Letters to the Editor 10/30/2024

Resolute leadership

To the Editor:

The recent outpouring of letters to the editor on the topic of the leadership capabilities of women was very encouraging if not down-right gratifying. One can appreciate editorial concerns to make sure our local paper (that we all love and support) does not print letters which could be considered uninformed at best or downright demeaning at worst. But look at what that short contentious letter brought forth. The responses were a great read, were they not? Heartwarming to read from so many locals in strong support of having women in leadership.

We are long overdue for a woman to be elected to take charge behind the Resolute Desk gifted from Queen Victoria to President Rutherford B. Hayes in 1800. Historically there have been 32 women who have run for the office of POTUS and half as many for the office of Vice President. Victoria Woodhull was the first woman to run for U.S. President in 1872 and in that century only one other woman attempted it; B. A. Lockwood ran for the office in 1884 and 1888.

In the next century, 15 women were presidential candidates of various parties. Notably, in 1972 S. A. Chisholm was the first black woman to run for the presidency and to serve in the U.S. Congress which she did for 15 years. In the first quarter of this century, 17 women have attempted to gain the office of POTUS. No woman was elected for either office until 2020. The first woman to have been elected Vice President of these United States is Kamala Harris.

Should Harris win the presidency of the United States of America this November, Queen Victoria’s Resolute Desk will have come from one woman, who wore the crown of the then greatest nation on Earth, to another woman who will take the helm of the greatest nation today. The gift will have waited 225 years to come full circle.

Susan Cobb

Election season

To the Editor:

Whew! Last week’s letters to the editor were quite the spectacle. It’s no surprise that some people have differing views about the coming election and how they view the election. However, the vitriol that has permeated this community is creating a black eye on what used to be a caring community.

I’m not sure where the origin of this came from but it has become ridiculous.

I had a couple people walk by my home and the man flipped me off. I confronted him and he turned and walked away.

So it continues, people calling names and espousing they know more than the rest of us. We watch and listen to both sides of issues and candidates. We listen to all the news. It may surprise some people but there are many so-called facts that are presented as fact when they are not. Research shows that we have been fed so many lies that separating facts from fiction becomes a real challenge.

So, I for one am glad that we are nearing the end of this election season because it will be great to return to normal.

Quit with your nonsense of being all-knowing, and start over with the old adage that if you can’t say something nice about someone then don’t say anything at all.

God bless America.

Owen Herzberg

Thank you

To the Editor:

Thank you, Mr. Cornelius, for publishing letters to the editor whether or not you agree with the opinion being stated. I salute you!

While I do not agree with Pat Farr’s assessment of “women being too emotional to run a country” (Margaret Thatcher, Queen Elizabeth ll, Golda Meir and others prove her to be wrong), I do agree with her right to express her opinion in a letter to the editor provided she is not threatening anyone, which she did not.

Perhaps what she meant to say was that she thought this woman was too emotional to run a country; that would be an entirely different matter for discussion.

I love Sisters Country and our newspaper. May you remain at the helm for many years to come.

Terry Hardin

What would Ike think?

To the Editor:

The first president I remember was General Dwight D. Eisenhower. He was Supreme Commander of the Allied Expeditionary Force in Europe and instrumental in defeating the impenetrably dark Nazis. At the other end of my life, our nation elected a president who was cheered and applauded by Nazis. I often wonder what Ike would have thought of the terrible arc our country has traveled in the course of one lifetime.

I wrote those words in 2020 before the last presidential election. I never thought I would have to reprise them, but here we are. I still ponder what Ike might have thought of the collapse of his traditional Republican party. It’s only speculation, of course, but I see him standing with those few whose character towers over their political ambition. They have been shunned by their party but history will treat them kindly and with the respect they deserve.

Stella Dean

Yelling fire

To the Editor:

I object to the just-plain-wrong statement by your Bunkhouse Chronicles columnist in his piece entitled “The Hacking of the American Mind,” in the October 16, Nugget, where he says that Minnesota Governor Tim Walz “lied. It is not illegal to shout fire in a crowded theater.”

