/* */

Wednesday, August 08, 2001

Past Letters to the Editor

Over the years I’ve written a number of Letters to the Editor that have been published. Some of them are included here:

Hot time in the old Dome (Minneapolis StarTribune, 8/8/2001)

If the air conditioning keeps going out at the Metrodome, we may need to build an underground stadium. Now that’s a ballpark environmentalists might be in favor of!

Who should apologize: President Clinton or Ken Starr? (St. Paul Pioneer Press, 8/24/1998)

It’s ironic that Bill Clinton keeps his job after lying about sex, while Jocelyn Elders was fired for telling the truth about it.

A Wellstone White House? (Minneapolis StarTribune, 2/16/1997)

I am extremely excited about the idea of a Wellstone presidency. Historians will view the beginning of the new millenium as a time when humanity chose to sustain itself by protecting the environment, empowering working families and cleaning up government. It has been said that Paul Wellstone is a long shot in the year 2000, but if anyone can win a long-shot campaign, he can.

Coleman’s Switch (St. Paul Pioneer Press, 12/23/1996)

In the 1993 St. Paul mayor’s race, Andy Dawkins lost because he told the truth about smoking marijuana. Norm Coleman won because he lied about his party affiliation.

Come on, St. Paulers, get a brain.

Don’t move funds (St. Paul Pioneer Press, 12/6/1996)

I enjoy sports, but I also understand priorities. The environment is simply more important than a new baseball stadium.

Shame on anyone who would propose moving lottery proceeds spending from the environmental fund to a new stadium.

Better tactics (1996?)

In his July 27 letter, Independent-Republican Party Chairman Chris Georgacas said U.S. Sen. Paul Wellstone filibustered the disaster relief/rescissions bill “only so he could offer spending amendments that he freely admitted would fail on a bipartisan vote.”

In any negotiation, it is better to ask for a whole loaf and get half than to ask for half and get crumbs. Too many politicians offer the lame excuse that it’s “not feasible” to fight outrageous legislation in Congress. Let’s cut government waste before cutting aid to the poor.

When in doubt (1994)

Both amusing and disturbing, Darrell R. Panghorn explained in his Sept. 30 letter that he voted for Sharon Anderson in the IR primary because he “assumed, (wrongly, it seems) that she had some qualifications or she wouldn’t be a candidate.”

Perhaps low voter turnout is not such a bad thing, after all. A good rule of thumb might be to spend at least one half-hour studying each race you plan to vote on. In a nutshell, “When in doubt, don’t vote.”