Letters for February 14, 2002
When we first brought up the problem with encroachments blocking access to the Lindo Channel greenway, we faced concerted character attacks by Councilmember Rick Keene and former E-R editor Jack Winning and some of their operatives. But we worked it out. Now, why don’t we vote for Keene and send him off to Sacramento? Maybe he can bring home some bacon for his hometown.
More recently, Suzanne Gibbs coordinated the opposition to public access to the Big Chico Creek Ecological Reserve, and we were subject to a withering disinformation campaign the likes of which I had never seen before. Nonetheless, the acquisition of the reserve was a brilliant accomplishment spearheaded by Suzanne.
Chico State’s management plan for the reserve now includes public access, and all has ended for the good. The two biggest dedications of land for the public purposes in our area came about because of Annie Bidwell and Suzanne Gibbs, and whatever their flaws we are indebted to them.
Pity the rich
John Burton’s, DSan Francisco, proposal to increase income taxes on the “rich” echoes the same old and worn-out mantra of the liberal Democrats. Playing the rich against the poor is divisive and causes resentment. It’s called class warfare.
This sick ideology undermines the very essence of what makes this country tick—the freedoms and opportunities available equally to everyone to make themselves the best they can be. And yes, along the way become prosperous and enjoy the good life. They should not be penalized for their successes.
These are the people who risk their wealth to create new industries and jobs and pay more than their fair share of taxes. Ten percent of the highest earners pay some 63 percent of all taxes—this from the Internal Revenue Service.
You stated that the “entire burden” of the deficit should not fall on the elderly, blind, disabled and, of course, the poor children, knowing that these people are generally not affected. These are the people liberal Democrats consistently and disingenuously focus on to justify tax increases. We all carry the burden of a deficit, Mr. Burton, some more than others.
To demonstrate your true concern for cutting the deficit, why don’t you propose a cut in the pay and perks legislators enjoy. You could also propose to stop spending on so many unnecessary and wasteful social programs.
Am I one of those despicable and evil rich? Absolutely not! Financially, I’m part of that segment called Middle America.
Mickey, Sonny and Enron
I grow weary of all the bleeding-heart left-wing liberals who think they can make significant changes by carrying placards and holding protests. In a college town where young people are suckered into such delusionary fantasies by populist sentiment, it is particularly distressing to see such ignorant behavior played out over and over again.
In the 1960s my generation was going to change the world by dismantling the military-industrial complex. It is still with us, however.
Here is what college students and the general populace are woefully ignorant of: In the late and middle 1800s in this country a body of law was passed that said that the interests of corporations were more important than the rights of individuals. That’s right, corporations are more important than the rights of individuals. It’s the law. Pushed through in large part by Justice Field, the laws were implemented to aid the development of the country. The two Field brothers, David Dudley Field and Stephen Johnson Field, were responsible for the codification of much of our legal system.
This bias for corporations and against individuals is what allowed for such debacles as the Enron collapse. It’s what enabled Disney to lobby and financially conscript Congress to pass the Sonny Bono Act so copyrights on Mickey Mouse wouldn’t expire in 2003, by extending copyright law 20 years. It’s what enables corporations to rule this country, not Congress or the people. You owe your soul to the company store.
Michael M. Peters
Save the country feel
I was at the Manzanita expansion workshop Jan. 24 and listened carefully to what the “experts” had to say about the five alternatives for this proposed project. These are my comments.
From everything that was said by these experts, the truth of what to do with the property rings clear as a bell. Any “improvements” in this sensitive park corridor will destroy what little is left of the “country feeling” of that area, and I do not say this lightly. This “feeling” is as precious and important as the park itself because it contributes to what the park experience is all about to the thousands who visit it regularly.
People go to that area for the beauty, the wildness, the feeling of “being in the country,” spaciousness and for the essential qualities that help rejuvenate and sustain us. That precious and sensitive little strip of corridor between Marigold and California Park is the essential presentation, the initial “warm up” to your arrival to Upper Park and the essential “slowly out of the park” experience before you drop back into the rat race of Chico.
Any widening of the road, putting in concrete curbs, sidewalks, gutters, bike paths, streetlights, stoplights will kill what is left of that “country” feeling. Any increase in traffic (predicted to be up to 600 cars per hour), traffic flow, speed or noise will kill what is so important to so many people in Chico and surrounding areas, not to mention air quality in the neighborhood and for park users.
In all my hundreds of trips to Upper Park or even driving through that area, I have never, ever, felt a desire for the trip to be faster or easier. On the contrary, quite the opposite. “I’m in the country; I can slow down now and relax.”
Just having that precious little strip of “country” makes everything else easier, and in my mind, that’s the real kind of “improvement” I need every day.
So for me the only alternative is no project, although we could put a sign at both ends at Marigold and California Park crossroads: “You are entering sensitive park corridor. Slow down and appreciate.”
Get involved. Save the park. Stop the expansion.
Murder in Iraq
Americans were appalled by the slaughter of more than 6 million Jews just six decades ago. How then can we now stand by and allow the murders of more than 1.6 million innocent people in Iraq by U.S.-imposed sanctions and bombings there? More than 750,000 of these have been children under the age of 5.
What if these were American children, dying because some ominous superpower would not allow the chemicals that are needed to treat the water or the materials, such as pipe, needed to fix broken sewer lines to come into the country? Without medicine to treat their sick and dying, physicians, who before Desert Storm provided 90 percent of the people with free health care, are now losing more than 90 percent of their patients.
Why are billions of our tax dollars helping support the genocide of these people? Why is questioning the actions of a government more interested in protecting the profits and interests of large corporations then the welfare of its people and environment looked upon as “un-American” or even an “act of terrorism"?
Who are the real terrorists here, the people trying to do something to better this world for the benefit of all or those trying to take all they can from this world for the enrichment of a few?
Mr. Bush would have everyone pin the responsibility on his so-called and inflammatory “axis of evil.” If you accept that notion, then how can you not consider the “root of all evil"? Now, review the playing field. …