff for the
division title, which Boston should have sewn up by Labor
Day.
Curse? Pain? Take two time-outs and call me in the mourning.
Gary Corbin
Northeast 50th Avenue
HEADED SOUTH
While most of the passengers were sleeping, Oregon's
future has been hijacked by "Governor" Sizemore ["Who Will
Stop This Man?," WW, June 7, 2000]. He doesn't want
to pilot the plane. He wants to churn out record numbers
of quick-fix constitutional amendments. He wants to put
government on autopilot. Oregon is a test flight for Sizemore's
East Coast power brokers (Grover Norquist of Americans for
Tax Reform) and his millionaire men's club. So who cares
where we land?
The destination, however, is clear. Welcome to the Hotel
California! We can check out anytime how the Golden State
is doing. According to longtime Sacramento Bee editor
Peter Schrag, California has become America's "Paradise
Lost." In two decades of government by plebiscite, California
engaged in what Schrag calls "a vicious cycle of reform
and frustration" at the ballot box. Today, California's
public school system, once a national leader, is headed
for the cellar, along with its libraries, roads and other
public services. L.A. may rule over Portland in this
year's NBA playoffs, but only Portland can still claim a
top-notch local school system.
In the Sizemore Era, Oregon is going down that California
path. We are placing self-government and our ability to
shape the future on hold, with an endless series of lockstep
constitutional "reforms." Nevertheless, Oregonians insist,
we don't want California's slipping quality of life. Today,
most of Oregon enjoys full employment and unprecedented
prosperity. Despite this golden moment, our civic, educational
and physical infrastructure, which could support a livable
and prosperous future, is fraying.
In 1902 a progressive coalition of farmer and labor groups
created Oregon's landmark system of initiative, referendum
and recall. Their goal was to counter the abuses of corrupt
machine politics, public land fraud and corporate monopolies.
Today, Mr. Sizemore and his friends in the initiative industry
have created a new, unelected political machine. Under the
cloak of reform, this machine is set up to grind Oregon's
representative government and fine public school system
relentlessly into the dust.
Let's wake up and listen to Jim Johnson and the Intel Corp.,
Oregon's top employer. It's time for a new coalition of
business, labor and ordinary Oregonians to claim a common
flight path to Oregon's future. We can start this year by
recalling "Governor" Sizemore!
Richard N. Ross
Southeast Eliot Avenue
YOU KEEP WHAT'S LEFT
How very typical. Your left-wing newspaper, a great
beneficiary of the First Amendment, has pasted a STOP sign
over Bill Sizemore's mouth, because he wants to slow the
government rape of my paycheck ["Who Will Stop This Man?,"
June 7, 2000]. Why do all leftists assume that the proper
place, the default location, for my money is in the government
treasury, and that any peep of protest from me that I actually
want to keep what I've earned is a sign of my "greed"?
And why do leftists assume that the only proper use of
the right of free speech and the right to petition government
is to call for more government spending and less personal
liberty?
You think government needs more money? Open your checkbook,
Jack. Donations from private citizens are not illegal. If
you think bureaucrats are smarter than you are about how
to spend your money, you have the choice to give it all
away. Why are you so terrified of the choices I would make
to spend my money if I actually got to keep it?
Massive government spending in every area of my life does
not automatically equate to "quality of life." Get a clue.
Individuals can be trusted with their money. Liberty works.
Dale A. Woods
North Gantenbein Avenue
NO RACIST IN MY BOOK
I laughed when I read Jonquil Hunter-Morton's letter
in WW [June 14, 2000]. The excuse that "black people
can use that powerful, pre-bellum word to bring it back
under their control..." is confirmation of the absurdity
of political correctness. When I hear the "N-word" used
by people gratuitously in public, whether they are black
or white or whatever, my estimation of their intelligence
drops.
Who then uses this word on a regular basis except the culturally
inferior? Hunter-Morton's argument is not convincing. Equally
amusing was the argument that "a black person cannot be
racist....to a white person, only prejudiced." In which
dictionary does Hunter-Morton find the definition of racism?
According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, racism is
(1) a belief that race is the primary determinant of human
traits and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority
of a particular race; (2) racial prejudice or discrimination.
There's no mention of socioeconomic power in this definition,
and to argue that the poor stupid white trash who profess
allegiance to racist ideas actually possess this kind of
power opens oneself to ridicule.
Can a black person be racist toward a white person or any
other person? With sufficient negritude and attitude, I
think the answer is obvious.
Gerhardt Goeken
North Webster Street
|
