 |
  |
 |
||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
||||||||||
|
TRIBAL EDUCATION In "Gambling With the Future" (6/24), Jasmine Pittenger equates the Three Rivers Casino (owned by the Confederated Tribes of the Coos, Lower Umpqua and Siuslaw Indians) with the education necessary to break the vicious cycle of poverty, lack of education and unemployment that beset the tribe. According to Bob Garcia, the tribe's economic development director, "Right now, every dime the Confederated Tribes has comes from the government." But, as the article reports, "funding is tight, and the tribes are not able to pay for as much of their members' education as they would like." Assuming that casino money, in fact, will buy the education that breaks the cycle, the cost to the non-tribal community is simply ignored. Many members of the non-tribal community, the folks whose dimes and dollars fund those tight government payments, are themselves feeling the pinch as they try to provide their children with an education. Reputable economists estimate that for every dollar landing in a casino's till, the community pays out anywhere from $2 to $12 in social costs. Thirty to 50 percent of a casino's take is misery money drained from addicted gamblers who will commit crimes, file bankruptcy, abuse their children and sometimes commit suicide because of their addiction. The rest is disposable income diverted from tax-paying merchants with whom it would otherwise be spent. As a mother of two small boys and as a teacher, I empathize with the tribe's special programs director wanting little, 7-year-old Eagle, who is part Coos, to have the opportunities that I want for my sons. I also want my sons to take pride in their Choctaw heritage without forgetting that they are part of a larger community to which they owe the responsibilities that the law and social conscience places on its citizens. My husband and I hope to teach our boys that their Indian ancestry should be a venerable guide for earning their place in society, not an entitlement to reparations for historical wrongs done to their ancestors generations ago. Susie Dewberry, Florence
MAKE ROOM Summer is here, and with it comes hordes of pleasure seekers. As a resident of Cheshire, I see a huge influx of traffic on Highway 36, bound for such destinations as Triangle Lake and the coast. Unfortunately for me, my only access to the trails where I ride my horse are about a mile down the highway. I am constantly amazed at how many people speed past my horse and I, never even hitting their brakes, or worse yet, honking their horns. Please respect the rights of everyone on the road. When you see a horse and rider, slow down, and if cross traffic allows, swing into the other lane a bit to give them room. Be aware of your load — even the most trustworthy horse can be spooked by large, loud RVs, trucks pulling trailers or boats behind them, flapping plastic tarps, etc. Use common sense — would you ever honk at a bicyclist? Please help keep me and my fellow riders safe this summer. Every equestrian will appreciate the consideration you show them on the road. J. Holmberg , Cheshire
CRUEL SENTENCE Although Jeffrey Luers admits he made a mistake in burning SUVs to protest global warming, his prison sentence of 23 years is exceedingly cruel punishment, lacking in justice, understanding, and compassion. Mary Jessup, San Francisco
BETTER ENERGY BILLS Last year, Congress wisely defeated the President's Energy Bill, which promoted fossil fuels at the expense of sensible clean and renewable energy. Now the Bush administration has split the energy bill that Congress rejected into several smaller bills, which are just as damaging as the bill defeated by Congress. Just as it did last year, Congress should vote down the current energy bills. Our leaders should demand that our nation focus on an energy policy that will result in less pollution, disease, and war than the energy policies that have guided us to date. Maggie Bagon, North Bend
UNFRIENDLY SKIES Despite serious civil liberties concerns and unanswered questions as to its effectiveness, the Bush administration is pressing forward with its Comprehensive Assisted Passenger Pre-Screening System II, or CAPPS. It is a frightening system designed to perform secretive background checks on the 100 million travelers who fly every year and to determine their "risk" to airline safety. This secret government security rating could change every time you fly, and the government won't reveal how you rate. You will have no meaningful way to challenge your score or to correct erroneous information. Your score will be based on credit information and secret law enforcement intelligence databases. This error-plagued system, easily abused by the use of false information, won't do much to prevent terrorism, but it could devastatingly weaken your civil liberties — including the creation of a blacklist of passengers who will not be allowed to fly freely. Contact your representatives in Congress and express your opposition to CAPPS II. Ask them what they're doing to stop this dangerous plan from moving forward. Tell your airlines not to share data and urge them not to be the government's accomplices in error-prone background checks every time you fly. Tell them to oppose CAPPS II. Christopher Michaels, Eugene
