Letters to the editor

Beating the law

Hyper-critical right won't be satisfied until judges are brought to heel

Editor, The Times:

I was surprised by the mildness of your headline, "Justice Kennedy draws criticism" (Times, News, April 12), over a story about the shocking extremism of the "Judeo-Christian Council for Constitutional Restoration."

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, chairman of the Home School Legal Defense Association Michael Farris, (conservative activist) Phyllis Schlafly and the rest make clear that the reckless policies of George W. Bush are only the beginning. They are plotting revolution against deeply held American principles of the rule of law and restraint on government, and once they fully consolidate their power, the ax is ready for those who offend them, just as it was in the Soviet Union, China, Cuba and Iran.

Make no mistake: These people are already effectively running the Republican Party, and their well-financed tentacles reach deep into the media as well.

Rep. Christopher Shay, R-Conn., and former Sen. John Danforth, R-Mo., are right to weep for what their party has become ("Some Republicans grumbling about leaders' Schiavo stand," News, March 26), but until the American people reject this homegrown totalitarianism and those who serve it, there will be no relief and the danger to America will only grow.

— Tyler Page, Kent

Amicus breach

It was bound to happen. Apparently, the conservatives have run out of liberals to blame for everything including the ugly itch of psoriasis. Now they are going after their own. Phyllis Schlafly, never one to not tell you what she thinks, and ever-present to tell us what we should think, wants to impeach Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy.

This time, Kennedy had the audacity to rule, with the majority on the court, that capital punishment for juveniles is unconstitutional. Kennedy was nominated for the court by President Reagan and, until recently, seemed conservatives' golden boy. How fast we fall ...

The neocons are all upset with Democrats for holding up 10 of President Bush's judicial nominations. But think about it, you conservatives: It saves you the trouble of trying to impeach them in a few years.

— Ken McRea, Kent

Judgment day

I can't believe this paper published an article about these traitors who think their way of justice for Americans is the only way. These pious, religious-twisted, sick pack of tyrants are not by any measure representative of any decent human being left in this country!

To attack federal judges in the name of Christ is so blasphemous that they all know they will burn in hell for all eternity for what seeds they sow. These people are evil, prejudiced and despise compassion, caring and compromise. Why in God's name you, The Seattle Times, would present such tabloid trash is beyond me. And why didn't you tell your readers that "Concerned Women for America" is headed by a man (Robert H. Knight, director of the Culture and Family Institute, an affiliate of Concerned Women for America) — a nutty Republican who knows what's good for women. Ya, real clout there.

Dummy up, dig for the facts and treat your readers to real professional, responsible reporting. Don't give these destructive organizations any credibility by spreading their hate.

— Michael Grieb, Kent

They v. the People

How deep can we sink?

They (U.S. House Appropriations Committee) threatened to cut off funding for the U.S. Supreme Court?

I thought there was a limit to the depth they (the Bush administration) would stoop to get their way, but I was wrong. There is no limit!

— Ki Punches, Everett

Disown defense

Can someone tell me what exactly this means: "I said something in an inartful way and I shouldn't have said it that way and I apologize for saying it that way. It was taken wrong" ("DeLay apologizes for judicial comments," News, April 14).

This is Tom DeLay's version of an apology — and I can't quite decipher it.

But here is what I get out of this sorry excuse for an apology: DeLay is not sorry for what he said, he is sorry only that what he said is causing him grief at this point, and causing people of his own party to question his ability to lead.

I hope we are getting close to the end of having to put up with him.

— Judy Stoffel Loewen. Seattle

Dismissed with prejudice

I think I finally get it: get what Republicans mean by "activist judges."

In their view, activist judges are judges who, after considering the merits of a case in relation to the U.S. Constitution and/or laws passed by Congress, past and present, rule against Republican agendas.

When judges rule against executive-department rule changes that thwart the very law they are supposed to implement, they are activist judges. When judges rule against Republican-enacted laws or actions that are unconstitutional, they are activist judges.

When judges rule against religious fundamentalists' desire to impose religious dogma on public institutions, they are activist judges.

Now, if a federal court, after being given jurisdiction by Tom Delay and his associates, had ordered Terri Schiavo's feeding tube replaced, overriding the state of Florida's rightful jurisdiction, you can bet the Republicans and their hatchet people, such as conservative pundits Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh, would have nothing to say about that ruling being made by activist judges.

Yes, I think I finally get it.

— Charles Bakeman, Sequim

Invalidated Licensing

The wait will be longer than expected

I enjoyed Chris Bayley's "Let's let Bartell's run the Department of Licensing" (guest commentary, April 6), which pointed out the disparity of service in various DOL offices.

It was quite an accomplishment when Peggy Maxie, our first African-American woman legislator, even managed to get one located in the Rainier Valley.

I agree that it is high time this South Seattle office got adequate resources. I am just confused by Bayley's use of Bartell's as a paradigm of good service.

What would Bartell's do if it ran the Rainier Valley DOL? It would promptly close it! Sad to say, it does not have a single store in multiethnic Southeast Seattle.

— Bob Rosenberger, Seattle

Legend of Mill Creek

Start with admiration

How do you say goodbye to a friend?

Councilman Jack Start was one of the most decent people I have met during my tenure on the Mill Creek City Council. He was easy to admire and respect. His humor and quick wit were legendary.

On Thursday morning, April 7, 2005, Jack passed away. We all lost a kind man and a good friend.

While serving on the Mill Creek City Council, Jack had a unique ability to analyze problems from various viewpoints. He had a special knack for calculating numbers and getting to the bottom line quickly. Whenever we worked on the budget, I wanted Jack Start in the room.

Councilman Start always conducted himself with much dignity, honor and grace. Jack patiently shared his wisdom, never seeking credit for himself.

Jack, we will miss you. May our loving God bless your soul and hold you close to his heart.

Our community thanks you for your service. We thank your wife, Jean, for sharing you with us. And I thank you for being my friend.

With heartfelt appreciation, much respect and a deep sense of loss,

— Terry Ryan, mayor, city of Mill Creek