Online only-Letters

Rossi vs. Gregoire

Dino's abortion stance dodging a red flag

Editor, The Times:

The headline "Gregoire ad is off-base on Rossi v. Roe v. Wade" [Times, Local News, July 11] was misleading: After reading the facts, it seemed that The Times' spin was further off base than Gov. Christine Gregoire's ad.

Why is The Times giving gubernatorial candidate Dino Rossi the benefit of the doubt on abortion rights? The Times article repeatedly mentioned that Rossi refuses to state a clear stance on abortion. He is obviously trying to hide something. Why would he keep dodging these questions unless he knew that his views were much further right than most Washingtonians are comfortable with?

This is unacceptable to me as a woman and a Washington citizen.

— Molly Walton, Seattle

Be honest, Dino

Republican Dino Rossi's record clearly shows he is opposed to abortion. This is indicated by his ties to far-right political groups and his opposition to Initiative 120.

If Rossi opposes choice — and he does — then it makes no sense to say he doesn't want Roe v. Wade overturned. Roe v. Wade is still the main legal protection for abortion rights. If Rossi would just come out and tell us where he stands on abortion rights, then we wouldn't have to keep parting hairs like this.

Will Rossi ever be honest and forthcoming on this issue? Maybe after he is elected — when it is time to pay back all of the far-right, special-interest groups who are currently supporting him.

— M. Allison Maus, Kirkland

Abortion part of the job description

In excerpts from his blog, David Postman said, "[Dino Rossi's] spokeswoman, Jill Strait, told me yesterday that abortion has 'absolutely nothing to do with the governor's job description.' " If that is what gubernatorial candidate Rossi thinks, he either is continuing to avoid making a clear statement about his position on abortion or is ignorant of the veto pen the governor holds over women's rights legislation, abortion included.

What Rossi thinks about abortion and other women's rights issues is of vital importance in any gubernatorial election and is, in effect, part of the governor's job description through the impact of the veto rights of the governor.

— Hal Mozer, Bellevue

Land clash

Court ruling protects landowners' rights

In Friday's editorial critical of a state appellate court ruling striking down part of King County's Critical Areas Ordinance, The Times again fails to understand the true nature of civil rights ["The land clash: Can we preserve the green?," Times, editorial, July 11].

The county sought to effectively "take" property by way of prohibiting any use of it and excuse itself by claiming it has the "right to protect" property it doesn't own. No mention is ever made of the burden placed upon the true owner who must still pay taxes on what the county now "protects."

The right to own and use land is a civil right like any other. Scientific opinion notwithstanding, if the county wants to eviscerate the civil rights of rural landowners — or any landowners, for that matter — it should show them respect by compensating them for the diminution of the land's value or at least lowering their taxes.

Instead, King County, with The Times' approval, sought cheap virtue at the expense of landowners. The Court of Appeals, as courts should, slapped that down, reminding both the county and The Times that people have rights that government must respect.

Memo to King County and The Times: Land theft cloaked in environmental virtue is still theft.

— Scott St. Clair, Kirkland

Lambeth Conference

Anglicans wrongly exclude gay bishop

Editorial columnist Lance Dickie crows about "an evolving Anglican identity" that includes female priests and bishops, and even a female presiding bishop who will run the Lambeth Conference ["An evolving Anglican identity," Times, editorial column, July 11].

What will this group ponder? According to Dickie, they'll try to reconcile some of the "wrenching disputes" that face the church today. They'll do that, however, without the presence of the Rev. Gene Robinson, bishop of New Hampshire, whose consecration must surely be at the heart of one of those wrenching disputes, a fact that Dickie skims right over.

Robinson was not invited to the conference because he is gay, he is in a committed relationship, and chooses not to hide these facts. Dickie mentions that Robinson will attend anyway. He will be outside, letting his presence speak volumes.

Meanwhile, his brother and sister bishops will be getting to know each other in a set of conversations rather than in business meetings — a "huge act of faith," as Dickie puts it. They're trying a new format for their meetings, while deliberately and, I think, wrongfully excluding a voice of difference that could help them engage in a true dialogue.

The door is not really open; the table is not really set for all.

— Terri Sharkey, Issaquah

McCain coverage

Media need to apply same standard

It was fun to watch the media pile on former Sen. Phil Gramm, the current economics guru to presidential candidate John McCain, after his "whiners" gaffe ["Remark dogs McCain," Times, News, July 11]. What was notable about it was that it actually received something McCain seldom sees: unfavorable coverage.

Perhaps the so-called liberal media can use this story as a learning experience, and begin to cover McCain and his campaign as they would any other. The sad fact is that any other candidate who ran such a lame campaign would have seen this same, harsh level of scrutiny every time a gaffe or flip-flop occurred. And in the McCain campaign, this means practically every day. Instead, more often than not, reporters bend over backward to explain what McCain really meant.