NADER HELPS BUSH This letter is a response to Pam Driscoll's letter (6/24). Yes, indeed "the lesser of two evils is still evil." Yes, multinational corporations are devouring us. But Realpolitik is Realpolitik, and Nader did everything possible in 2000 to elect the greater evil, and with help from shoddy ballots, voting fraud, and the Supreme Court he succeeded in electing Bush, who, if his last name were, say, Johnson instead, would likely be working selling encyclopedias. And that little genius has gotten the country in such a mess he may cause a depression and cause credit to America to be cut off. Swell! Clinton was the best friend U.S. business ever had but got the country out of the mess Reagan had gotten it into. So it is better to have the lesser of two evils. So why is Nader running anyway? Does he want to re-elect Little Elmo? And he obviously doesn't know his power urge is anal. And Nader is quintessentially just our man from Consumer Reports, who's never seemed very concerned about poverty or huge tax cuts for the rich. He just seems to address himself to affluent middle-class, consumerist-maniac Philistines. Likewise, I doubt he's read much in or on Marx, Engels, Lenin, anarchist theorists, or the Frankfurt School old boys, et al. In short, he doesn't seem broadly radical at all, just a typical American obsessive with a pitifully narrow specialization and subjectivity. Paul J. Green, Eugene
THINKING POSITIVE Thanks to physicist James Wood for sharing his reaction to the movie What the Bleep Do We Know (Letters, 6/24.) However, from my science-education-deprived perspective, I applaud the creators of the film for encouraging more people to think positively and to focus on what they want from moment to moment instead of wallowing in self-pity and hopelessness. I agree that we cannot have everything that we dream because we are limited by time, space and the human body, among other things. On the other hand, science is confined by our current understanding of the world around us, regardless of the methods used to prove theories. Consequently, we still need to dream of new possibilities. Negative thinking may not have caused the horrendous state of the world. Perhaps we are doomed to live among wars and starvation simply because of the competitive nature of humans, despite our thoughts. But dreaming feels good, benefits health and influences our behavior. And if there is the slightest possibility that this will bring about world peace, which the current mentality of violence in response to violence certainly has not, then I am in favor of focusing our intentions on love and utopia, and want more films like this, even if they aren't in alignment with current scientific principles. Pat Sweeney, Eugene
MUST DO SOMETHING As an avid (researched) activist after Sept. 11, the film Fahrenheit 9/11 did not contain anything shocking or new to me. In fact, I personally feel that there were important elements regarding what really happened on 9/11 that were not included in the film. Fahrenheit 9/11 appropriately opens with perhaps a full minute of audio juxtaposed with a dark screen. This felt symbolic of how "in the dark" America is. And interestingly enough, when we exited the dark theater into the late afternoon sun we were greeted with a nearly blinding light — illumination to help wake us up! Fahrenheit 9/11 is powerful; I broke down three times during the film, twice during scenes from Iraq and then when a mom of a U.S. soldier lost her son to the war. Those of us who went to the movie together talked about it afterward, all feeling anger and grief, wondering what we can do, because there is no conclusion or resolution in the movie, leaving a restless feeling of a need for revolution. Michael Moore is beyond brave to go up against the U.S. government to expose the truth about 9/11 and the Iraq war! Now, it is the responsibility of each of us to rise up and decide how we will respond to the serious charges against the Bush administration. Barbara Raisbeck , Eugene
REAL ARTISTS The last time I was allowed and encouraged to be a real artist may have been second grade. Sometime afterward I was told I could not hold a tune, had two left feet, and could not draw by someone trained to recognize that my artistic skills would not satisfy the ruling class. Once again art was stolen from the people. Before my grandfather's time everyone was allowed and encouraged to be artistic. I have seen their weaving, paintings on walls and bowls, their carvings, and heard their music, none of which could be sold to a doctor, lawyer, CEO or the state and none of which would gain them a grant to do art. Their lives were approached artistically and they paid their own rent. The saddest thing about today's art is, like everything else, people have allowed it to be stolen through enslavement, concentration of wealth, and the elitism of self-indulgent modern "artists." Ed Gunderson, Creswell
