No fan of Cal
Why does the Journal print Cal Thomas' columns? To fulfill a fair and balanced approach? To give liberals still another conservative clown to laugh at? To hold him up as a model of how wretched and pitiful is the conservative media? Has he finally been elevated to the pinnacle of commentators speaking for the GOP now that Glenn Beck is in media limbo and Rush Limbaugh surely is on his way to media hell?
Thomas writes, "Democrats have managed to divert our (the GOP's) attention" ("Outmaneuvered GOP needs rhetorical focus," March 14). Well, finally he sees what's been before his eyes for some time, but the Democrats have managed this? How? No, the Republicans are pretty capable of diverting themselves.
"Instead of debating President Obama's dreadful record on just about everything, Democrats have managed to get Republicans talking about sex and morality." What? When haven't they talked about sex and morality? The truth is they have nothing else to debate since Obama's record on just about everything clearly is reversing George Bush's dreadful record — on just about everything.
Limbaugh's misogyny is well-known, as are his rants that liberals should take responsibility for their actions. He should do the same, but never does. Still, his freedom of speech remains intact. He can say anything he wants, he just can't say it on these public airways. If we the people chastise his sponsors, if they listen and pull their sponsorship, that's all of us exercising our freedom of speech.
PAUL LUNDRIGAN
Southmont
Reciting the pledge
John Railey's March 18 column, "Law should make Pledge mandatory," is spot on.
The new statute approved by the legislature requires two things. The first: All schools recite the pledge each day. The second: No child should be compelled to recite the pledge.
First Amendment objections to recitation of the pledge in school have been honored since the Supreme Court so ruled in 1946. Most authorities agree that First Amendment rights of minor children are rights exercisable not by the child but by the parent. Therefore, does the statute create a new right exercisable by the student or does it merely endorse the longstanding law?
I do not believe the legislature would adopt a law allowing a child to be insolent and disrespectful to the pledge. Too many Americans serving under our flag have died defending our freedoms. I believe the intent of this law merely requires pledge recitation, which has been our policy since 1994.
The policy the school board should adopt is simple. When a child refuses to recite the pledge, the school will honor the request. However, by the end of the day that child's parent will be contacted. The parent will be requested to sign a First Amendment waiver.
Like Railey's father, my father was a World War II veteran. I know how he would have reacted to such a request. I have no doubt the next day I would stand for the pledge as I am sure it would be painful for me to sit down.
A.L. "BUDDY" COLLINS
MEMBER, WINSTON-SALEM/FORSYTH COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION
Kernersville
Sum It Up
Do you think that Winston-Salem is open to all kinds of art?
#2, Mr. Collins, mandatory speech is not free speech. You claim that " Most authorities agree that First Amendment rights of minor children are rights exercisable not by the child but by the parent," yet the Supreme Court in Tinker v Des Moines held that the First Amendment applied to public schools, and that administrators would have to demonstrate constitutionally valid reasons for any specific regulation of speech in the classroom. The court observed, "It can hardly be argued that either students or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate."
ReplyDeleteI was surprised at John Railey's stance on the pledge in his editorial. Mainly because for some reason I thought he was Quaker. My daughter had a girl scout leader who was Quaker who was very uncomfortable with reciting the pledge for reasons of religious liberty. Too many generalizations and assumptions on my part I guess.
DeleteRailey is a Quaker.
DeleteNo country worth living in makes its citizens swear or pledge or salute anything.
That is for Hitler and his ilk.
Is W-S open to all kinds of art? Don't know. How many kinds are there?
ReplyDeleteGood question.
DeleteMany years ago SECCA got a grant, about $50,000, and used it to hire an "artist" to do an "installation". He got up in the bucket of a cherry picker and dripped white paint...on the building, in the trees, on the ground, even the parking lot.
I asked the director if this particular work of art was for sale. I thought that that was maybe a little bit funny. The director was not amused.
Clearly that director had no appreciation for "art" or humor.
DeleteThou art many.
ReplyDeleteVerily. I saw your unemployment post last night. Sounds like you have to put up with some frustrating people. Any chance you can put people on a 1099 or would you never have anyone available when you need them?
DeleteNo, don't think we could be away with 1099s.
DeleteSucks that Carolina lost...Kansas is incapable of traveling apparently...but it's all good. About to get my Don Draper on.
ReplyDeleteAh...I see...
DeleteOnce again the guys in the striped uniforms have done the Tar Heels in...I thought it was only the Wolfpack that they were out to get...or was that Dook?