For all of the fuss over Sen. Barack Obama's (very few) flip-flops, the media could fill page after page with all of McCain's countless flip-flops. I know that you're all under extreme pressure not to appear liberal (God forbid), and it's also in your interest to have the election be competitive, but there needs to be a single standard for both candidates.

If necessary, new reporters — who haven't been corrupted by McCain's doughnuts and barbecues — should be assigned to cover his campaign. Treat both campaigns the same, and let the readers and viewers decide this most important election themselves. And please pass this advice onto The Associated Press, which can't seem to shake its collective man-crush for all things McCain.

Our country is more important than this kind of high-school-level reporting. Maybe the most important reform we all should be demanding from our politicians is that of media ownership and consolidation.

— J. Stockton, Seattle

Traffic-circle death

Crime the norm in Seattle

The Times is doing its level best to convince readers that James Paroline's violent death was an anomaly, claiming that crime is way down and that we float through our lives enjoying days and nights of peaceful calm ["Seattle's mean streets," Times, editorial, July 12]. Good try.

If only your newspaper didn't find itself reporting on every stabbing and shooting throughout the city. Readers remember only too well the violent acts that have occurred recently at Pike Place Market, Belltown, Pioneer Square, Queen Anne, Greenwood, Northgate Mall, South Seattle ... the list goes on and on.

The senseless death of James Paroline was, in fact, par for the course in present-day Seattle. Minor slights are routinely met with fists and bullets, with seemingly no respect for human life and no understanding of what it means to be a member of a community.

But, all together now, let's sing those saccharin tones about what a "world-class city" Seattle has become.

The Times can spin all it wants. The citizens know better.

— Michele Horwitz, Seattle

Careful of word choice, Times

I have followed with sadness the story of the needless death of James Paroline in Seattle ["Vigil shines light on attack," Times, Local News, July 12].

However, I was startled to find the events characterized as his being "beaten by a stranger while watering" in Saturday's newspaper. By accounts written earlier in The Times, he was confronted by his assailant not while watering, but while involved in a physical pushing match with teenage girls in the street. And a single punch would not in normal parlance be termed a beating.

It is a disservice to the community and inflammatory to go so far to make a martyr of a man who also escalated events unnecessarily by hosing down the girls who complained and confronted him. It is tragic that a dispute over something so small led to this man's death, but please: Surely the writers and editorial staff can show the judgment to forgo the temptation to repaint the sad incident to make use of it as a parable of good vs. evil. The Times' own reporting shows that reality is not so simple.

— Susan Conners, Normandy Park

Economic debate

Free markets not free enough

E.J. Dionne Jr.'s column indicating that American capitalism needs an overhaul highlights some obvious rule changes that must be made to make sure that, particularly in the financial industry, the players behave better ["Rewriting capitalism's script," Times, syndicated column, July 12].

However, his criticism of free-market principals and their failures disregards the fact that our so-called free markets are not free enough. Health care, banking and the oil crisis are good examples.

Health care is impacted by government mandates and regulations.

Banking, as in the case of the savings-and-loan associations bailout, was caused by the government deregulating the asset side of the balance sheet but not the liability side. This left the government and the taxpayers to still insure depositors.

In the case of oil, government regulations regarding the exploration for oil and its processing has significantly contributed to the oil crisis we have today.

— Bob Dorse, Seattle

President Bush

Congress shares the blame

I must take exception to the letter from Glenda Tecklenburg in the Times ["Rossi and the GOP," Times, Northwest Voices, July 12] in which she writes, "Eighty percent of the public now sees clearly the damage he has done to our country, the world and the economy."

The "he" she refers to is President Bush. Not all the blame can be placed on his shoulders. The problem here is the incompetent Congress, enjoying its lowest approval rating (18.5 percent) in decades. They are the stumbling block. They have accomplished almost nothing since they have taken control. Time to replace a lot of them!

— John Moe, Federal Way

Backpack funding

Families should buy school supplies

You could expect pretty good odds that the writer of "Investing in the future of our society: kids" [Times, Northwest Voices, July 11] has children of her own.

Families with kids often assume everyone else shares their belief that education automatically trumps other challenges, such as public safety, emergency response, transportation and infrastructure. It was suggested that asking families to buy school supplies for their kids somehow indicates a breakdown in education funding. Forty-nine percent of my property tax supports schools. I pay this gladly, because I believe it to be both my responsibility and honor to support education infrastructure.

However, I don't consider it unreasonable to expect families to send their kids to school with supplies they buy themselves. Raising children is expensive, but I don't see a problem in asking families to pick up some of the costs of sending their kids to school.

— Logan Downing, Seattle