Having handled a number of First Amendment cases in my litigation career, I have a bit of background on this issue, and think your readers shouldn’t have to swallow your columnist’s misstatement (or “alternative facts”). In reality, what happened is that Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, writing for the Supreme Court in a post-World War One case, held that falsely yelling “fire” in a theater, which causes panic and people getting trampled, can be illegal. The Supreme Court thus held that this is an example of reasonable limits that government can put on free speech that is otherwise protected by the First Amendment. Your columnist’s blunt statement that Governor Walz lied, betrays not only your columnist’s ignorance of legal history, but his willingness to use his media platform in furtherance of his right-wing extremist political views.

If we want to be inundated with crazy right-wing blather, we can turn on Fox News. Can’t we keep this hateful garbage out of The Nugget?

Timothy Grabe, attorney and pro tem judge

Editor’s note: The Nugget invited columnist Craig Rullman to reply to Mr. Grabe’s assertions. Click here to see the column written in response.

Not going back

To the Editor:

As I was beginning to compose a response to Chet Davis’ and Pat Farr’s letters, I picked up the latest Nugget and found that Mark Pachman had done all my work for me.

His letter eloquently educated us about the differences between the forms of the left side of political thinking. I think of politics as a long line with the furthest left being communism and the furthest right being fascism. It logically shows that we should be somewhere in the middle taking the best parts of each side without going to the extremes. There is no perfect form of government that is all things to all people. We haven’t evolved that far yet. Maybe someday. Democracy is a good start so let’s keep it for now.

I think that Jim Cornelius does an outstanding job editing The Nugget. I disagree with the people that said he shouldn’t print letters like Pat Farr’s. I’ve never seen such a response to a letter in this paper before. Perhaps Pat Farr will consider a little more further about the role women play in our society. I grew up in a household with a single mom for a time and two sisters. My mother was a good role model for my sisters and I and when she re-married, my stepfather was another good role model that was man enough to take on a strong-willed woman with three children. They soon had two of their own. Two more sisters. All of my sisters are strong-willed, accomplished women and they ain’t going back.

We are at a serious crisis point in our country and the world. I’ve witnessed a lot of history in my years and been through many elections. I’ve never been more worried about the outcome of an election than I am now. It really is a tipping point for us. The choice we make is going to determine where our country and the world will be in the near future. I choose Democracy and true freedom over lies and fascism. Bertrand Russel said, on how fascism starts, “First they fascinate the fools, then they muzzle the intelligent.”

Let’s not go there.

Bruce Campbell

Safer streets

To the Editor:

Sisters City Council approved the bid for the last phase of the McKinney Safety Project Wednesday night, October 23.

It includes improvement of the pedestrian crossing at North Fremont and additional pedestrian crossings at Trinity, Brooks Camp, and Arrowleaf, as well as signage. Thank you City Council, Paul Bertagna, and Public Works Committee! Your efforts to make McKinney Butte safer for pedestrians, cyclists, and traffic is much appreciated and will make a difference.

Speed is the single most important factor in the safety of a street. Please slow down and observe the 25 mph speed zone on McKinney Butte. Traveling from the high school to the roundabout going 25 will only take you about one minute longer than going 35 while the risk of severe injury almost doubles when a pedestrian is hit by a car going 35 instead of 25.

The City has done their part in making McKinney Butte safer. It is up to us to truly make it safer for all users.

Cathy Russell

The public square

To the Editor:

Thank you for publishing the Pat Farr letter (Oct. 16). I was one among many who found the ideas therein appalling and antiquated. However, the response it provoked in recognition and celebration of the power and potential of women was deeply meaningful to me. If you had quietly put that letter in the trash bin (perhaps where it belonged) then we all would not have had the opportunity to so powerfully and publicly assert the counterpoint.

The public square can be, often is, a raucous and uncomfortable place. Sometimes it is where we take ideas well past their prime and finally bury them.

Thank you for keeping the public square.

Owyhee Weikel-Magden

What’s newsworthy?

