Online-only Letters

Political opinions

Wake-up call

Editor, The Times:

Well, hello, Mary Lou! Seems like your "falling awake" has been a long time coming. There is nothing new or different about the people you encountered, just that you recognized, finally, the humorlessness of leftist liberals, including their progeny [ "Go ahead and stick out your tongue if you hate Bush -- or love Mohawks" Times, guest commentary, Sept. 4].

Lack of humor has been a besetting illness with liberals, progressives, leftists, Stalinists and communists of any ilk. If humor is starting to appear within you, then -- gasp! -- you might be turning into a conservative. The only cure for that is to fall back asleep.

-- Leif Thorvaldson, Eatonville, Pierce County

Hague's political lesson

For an a lesson on the politics of today, watch and listen to Jane Hague very carefully [ "Hague apologizes for behavior during DUI arrest," Local News, Sept. 4].

You'll understand why it is that Sen. Larry Craig of Idaho is in the news. Hague is surprised that her initial response was not accepted. She has followed typical political protocol, and been evaluated for alcohol-abuse issues. Whoa ... such sacrifice on her part. She apologized repeatedly to all involved for being so "angry," but insists to this day that the police were wrong, the breathalyzer was wrong, and that she had only a glass or two of red wine. She blew a .135 and .140. And she continues to plead not guilty. She generously met with reporters in the company of her political adviser and had to hold back tears, for goodness sake.

But the absolute crown jewel of her explanation/spin of the entire affair is this: After accusing the police of poor law enforcement and poor administration of legally accepted breathalyzer procedures, she has realization -- at age 61 -- that she can no longer drink and drive. From this point on, she will abstain from drinking at all while driving.

Well, bowl me over and color me excited ... she's finally learned that she can't drink and drive! Big-girl stuff, to be sure. She is innocent, someone else made a mistake -- the police -- and she demonstrates again that the truth is the rules don't really apply to people in politics. Thank you, Jane Hague. Sen. Craig is on your side.

-- Jim Innes, Mercer Island

Name game

In referring to the resignation of Alberto Gonzales, President Bush was quoted as saying, "It's sad that his good name was dragged through the mud for political reasons." This from a man who was a party to verbal attacks on Michael Dukakis, John McCain, Max Cleland, Ann Richards and John Kerry, just to name a few.

-- Gordy Green, Seattle

Iraq comment

There is no case for the U.S. to remain in Iraq. It was wrong to go in; it is now wrong to remain. It was not just wrong; it was a criminal war of aggression. The case to remain in Iraq is just as dishonest as was the case to invade Iraq.

Bush wrongly asserts that if we quit Iraq, the terrorists would gain new recruits to attack our cities. By invading Iraq, he could not have done more to strengthen the terrorists. Retaliatory terrorist attacks against the U.S. will occur in just a matter of time.

Bush wrongly asserts that abandoning Iraq would throw the Middle East into even greater upheaval and loss of life. Terrorism would likely decline in Iraq if we left, since our presence there is part of the reason for terrorist activities.

Bush naively rhapsodizes about a free Iraq being a beacon of hope, a friend of the U.S., and an ally in the war on terror. Iraq will not soon be a friend or ally of the U.S. after what we did to it.

Bush and his courtiers are wrong in seeking to avoid responsibility for what they have done by remaining in Iraq to the bitter end, leaving the final catastrophe to occur on someone else's watch. Bush has brought unspeakable tragedy to our nation. To our discredit, we let him do it.

What kind of people would we be to sacrifice even more of our military men and women in a vain effort to avoid the humiliation and disgrace we brought upon ourselves?

-- Malcolm McPhee, Sequim

Saving salmon

... and the environment

I just read "Our lawmakers can help hatch a vibrant future for salmon" [guest commentary, Sept.4]. Donald Barbieri has taken a very strong stance when standing up for our nation's salmon.

Our region needs to be asking what future we want to create, and figure out how to get there. We need political leadership to be asking these questions and bringing people together to craft solutions.

The debate over the Snake River dams and endangered salmon is central to this question of the future. Do we really want to remain stuck in old, tired and failing patterns? Or are there opportunities to plan for and achieve more successful, more sensible communities that can really work for our citizens, our economy, and our natural resources and environment?

-- James Kintzele III, Mount Vernon

Information overload

Monitored by the government everywhere we go

Enough is enough. When I recently tried to make a appointment for a medical issue, I was asked to fill out a detailed form, two pages long with fine print, which I assume was so they could get maximum questions in the report.

The questionnaire wanted detailed medical reports all the way back to my grandparents. That did it for me. The CIA probably was looking for any form of insurgency in my past.

I was also required to sign a secrecy form which means nothing except it protects a business from being sued when the CIA does knock on their door.

Some of the questions had no relevancy to my health whatsoever, does the National Security Surveillance Act of 2006 have anything to do with this?

-- Glenn Krantz, Burien

No brainer

Mauled woman should be protected

Last week I read an article on Maritza Dowe, who was attacked while at work, stabbed numerous times and left blind and disfigured ["Breaking down walls of fear" Local News, Aug. 25].

The one thing which still rings in my mind is Dowe's concern over losing her health coverage.

After all she and her family have endured, how can King County consider terminating her coverage? Anyone permanently injured on the job should have lifetime coverage. That, to me, is a no-brainer.

-- Deborah Waters, Seattle

WASL leaves kids behind

Time to change testing standards

Regarding "Passing grades for the WASL" [editorial, Sept. 4], the irony of the entire WASL mess is that it "Leaves No Child Educated."

Terry Bergeson's "baby" was supposed to benefit struggling students. Instead it put huge obstacles in their way. Not only can they not pass the "fuzzy-thinking" tests, they also are denied learning basic skills that will actually be needed in real life.

We need balanced standards. Do we trust Bergeson to rewrite "state standards" a fourth time? We must stop influencing more than 30 percent of students to drop out or get a GED.

We know better than to continue to treat student learning as one-size-fits-all. We should provide different educational career opportunities for students who are not college-bound.

For example, students who are going into non-math careers should only have to take courses that cover basic algebra and geometry, just enough that they are knowledgeable in the subjects.

There should be no high-stakes testing! Any test that is given should not be a mystery -- like the WASL. Exams should be clear-cut, reliable and measure basic skills while providing teachers diagnostic information to fine-tune instruction. There are already many such valuable tests.

In fact, we "lowered the bar" by using such extreme measures to try to get all students to pass the moot value WASL tests!

-- Rebecca Venable, Cheney, Spokane County