Letters for January 26, 2017
More poor communication
Re “Communicate, folks” (editorial, Jan. 5):
Kudos to RN&R for taking Oscar Delgado to task for his public chastising of a fellow council member. In more ways than one, Delgado and Naomi Duerr have acted less like elected representatives of the people and more like best buddies to city employees: Delgado with his after meetings beer drinking with the city manager and Duerr, using her self-described empath abilities to shed tears to the mayor on behalf of— and do the bidding for—three allegedly harassed female employees.
Those women, who it now appears conspired to ruin the city manager’s career and that of another female employee they were jealous of. Delgado and Duerr forgot that the mayor is the elected and designated representative of the council when it comes to the management of staff and employee issues. As for Delgado publicly expressing his offense at Deurr predicting an alleged stereotypical Latino reaction from him to not take the women seriously, well, his public attack of Duerr sure sounded a lot like that of a Latino male whose machismo had been wounded. I think where there’s too much male Latino machismo exhibited, there’s good reason to wonder about other Latino stereotypical traits showing bias, too.
Count the tribes
Re “Perils of privitization” (Let Freedom Ring, Jan.19):
In Trainor’s rant against Gold Butte and Bear’s Ears National Monuments, he cites just two tribes—Paiutes, supporting the monuments, omitting 25 others Hopi, Uinta and Ouray Ute, Zuni, etc. He says “the feds take,” whereas the verb take means to get by conquering, capture, seize, trap, snare, catch, grasp, swallow. The land has been here since millennia before us, and will be after we are gone.
Do all your letters mean nothing to the RN&R? Or—does your editorial staff think it’s “open journalism,” or incredibly cute, to publish this shit? I am deeply insulted.
Who to blame
Russian hacking? In Hillary’s words, “What difference does it make?” We should be thankful those emails came to light because it proved collusion against Sanders because “it was her turn.” Democrats ignored their candidate’s corrupt and dishonest history. Even if it could be proven the Russians hacked the election, we still don’t know how they managed to place all those emails on Anthony Wiener’s laptop.
Seriously, these people were so lax in their email security, in addition to their blatant dishonesty, they have no one to blame except themselves. Any amateur could have hacked them.
Fighting the last war
Re “The next step” (Notes from the Neon Babylon, Jan. 19):
It’s amazing where you wrote “Trump’s single, overarching message for the nation” was actually “spot on” for explaining Obama’s whole presidency. And illegitimate? What was said about Clinton that was not true? Yeah, timing may have had a big part in her loss, but many of us deplorables—which, may I add, were the majority—had felt Obama’s “legacy” right in the caboose.
And though Bill Clinton wasn’t the one running, I know I don’t stand alone when saying that even if nothing else existed, him being impeached should have its own everlasting baggage. She is dirty, her hubby is dirty, and Obama was the furthest thing from American as it gets. Good riddance to yesterday, and hope that Trump does half the things proposed.