To the Editor:

In the October 23 issue of The Nugget, some readers took the editor to task for publishing a letter from Pat Farr the previous week in which Farr questioned a woman’s innate ability to be President of the United States.

To avoid confusion, I’ll immediately dismiss Ms. Farr’s statements as nonsense and suggest that the current election proves that presidential qualifications are not gender specific.

Clearly, the opinions of Ms. Farr were not those of The Nugget nor its editor. Her statements were in a letter to the editor within the opinion pages.

Should her letter have been “spiked,” as so many readers seem to believe? It is an increasingly common argument, from left and right, that “disinformation” or “misinformation” or “yellow journalism” or “fake news” should be repressed.

But if this happens, a cornerstone of our democracy would be lost, as emphasized by the quote frequently (and incorrectly) attributed to Voltaire: “I disapprove of what you say — and will defend to the death your right to say it.”

In fact, the October 23 crop of letters that energetically refuted the opinions of Ms. Farr proves the value of a free and open forum. Writers offered great information, including lists of female leaders around the world, examples of difficult (rational) decisions made by female leaders, and so on. Now we know.

Taken as a whole, this discussion advanced our community’s knowledge. Reading the opinions of others, especially ones we disagree with, and sharing our own, is key to the process. Understanding takes time and is not enhanced by repression.

Erik Dolson

Where “they” want us

To the Editor;

Well, it seems that “they” have us right where “they” want us: deeply divided along party lines. On one side we are told that Kamala is a fool who only speaks in word salads, and is a communist. On the other side we hear that Trump is a Nazi, a Hitler, a misogynist and a felon. Hmmm....

“They” have us securely divided into two different camps and the twain shall never meet. And how many years has it been that Epstein was “suicided” and we still haven’t seen the list? Why? Why do they want us divided? People, we are smarter than this.

It is an important election and we should all be concerned that 1,500-plus illegal aliens (when they quit counting — nothing to see here) were registered to vote in Oregon, including 36 in Deschutes County. Only U.S. citizens are allowed to vote in our elections. Our county clerk could be fined and imprisoned if he certifies an election if he knows fraud has been committed. We don’t want to see him in jail, do we?

If Trump wins, the country will not be under a dictator. If Kamala wins, we will not become a communist country.

We all need to be concerned about things that really matter: our children. We have the sickest children in the world, the highest autism rate in the world, the most obese children in the world, and our food, air, vaccine schedule, and water are in large part to blame. Let’s work together to get our children well again. Let’s unite to save the children.

Honestly, the Epstein list might hold a lot of answers. With very few exceptions, everyone in Washington is afraid of bringing that list to light. Let the trials begin.

Jayne Simmons

A thought for this moment

To the Editor:

Thank you for giving us the privilege to share our thoughts in this open forum.

As I have been reading the many letters to the editor these few weeks regarding our political leanings, I began pondering this thought asking myself, “If I saw a Mark, a Beth, a Thomas, a Laura, a Christine, a Pat, a Lane, a Terry, a Deborah, a Jan, a Kathy, a Gigi, a Kevin, a Donald, or a Jenny stranded on the side of the road would I pause to help them? If I saw them needing clothes, would I pause to help clothe them? If I saw them without food, would I pause to help feed them? If I knew they needed a ride to get to a doctor’s appointment, would I pause to take them?

As I considered my answer, my perspective changed — my heart changed.

Perhaps it might benefit us all if we could lean a bit more on those thoughts in the next few weeks ahead? I have faith to believe we all would take the time to pause.

Matthew 25:35-36

Jenny Denzer

Madrone for Council

To the Editor:

Residents of Sisters are fortunate to have outstanding candidates for the three open positions on the City Council. As one of your choices, please consider a vote for Eli Madrone.

As a business owner, volunteer on City Parks Advisory Board, parent and coach, Eli is fully invested in the future of our community. There are important decisions to be made in the coming months, and Eli will bring a fresh perspective to the Council that can benefit Sisters as it faces the challenges of growth. Join me and cast one of your votes for Eli Madrone.

Dixie Eckford

Heart of democracy

To the Editor:

I want to thank The Nugget for printing Pat Farr’s Letter to the Editor.

