---- — Opposes dissolution
TO THE EDITOR: On Tuesday, March 19, there will be a vote to dissolve the Village of Champlain.
It was brought to my attention that some villagers believe that the vote is only to have a study done on the village and how it works. This is entirely inaccurate; in fact, I’m still completely astounded that anyone would purposely mislead other villagers into voting “Yes” without divulging the full truth.
A vote of “Yes” will dissolve our village — forever.
Please help us stop this from happening. Our village is our way of life. Our village officials and workers are continually working to keep Champlain a viable and working village.
The state is trying hard to dissolve all villages because it is the one form of government that still belongs entirely to the people. We elect our own officials, and they truly represent our interests. The farther we move away from this form of government, the less we are heard.
A vote of “Yes” will take away our village. Please do not let that happen.
On Tuesday, March 19, please come out and vote a resounding “No” to save our village from those who would see it destroyed.
“No” on March 19.
LYNN B. McCARTHY
TO THE EDITOR: Imagine the pride of the Teapublican voter — the farcical spectacle of a succession of morons being jettisoned from the primary clown car.
The drama of your default standard-bearer, a lying, unprincipled economic royalist, who lost despite a coordinated campaign of racially discriminatory tactics.
Your re-born “party of smiles” remains one of corporate feudalism, partisan obstructionalism, exclusion and moral bankruptcy. Enjoy the contempt for democracy, selective Constitutional interpretations and a transparent, revisionist pining for a simpler, bygone (i.e., whiter) America. They will shed more heat than light on problems and offer “ready, fire, aim” solutions.
Teapublicans remain steadfast in their promotion (through rhetoric, legislation and nullification) of a subculture of racial animus, malfeasance and fomenting mistrust of government. Idology, crisis mongering and crony capitalism will trump the common good. They’ll still champion policies contrary to the mood of the majority and punish those they are elected to serve.
Revel in these twisted realities, upside-down views on economics, the marginalization of 98 percent of us and the belief that human rights are suspended at birth. Take pleasure in familiar lies about superior stewardship of the economy and the laughable term “job creators.” Blithely ignore facts and evidence of corporate domination, privatization of government, rapacious exploitation of the Earth and an insufferable upward concentration of wealth.
Your siren song is the bellicose, dyspeptic grunts of posturing, pompous fools, bereft of ideas and obsessed with power and its retention. Yes men for big business, naysayers for Americans.
Fearing the loss of their place suckling at the teat of corporate money, they cravenly appease a gaggle of seditious lunatics who they fear might, in a primary challenge, send them home, slobbering, reduced to cheating fellow country clubbers at golf.
Teapublicans, this is your party. Be proud.
TO THE EDITOR: Kudos to the Head Start Program, the administrators, teachers, staff, bus drivers, aides, cooks and volunteers who teach our little ones, ages 3, 4 and 5 years old.
At this early age at Head Start, they learn the skills to socialize in the bigger world they will be facing: the skill of proper speech in social interaction, making space for others outside their immediate family and, of course, the biggie, sharing.
Let’s give these folks the credit they deserve; give them an encouraging word once in a while. Thank them for what they do for our children.
This program is an excellent “head start” for our children.
RITA J. JOHNSON
TO THE EDITOR: In the fall of 1951, three guys from Plattsburgh spent a Saturday in Gotham.
Glenn Otis, Gus Lapham and John McGaulley, were all 1946 graduates — two from St. John’s and me, from MAI. I believe football was the only sport we all competed in together. In later years, I referred to my St. John’s friends as “we graduated from different high schools together.”
Francis was always “Gus,” and Glenn was, from high school, “Stubby.” As he grew in stature, I had a hard time dropping the “Stubby.” What Army general is known as “Stubby?”
In 1951, Glenn was at West Point, Gus was at an agricultural school in Farmingdale, and I was at the Columbia University Graduate of Business with an educational deferment. In 1946, many high school graduates from our area enlisted for an 18-month tour of duty. (Gus and Art Lefevre enlisted together with the understanding with the recruiter that they would stay together. Art went to Italy, and Gus and Glenn went to Korea, I believe.)
Glenn and Gus got together once in a while for Army football games. Recently, Gus called me. Glenn had extra tickets for the Army-Columbia game. Would I like to go? Sure.
Gus liked Greenwich Village; he and I went there a few times, Nick’s, Bob Condons, Dixieland, jazz. Okay, except that Glenn couldn’t go in his West Point uniform. How about a sports coat. No one will notice the grey pants at night? Glenn easily fit into one of my sports coats (one of two), and off we went to Greenwich Village and Dixieland for the night.
Afterward, Gus caught the LIRR to Farmingdale, Glenn switched jackets in my room on 116th Street and, I, of course, was home. Some memories are good.
JOHN H. McGAULLEY
TO THE EDITOR: As the “Blamer in Chief” continues to tell Americans the sequester is the Republican’s fault, I would like to remind him that the idea was his.
Personally, I believe it could become a positive move for America if the cuts in additional spending were targeted at wasteful programs. Sen. Tom Coburn puts out a book every year listing government waste. Why doesn’t Congress use that as a playbook for the sequestration?
Remember when the president promised to go line by line on the budget eliminating waste and duplicate programs? If we ever get a budget, that would be a great idea. There are plenty of ways cuts could be made that would not hurt our economy.
I am thankful for leaders who want to address the debt and deficit. But, I feel cutting our military will put all American’s at risk.
My heroes are leaders who will work together to stop unnecessary spending. I wonder if people realize how much we are borrowing just to support our government. The new programs suggested by the president in his State of the Union address sound OK, but are they worth borrowing from China to pay for them? Why will happen when China refuses to loan us any more money?
The $85 billion to cut the increase in government spending is about 2.4 percent or $2.40 per $100 for each American. I am already spending that on increased costs of gasoline. One adjusts and spends less somewhere else.
If our president wants, he can find ways to cut that won’t hurt us. I would like to say to him, “Yes, you can.”