Document text
Letters to the Editor, Feb. 19 Sunday Feb 19, 2017 at 2:00 AM Feb 20, 2017 at 6:33 AM Seeking answers Ted Krempa (Feb. 5) says, “The regular people have spoken and want to get on with the business of rebuilding our country.” Here are some honest questions made without irony, malice or spite intended. What is it that Trump is doing to rebuild the country? Trump so far has had full support of the Congress and Senate. What do the people who support Trump's agenda see him achieving or attempting to accomplish? So far, a ban on Muslims from seven countries, banking and environmental deregulation, ordering media blackout, and working to put a wall between the U.S. and Mexico. Also, the Affordable Care Act is on the table to be repealed. Do Trump supporters approve of all of the new policies? Hopes are that this new administration can do good things. One must wonder, seeing what has happened so far. Racism has been stoked and people are trying to stand up for ethics and morals of the country. It would be an amazing day if we could all agree on our priorities and try to blend them from both sides of the aisle. It would be a perfect balance of social services (police, schools, health care, etc.) and capitalism. Kathy Lambie Medford Enjoy the circus You die-hard Democrats and Republicans crack me up. The vituperation you spout toward each other is amazing. The socialists (excuse me) liberals, or the stupid party (excuse me again) the conservatives, will rarely see eye to ete no most given subjects, let alone presidents. Get over the propaganda, preconceived notions and prejudice you have learned or been taught, and of your own volition see the truth which critical thinking requires. I have heard Trump and Clinton were and are both unfit to be president. Either of them would willingly and intentionally further shred the Constitution to get their way. Both, I have heard, are egotists, bombastic, liars, unscrupulous and overly wealthy. Eight years each of Clinton, then Bush, then Obama. Think about that. Presidents, some good and some bad, come and go. Congress is the important branch of government. If you want real representation of your views, elect people who reflect them. Until that happens, calm down, sit down, relax and enjoy the circus (excuse me) the democracy (excuse me again) the republic in which we all live. L.R. Palmer Medford Touting Crichton's lies It's been years since anti-science climate deniers touted the alternative facts (lies) of deceased novelist Michael Crichton, but Hadley Nesbitt (Letters, Feb. 5) tries again. After agreeing with Bruce Bauer's analogy about Soviet politicians suppressing sound genetics in favor of long-discredited nonsense, Nesbitt gets tied up trying to refute Bauer's accurate parallel with the anti-science climate denial of our Republican Congress and White House. Nesbitt did accurately describe the essence of our current scientific understanding of global warming and climate change. However, his effort then to dismiss this as equivalent to Soviet political anti-genetics propaganda fails totally. It was Soviet politicians who rejected science and established a pseudo-scientific consensus of genetic nonsense. The Soviet example is, as Bauer noted, exactly parallel to current Republican politicians promoting an anti-science view to undermine genuine science because the genuine science doesn't suit their political preconceptions. Novelist Crichton claimed that science doesn't operate by consensus. Crichton was as wrong then as Nesbitt is now. Consensus is exactly how scientists develop agreement. It is derived from research experts agreeing on what the research means. Seeking consensus is also why we obtain additional opinions on serious medical diagnoses. Patricia Gordon Jacksonville