UNCOMPROMISING NADER There have been few people in the history of this nation who have worked harder, given more, and achieved more to promote social justice than Ralph Nader. I support him in this election because he is the only candidate who has taken an uncompromising stance in opposition to the butchery of thousands of unarmed men, women and children in Iraq. I had the honor and privilege of volunteering to work at the Nader nomination convention in Portland on June 26. Just being in the presence of well over 1,000 people who share my point of view was a thrill. It was less thrilling to be in the presence of the 60 or so Kerry supporters who showed up in a deliberate attempt to sabotage our efforts to get Mr. Nader on the ballot in Oregon. I called the Democratic Party of Oregon to express my displeasure. Not surprisingly, the nice lady I spoke with hung up on me when I pointed out that disrupting other political parties' meetings was a tactic used by Hitler's Brown Shirts during the Nazi's rise to power in Germany in the 1930s. I am mystified how anyone who identifies themselves as a progressive or liberal can support this resurgent fascism. Bob Watson , Eugene
LIBERTY IS DEAD The Supreme court recently made two decisions about the right to remain silent. They ruled in favor of Dick Cheney remaining silent, which was good for Dick because he did not want the people in California to know what his Enron buddies had planned to do to Granny Tillie's ass when her electric bill came. The other decision ruled that everyone else had to tell the police their name. That name when entered into the officer's Blackberry wireless device will give him access to the Matrix. The Matrix, a federally funded data base, would inform the officer who your relatives are, who lives in your house, the kind of car you drive or boat you own, whether you've been sued or, in one case, that you took your now ex-wife to a sex club. If you don't think it is right to sacrifice your liberties for "National Security," just remember what Dick Cheney said on the Senate floor the other day. "Go f*ck yourself!" Michael T. Hinojosa, Drain
OVERCAFFEINATED I am greatly offended by the 6/24 "Too Much Coffee Man" cartoon. In this cartoon, an angry man yells and then kicks his loving and receptive cat. I would ask, "Does this cartoon give kids and adults the idea that it's alright to kick an animal?" I would say yes. Perhaps you should think about the hundreds of animal abuse cases that are reported in Lane County Why would you want to encourage this kind of abuse. Why is animal abuse funny? What next, rape jokes? Domestic abuse humor? I call for the suspension or removal of Shannon Wheeler, the cartoonist, and an apology to the cool cats of Eugene. We love cats and to see them being abused is not funny. James Bakerhall, Eugene
COMMON GROUND In America, our bounty is in some ways our curse. In this land of plenty, we are not forced to work together out of necessity or thrift. Our ignorance of each other misleads us into assigning easy categorizations: "liberal" or "conservative," "radical" or "warmonger." We paint those who disagree with us into absurdly extreme corners in our mind, and never allow them to come out and be heard. Reading letters to the editor, I often wonder whether Americans are increasingly paying lip service to the ideals of democracy. A democracy invites and tolerates the clash of opinions, and understands its obligation to search for common ground. Indeed, a democracy knows its very survival depends upon it. A combustible mix of events is brewing: political party conventions, the release of the 9/11 Commission and Senate Intelligence Committee reports, a highly-charged theatrical release from a contentious director, the release of a loved and hated ex-president's autobiography, the Olympics in Athens, the growing torture scandal, and the possibility of worsening violence in the summer heat of electricity-insufficient Iraq. The fire danger here at home is very real. If we allow ourselves to forget our common interests, our common purpose, and our common ideals, our nation could be engulfed by passions not seen since 1968. Finding common ground requires first searching for it, a responsibility that belongs to all of us. Todd Huffman, M.D. , Eugene
SMALL SACRIFICES This seems a time of sentimental reflection on the passing of a former president and cultural icon whose perpetual smile in countless movie and cigarette ads over the years has inspired millions. I am particularly reminded of my opportunity as a widow with children to contribute most of their college funds to the health of the Star Wars project, the military and large corporations as part of Mr. Reagan's inspirational plan to trim the fat from social services. And of course the — how to put it? — great strides in national security and fiscal balance resulting from such policies made shouldering tens of thousands of dollars of debt seem a small price to pay. Our contribution came during the first phase of the program. I can only speculate as to the patriotic satisfaction of parents widowed after the final program cutbacks. Those fortunate souls gave not only all college funds but two years of basic family maintenance as well. Suffice it to say Mr. Reagan's life had a profound impact on the health and integrity of many, many families, the effects of which continue to echo down the decades. It was a gift that keeps on giving. Marian Streeter, Eugene
LETTERS POLICY: We print as many letters as space allows. Please limit length to 250 words and submissions to once a month. All letters are subject to editing for length and clarity, and must include address and phone number. E-mail to editor@eugeneweekly.com, fax to 484-4044, or mail to 1251 Lincoln, Eugene 97401.