Each week there is at least one letter that makes me pause and invites me to reflect on what life events have shaped my beliefs and values. Often, there is some strong emotion attached both positive and not-so.

The point is the letters allow me a snapshot of who else makes up this community that is different from me. And that is important to know even if I don’t like what I have read. Sometimes I shake my head in disbelief, there may even be a few cuss words. Lately I am finding myself of the need to “turn to wonder” about what life experiences has led a person to their belief. I am trying to suspend my judgement and lean into inquiry versus advocacy. Trying to see if there is any opening to engage and understand without the end goal of changing or judging another who differs from me.

Pat’s letter, like many Letters to the Editor, was difficult to read, but not in an angry way. I think by participating in the book study offered through Paulina Springs Books on “Healing the Heart of Democracy” by Parker Palmer, I am learning how to respond more thoughtfully and engage in the community with deeper compassion. The impact on the Sisters Community by cultivating these five habits of the heart from Parker’s book is unlimited. Only when I can truly know and understand another am I in community with them and vice versa. It takes courage, skill, patience, and compassion. Sprinkle in hope. Give it a try!

The five habits of the heart from “Healing the Heart of Democracy”:

• An understanding that we are all in this together.

• An appreciation of the value of “otherness.”

• The ability to hold tensions in life-giving ways.

• A sense of personal voice and agency.

• A greater capacity to create community.

Lisa Gies

What I want in a President

To the Editor:

I am asking you and my neighbors to join me in voting for a president who sets a good example. A person who brings a vision of unity and who sees value in every human being. I want a president who views kindness, mutual respect, and compassion as strengths not weaknesses.

The president I want will not bask in self-achievement but will work for all of those who have not yet achieved their American dreams. I want a president that understands that greatness means protecting the disadvantaged, the vulnerable, and even those who want to become Americans. I want a president who understands that making a more perfect union always means moving forward not going backward, expanding freedoms not restricting them.

I want a president, not a king who shouts “off with his head” if someone questions him. My preferred president will honor the oath of office to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. I want a president who will protect our Capitol, as well as show genuine care for every state, county, and local community. I want a president who takes pride not in authority but in service to the people. Most importantly, I want a president who plays by the rules and keeps the law. This requires a clean legal record, not a rap sheet of convictions for fraud, abuse, and slander.

The president I want will work with our allies, not fawn over our enemies. It’s time for serious leadership, not vengeful impulsiveness or childish name-calling. Only one candidate comes close to these ideals. She will receive my vote.

Tim Hockett

Bigotry is not discourse

To the Editor:

I’d been looking forward to the explanation from the editorial team on why the letter on “too emotional” was published.

I was dismayed to read the editor’s justification last week, and the claim that it was “a good outcome.” Political discourse should be about ideas, policies, and principles rather than bigotry.

The editorial board needs to take responsibility for an error in judgment in publishing the letter. We don’t want to be a community or forum where people couch sexism or racism as “discourse.” Because what would be next? A public debate on whether minorities should be allowed in Sisters after dark?

Abhi Chaudhuri

Free speech

To the Editor:

Two weeks ago Pat Farr wrote a letter to the Editor stating her opinion of Kamala Harris’ (or women in general) ability to serve as President. Stating that most Americans don’t agree with her viewpoints would be an understatement. While voicing that kind of opinion publicly is her right, what really struck me was the voracious (orchestrated?) response to The Nugget for publishing her letter.

Numerous letter writers chastised The Nugget for not censoring Ms. Farr’s right to free speech. It would appear that some in our community are in favor of free speech only as long as that speech falls in line with their own beliefs. One can only look at the disastrous results of the “cancel culture” that has swept across our country to see the very real threat to democracy that comes from silencing free speech. We have all seen how the “speech police” (mobs) descended on those offering a view counter to popular culture as they were silenced or physically threatened on our college campuses. How different might our response to the pandemic have been if hundreds of experts in virology and epidemiology were not ‘cancelled’ and we were allowed an open debate on how to manage a pandemic?

