We have a choice this election
We live in scary times. Just a few months before our presidential election, Joe Biden, presumptive Democratic nominee is showing signs of cognitive decline due to his age. Never before has there been a call for a new candidate this close to an election. The Democratic Party, showing its wide diversity of interests and ideas is going through a difficult process as opinions fly around. It’s a messy process, but one that mirrors messiness of an active democracy.
For the Republican Party, the opposite appears to be true. For that party, there is no question who their leader will be. They are all lined up behind their presumptive nominee, Donald Trump. The problem is that Trump is a narcissistic twice impeached grifter, who has been found liable for sexual harassment, and election finance fraud. He is the first president in our history to request immunity for his actions as president and our Supreme Court inexplicably granted him that immunity. That same Supreme Court recently stripped many government agencies of the ability to enforce regulations that protect food, environment, transportation systems, financial institutions and places of work.
The sudden shift in power is without precedent and the way Republicans are quietly lining up behind it is unnerving. Since Trump has entered politics, his many critics within the Republican Party have left in frustration, been voted out of office or have suddenly and dramatically switched from outrage to full support as they apparently covet power more than the pledge to protect our Constitution. The base of Trump supporters have ignored or repudiated every impeachment, every guilty verdict, verbal abuse and transparent lie with stunning consistency. While the Democrats fret over their nominees’ recent performance, Republicans blindly kiss the ring of the most unworthy candidate in our history. Young men and women have died in wars to protect our freedom. Now, many of our citizens are willing to give it away over easily refuted lies, unfounded fears and the price of a gallon of gas.
We have a choice this election. That is abundantly clear, but the outcome is not. Indeed, these are scary times.
John F. Berky, Windsor
New look needed at ‘tough on crime’
Is “tough on crime” a bad choice? Bad drivers must be ticketed and fined for there to be a deterrence to making poor choices on the state’s roadways. In order for the threat of ticketing and assessing fines to be a deterrent for poor decisions made by bad drivers, it would be beneficial if people were fined accordingly when they speed, run a stop sign or red light, or drive a vehicle in a pedestrian zone. We have laws, we choose to not enforce them. Some in politics would place the blame for lack of enforcement on diminished personnel and funds. This is sometimes the case. However, my experience has been that even when law enforcement is available and the perpetrator is stopped, the individual may not be ticketed, upon discretion of law enforcement. This discretion is necessary as there are occasions when assessing penalties will not deter future actions. But this does not always work. My vehicle was recently struck by a driver running a red light. The driver didn’t receive a written reprimand. Is the inconvenience of the accident enough of a deterrent for this driver to alter driving decisions? The driver admitted running the light intentionally to be on time for an appointment.
I feel badly and angered by the needless loss of life we see on our highways. The senseless loss of loved ones such as the young DOT employee recently killed. Prior to retirement, I experienced the loss of a fellow state employee who I knew in passing. A state trooper, he was on the side of a highway, hit by alleged impaired drivers. Yes we need enforcement, yet in this newspaper I see a piece about our culture moving to a “second chance” society. Perhaps we need to reconsider some aspects of “tough on crime” options, in some instances.
Barry R. Cerreto, Vernon
