"Trump's Tongue" Letter to the editor Tom Denton

Trump’s Tongue

 

Donald Trump’s fiasco in Helsinki, in which he joined comrade Vladimir Putin to cast doubt on US intelligence agencies and implied that the Russians were innocent victims, has generated a fresh review of the subtleties of the English language.  During his Helsinki press conference, he said that Putin had denied meddling in US elections, stating “I don’t see any reason why it would be.”  Back in America, facing harsh criticism from all quarters in the aftermath of the summit, he issued the following retraction:

 

             It should have been obvious . . .  In a key sentence in my remarks, I said the word “would” instead of “wouldn't.” The sentence should have been, “I don't see any reason why I wouldn't” or “why it wouldn't be Russia.”

 

When Trump speaks, nothing is obvious because his blizzards of falsehoods, semi-retractions, and winks offer no solid ground for drawing conclusions or inferences.  His original statement seems to let Russia off the hook.  His walkback remark seems to beg for a concluding clause:  “BECAUSE ALL US INTELLIGENCE CONFIRMS RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE.”  Alas, that clause seems to be locked up in the holding pen.

 

Trump’s reframing of his words recalls President Bill Clinton’s famous parsing when he was denying his sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky:  “It depends upon what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”  We know how well Clinton’s words served his cause.

 

Senator Sam Ervin, questioning a witness during the Watergate hearings, was asked how he knew 18 US Code 2511 would not let Nixon authorize a burglary in Daniel Ellsberg’s office.  He replied, “Because I can understand the English language.  It is my mother tongue.” We have learned that Trump has neither the capability nor the desire to use his words to defend the American people.

 

Publishing History

Poughkeepsie Journal          7/21

Shawangunk Journal    7/26

New Paltz Times    7/26    

Sullivan Democrat     7/27   

"Lyrics in question" Letter to the editor Misha Harnick

Lyrics in question


Jesse J. Smith did right to report about Faso attacking Delgado and Delgado’s response. Regardless, it is disturbing that this “exchange” even had taken place.

When, some 12 years ago, Antonio Delgado started his music business, to empower young, poor, especially black kids, he was a young man. It was naturally essential that he speaks to them in their “language” as well as musical taste. Many of us change over the years as we mature, and so do our ideals and opinions. It may be that today he would choose different tactics.

To single out some of the lyrics as being “troubling and offensive” is itself troubling and offensive, and childish. Besides, some of the sentiments the lyrics convey – “looks like we only goin’ from chains to cuffs/still niggas still locked up on stuff” -- VERY SADLY DOES represent reality that is still with us, today. And yes, the lyrics show an “ugly…picture of America”, but it is NOT a “FALSE picture of America” as Faso stated -- it is, sdly, still the reality today.

The use of the so-called N-word, be it “nigger” or “nigga” among blacks themselves is not always intended or taken as offensive; in fact, both literature and plain talk also use it at times almost as an endearing term.

Since the article made a point mentioning that Delgado moved to Congressional District 19 only last year, let me offer a different take on this phenomenon. To the contrary, I think it is a very positive, commendable, and wonderful act when someone sees there is a problem somewhere and wants to correct it. So, he moved his family to Rhinebeck, not far from where his wife was born and lived. I am certain that if there were a Faso in Schenectady county, Delgado would become a candidate to defeat him there.

I hope that both the incumbent and challenger will be able to campaign for the next 100 days in a decent, polite, and inoffensive manner.

Publishing history:

New Paltz Times 7-19-19

"Term Limits" Letter to the editor Misha Harnick

Term Limits

I may have missed some, but I do not recall EVER in the 40 or so years of my reading the paper seeing a full-page ad (July 12th, page 3) -- especially a political one! -- in the New Paltz Times (and its various predecessors).

From what I have read, I believe that ReclaimNY has been founded – and is being funded – by the Mercer family, together with Steve Bannon. Their goal and aim is to create and support right-wing agendas, yet make them appear like the most proper and beneficial thing for New York State residents to support. True, we have freedom of speech, but because of the background and activities of its financial backers, it is a disruptive organization, one that we should not encourage to meddle in local politics

As far as the content of the ad itself. I think that if a mayor, a governor, a county or state legislator, a congressmen – in other words ANY ELECTED official – does a good job which constituents approve of: it is a good think to keep them on the job until they are ready to leave, on their own, or get voted out of office. After all, continuity promotes trust and can help bring useful initiatives to successful fruition.

However, I strongly believe that APPOINTED officials, such as court justices and ESPECIALLY Supreme court justices, ought to have a term limit. While a mayor may continue his team’s work and agenda over several years, the Supreme Court has not even remotely such mandate. It deals with individual legal cases, on a case-by-case basis, although it at times refers to older decisions, as its members’ political leanings dictate them. We would do well to start campaigning for the Justices’ term limits!


Publishing history:

New Paltz Times 7-19-18