OPEN DIALOGUE Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 is a friendly and implacable reminder that the nature of democracy is that it takes eternal vigilance to keep it. If we want to be free, we have to practice the principles of freedom. One of them is open and transparent dialogue about the actions of the leaders of the republic. When one of those leaders, be they the mayor of the town council or the president of the U.S., acts in ways that trample on and defeat the principles of democracy it is then necessary for those acts to be exposed. It is apparent from this documentary that the Bush family has had and continues to have a long and inglorious relationship with the rulers of Saudi Arabia and specifically the Bin Laden family. It was especially nauseous to find out that the Bush administration allowed members of the Bin Laden family and principle members of the Saudi royal family to leave the U.S. immediately after the attacks of 9/11. Just what were they thinking? That we would never find out? Another principle is that behavior has consequences. The acts of the Bush family in support of the haves and have mores‚ has helped those individuals reap an obscene amount of money from the suffering of others. The consequence for the Bushes are that one more of their family members will have the chance to go down in history as another one-term president. Gerry Merritt, Eugene
MORE ON MOORE I find it interesting that the most fervent critics of the movie Fahrenheit 9/11 seem more obsessed with attacking Michael Moore than in taking on the points he makes in his film. Moore's film offers a dramatic and unapologetic critique of Bush and his administration. But the facts that serve as the basis for Moore's critique have yet to be disputed. In fact, most, if not all, of the claims he makes are well known and part of the public record. If people think the case Moore makes is flawed, then they should debate the merits of that case. The failure of many right-wing critics to do so makes me wonder if they're more interested in playing politics than engaging in a genuine debate about the film's issues. Many critics have denounced this movie as unpatriotic and anti-soldier. For me, the movie served as a powerful (and painful) reminder of the costs of war — and of my obligation as a citizen to hold our leaders accountable for making wise decisions about when to send our troops into combat. Michael Moore, and many of the subjects in his movie, clearly love our country, but are deeply troubled by George Bush's leadership. Moore's movie raises extremely difficult questions that deserve our attention as we move toward the November elections, and as U.S. soldiers continue to die in Iraq. To be American means to engage, rather than passively accept, the actions of our leaders. Christopher Michaels , Eugene
THOUGHTS ARE ENERGY In his letter, James Wood complains that the film What the Bleep Do We Know is reflecting a popular trend to extend quantum physics from the sub microscopic to the macroscopic world ... but isn't everything made of those sub microscopic particles? Why do scientists think quantum physics doesn't affect our common perception of reality? It does affect the macroscopic world, but in ways that are very subtle. The Heisenburg uncertainty principle states that you cannot be entirely certain of the phenomena you are observing because you affect the phenomenon you are observing. This refers to observing electrons but it can explain the multiple points of view of reality in Rashomon as well. In a famous ESP experiment from the forties, people were asked if they believed in the possibility of ESP. Those who said "yes" were placed in one group and the ones who said "no" were placed in another, then both groups were tested. The "yes" group scored significantly above chance while the "no" group scored significantly below chance. In other words they were subconsciously going against their instinct to support their negative view. Their observation of the experiment affected the outcome of the experiment. Our five senses are governed by the macroscopic world of Newtonian physics, but if our thoughts are made of energy and energy operates by quantum physics, then our minds can perceive reality the way our five senses cannot. Alisa McLaughlin, Eugene
CLEAR VISION Experts say the next terrorist attack within the U.S is not a question of "if" but "when." I ask myself which candidate, John Kerry or George Bush, is better suited to lead our country in the face of such a threat? I believe John Kerry has a clearer vision for homeland security. His "Defend America" initiative incorporates existing resources and new innovative measures. For example, he includes homeland security as one of Americorps major objectives and under a new Community Defense Service hundreds of thousands of citizens will be trained to assist first responders if the need arises. Another initiative, "First Defenders," assures that local responders are fully equipped and ready to respond to a terrorist attack at home. Kerry will restore funding to COPS (cut to 1/10th of its budget under the Bush administration) to achieve the original goal of putting 100,000 more officers on the streets. Further, Kerry proposes basic national security standards for major metropolitan areas. How will we pay for this? By rolling back Bush's tax cut for the wealthiest Americans and using the money to fund homeland security initiatives. Three years after Sept. 11, homeland security is woefully inadequate. Nothing I have read convinces me Bush's vision for homeland security will change. Kerry's vision is specific, comprehensive, affordable, and most of all, a funded priority. For me the choice is clear. John Kerry is best suited to lead our homeland security needs. Jeff Gau, Eugene
LIGHTER TOUCH? I read Ms. Wadsworth's review of Fahrenheit 9/11 with an odd mix of respect and incredulousness. I, too, stood in line with friends on a hot summer's afternoon to see it. I'd been exposed to some of the information beforehand. What I saw was a pretty accurate account of The Whole Thing: the Bush Dynasty's awful and obvious complicity; the Saudi Royal Family; the possibility of unending war in our foreseeable lifetimes, and beyond. Whoa. What I do take issue with are certain comments by Ms. Wadsworth: That Michael Moore's "too vague on this point," or that he needs a "lighter touch." A lighter touch? We're not talking about the finer points of French cuisine here — a slightly more translucent sauce with a mere breath of fresh rosemary. No. I think we're talking about the transparency of the lies heaped upon us, the mind-blowing horrors of war, the rotting corpses, the stench of death. Rob Simonson, Eugene
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
 |
|||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