Hearing viewpoints we disagree with should stimulate us to review our own beliefs and then offer up a response without asking for the writer — or the free press that published those views — to be cancelled. The best way to counter an opinion we find disagreeable is to make a strong argument in favor of one’s own views. Kudos to Kevin Statham’s letter in response that took on Ms. Farr’s opinion with fact instead of calling for The Nugget to start censoring free speech.

Can you imagine if our local paper decided to censor opinion that they did not like? What if the Editor was staunchly pro-life and stifled any pro-choice opinion? Or maybe a defund the police advocate and refused to publish any letters that supported law enforcement? Pretty easy to see how this would not serve the public well.

It is worth noting that the First Amendment not only guarantees freedom of speech, but also freedom of the press. A very bold proposition in 1789 when it was proposed, and it may be no coincidence that the next amendment guaranteed the right to bear arms!

James Madison was the primary author of the First Amendment and called a free press the “great bulwark of liberty” and went on to emphasize the importance of citizens and the press to be able to express their opinions without fear of reprisal. Wise words for all of us to remember.

As for free speech, it is alive and well here in Sisters Country, thanks in no small part to Jim Cornelius and The Nugget.

Carey Tosello

Unfit for office

To the Editor:

With election season upon us I’ve been thinking a lot about freedom and what it means to live in a democracy. I was dismayed to see so many people writing in this past week’s Nugget about how they can’t believe our paper would print an opinion from Pat Farr.

The First Amendment requires that people be allowed to express their thoughts. Freedom of the press is crucial to our democratic values. I also felt strongly that I should exercise my right as a citizen to express my opinions.

This is the most important election of our lifetime, maybe since the Civil War. The difference in the candidates is huge. We have the vice president running to lift up the people while the former president calls us “the enemy within” and “vermin,” spouting lies and conspiracy theories. He wants to lock up people in our public offices who call him out and disagree with his rhetoric. Putin and Xi are people he looks up to while U.S. soldiers are losers and suckers according to him.

Kamala Harris wants to expand tax credits for small business, protect women’s reproductive rights, and give incentives for first time home buyers. She supports unions and wants to raise the minimum wage.

Generals John Kelly and Mark Milley have called Trump a fascist. These facts are in plain sight. Trump shares his vision of this country with us himself! Listen to him. He wants to shut down news media and restrict the free press he calls fake news. People say they don’t like him but they like his policies. I know of only two; mass deportation and detention camps, oh and tariffs which economist say would add a $4,000 tax burden on the middle class.

The Biden Harris policies have allowed our GDP to grow, higher than ever before, and our stock market to break records. Wages are up and inflation is going down. We have an infrastructure bill, a CHIPS act and we are producing more oil than ever. Our democracy is the envy of the world.

Watch the former president’s rallies. Don’t take my word for it. The man is unhinged and unfit to be president. Please check the facts, be informed and vote for democracy.

Debra Lajko

Damage to office

To the Editor:

I never knew my uncle. A pilot in the U.S. Air Force, he was shot down over Korea a few months before I was born. His body was never found and we later learned he’d been captured and sent to a POW camp in Korea. He was then moved through China to a prison in the USSR where he eventually met his end.

My uncle was not a sucker or loser as Mr. Trump would have us believe. Donald Trump, who speaks fondly of the dictators in North Korea and Russia, is a threat to America and is unfit to serve as Commander in Chief of our armed forces.

Please vote for Kamala Harris and keep Donald Trump from doing further damage to our country.

Chris Harker

Harmful impact

To the Editor:

Despite the many responses in regards to Pat Farr’s “Too Emotional” letter in last week’s issue, you do not seem to grasp the power that you hold as the editor in our community newspaper. Though your intent may be to “keep as loose a rein on the discourse as possible,” your impact is a harmful validation of baseless, divisive views that foster prejudice rather than constructive debate. Your impact ripples out into the community. Your impact outweighs your intent, and I ask that you take responsibility.

I’ve seen countless divisive and discriminatory letters published in The Nugget. In the 6/30/2024 issue, you claim that The Nugget is going to be “more attentive to the guardrails” for letters published. The community voice is loud and clear — we are ready to see what these guardrails are, and we ask that you reconsider the policies that you may or may not have in place to determine what you publish.

The Sisters Country Vision states a goal to “honor and strive to maintain [...] the experience of caring and belonging,” and Strategy 4: Diversity states the goal to “bring Sisters Country’s less frequently heard voices into a more diverse, welcoming, and inclusive community conversation, fostering greater tolerance in the community.” Well, The Nugget is certainly not creating that welcoming space for many of us. I ask you to consider if the letters that you choose to publish foster connection in our community or perpetuate harm.

Please remember that your impact of harm in the community outweighs your intent for fiery discourse.

Hannah Joseph

Harris is well-qualified

To the Editor:

Kamala Harris is an attorney, and was a successful public prosecutor; including winning cases against some of the largest banks in the country, who were taking advantage of people. She is eminently qualified to be President of the United States.

Donald Trump is right on one thing. There is an enemy within; and yes that enemy within the United States is Donald Trump. We don’t need an authoritarian Putin puppet leading our government. To be against voting for Kamala Harris because she is a women is misogyny. That form of sexist prejudice is wrong. Please vote, supporting democracy, freedom and equality of all Americans.

Frank Siemsen

Discourse

To the Editor:

Like so many others, I was disappointed to see Pat Farr’s letter in The Nugget. Not least of all for the many counterexamples that readers have noted, nor the irony that, in this election, the candidate with demonstrably less capacity to regulate emotional responses is male. However, beyond disagreement with both the letter’s content and the decision to publish it, I am troubled by the rationale for its publication.

The editor cites promotion of robust public discourse, while acknowledging that political opinions may make some readers uncomfortable. But Farr’s claim was not that Kamala Harris as an individual is unfit for office. The sentiment of the letter is that women are unfit for office. That is not an uncomfortable political opinion. It’s a false, harmful stereotype that does nothing to enrich public discourse. Would the paper have published claims that black people don’t have the capacity to be president? I’d hope not. Because publishing such a claim as public discourse would acknowledge a clearly racist viewpoint as a legitimate political perspective. It’s not political, it’s wrong.

The editor suggests that the many letters in response is a good outcome. I disagree. They’re a necessary outcome, but having to continuously refute claims that have long since been proven false and discriminatory is nothing to celebrate. We should be past the point where blatantly sexist claims gain standing in public discourse. A better outcome would be reserving this forum for issues that have no social consensus. A better outcome would be refraining from publishing sexist stereotypes under the label of political opinion. A better outcome would be demonstrating that women’s capacity to serve in executive leadership positions is not open to debate. And yet, publishing letters like Farr’s in the spirit of robust discourse sends a clear signal that – somehow – it is.

Amy Paul

Voting for Will Lathrop

To the Editor:

Many of us have spoken on the virtue of choosing people over party in these troubling, divided times. There is a candidate that deserves the attention of all of us, regardless of party.

I am writing to encourage you to vote for Will Lathrop for Attorney General of Oregon. This is a really important race and it is really close, so your vote can make a difference.

Here is why I'm voting for him: It is no secret that Oregon is struggling with crime, addiction, and homelessness. Public safety should be our top priority this election. The Attorney General is Oregon’s chief law enforcement officer. Will was a child abuse prosecutor in Oregon for nearly a decade, worked on child abuse efforts at the national level, and most recently has been leading multinational teams in Africa to rescue human trafficking victims and combat land violence against widows. When elected, he is going to take on drug trafficking, work to keep children safe, and combat government corruption. He has the unique law enforcement experience (in Oregon and internationally) to rebuild law enforcement in our state and restore public safety.

Will is not a political guy, he is just a long-time public servant who is focused on accountability, problem-solving, and protecting victims from crime. I really encourage you to consider voting for him.

You can learn more online. https://www.willlathrop.com/ View his latest ad here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=El6IK1mQ1s0 or learn more about his work in Africa here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hw2WGM8ImS8 Will also had a great debate last week, you can watch his closing here! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHBZoqqzCV4

Chris Dudley