Advertisement

The patriotism of Thomas Paine; immigration reform; art and the Smithsonian

Share

Early American wisdom

Re “To be a Paine patriot,” Opinion, Jan. 30

After decades in which monopolists have been allowed to run riot through our economy, concepts such as the collective good and the public commons are music to my ears.

Thomas Paine believed that the chief measure of Americans’ patriotism was their willingness to sacrifice in proportion to their means and abilities. A patriot would forgo maximizing profits — even forgo profits altogether — if they came at the expense of the soldiery, the poor or the national debt. Paine’s belief suggests that we look to ourselves if we are to heal our ailing nation.

Advertisement

Sacrifice and selflessness used to be considered American ideals. Our national dialogue asks us to accept that “too big to fail” is somehow good for us. Paine offers us a solution that worked in the Depression: We’re all in the foxhole together. All we need to do is pull in the same direction.

John Thomas Ellis

Kentfield, Calif.

If Barbara Clark Smith would like to hark back to Revolutionary times, that’s fine by me. We’d have small government, no income tax and no redistribution of wealth other than what the churches would collect for the truly needy.

That’s why they call it the tea party.

Richard Shapiro

Los Angeles

Advertisement

Can we all join together to turn America around?

Certainly, as soon as we repeal Roe vs. Wade, trash regulation and ensure that everyone’s right to carry a loaded assault rifle is respected.

Then we can all tackle our biggest problems: unions, the war on Christmas and illegal immigrants.

Marvin J. Wolf

Mar Vista Heights

Border control and deportation

Re “Working on immigration,” Editorial, Jan. 31

Why do Democrats and The Times continue to insist that a path to citizenship is necessary in any discussion of immigration reform? We legalized millions of illegal immigrants with the amnesty of 1986, promising it was a one-time thing and that we would effectively seal the borders against further illegal immigration.

Advertisement

We now have more than 11 million illegal immigrants in the country, many of whom hope to become legal residents.

Rewarding those here illegally will only encourage more to follow. A better answer would be to deport as many illegal immigrants as humanly possible and then open the debate on immigration reform.

Workplace raids and the mandatory use of E-Verify are far better solutions than the DREAM Act.

Bill Wallace

Corona

Are illegal immigrants “carrying a forged driver’s license or using a fraudulent Social Security number” committing only “minor offenses,” as the editorial claims? Isn’t using a forged license even worse than driving without a license, since it enables further fraudulent activity? Doesn’t widespread use of fraudulent Social Security numbers undermine the entire system? Is tolerating these offenses “effectively enforcing immigration laws”?

Advertisement

And isn’t hiring drug and human smugglers to enter the country illegally a serious offense? How can taking this route be considered an auspicious first step on the “path to citizenship”?

Why isn’t the existing “path to citizenship,” followed faithfully by legal immigrants, good enough for the undocumented?

Howard Hurlbut

Redlands

We need to be treating the cause of why so many Mexicans risk death, injury and hardship to come to the United States. Mexico lacks public safety and an economy that provides hope for a future, so families migrate north.

In 2006, Steven Hill, writing in the Washington Post, proposed a Tex-Mex Marshall Plan, with the goal of decreasing disparities on the Mexican side of the border and fostering a better climate for investment. The U.S. would provide subsidies to create jobs and a middle class, boost homeownership and build infrastructure. Fewer Mexicans would want to emigrate north.

Advertisement

We need a comprehensive plan that deals with causes and not symptoms. The plan would begin with passage of the DREAM Act.

Allen Peters Baldwin

Lake Elsinore

Not so savvy at the Smithsonian

Re “An artless move at the Smithsonian,” Opinion, Jan. 31

Although I agree with Tyler Green’s criticism of Smithsonian Secretary G. Wayne Clough for pulling David Wojnarowicz’s video “A Fire in My Belly” from the institution’s “Hide/Seek” exhibit under pressure from the Catholic League, had Clough cited artistic grounds instead, I’d have completely concurred.

I was OK with the brief scene of ants crawling on the crucifix, but by the time I got to the mouth being sewn up by unseen hands, I decided the amateurish film wasn’t artistically even warm.

Advertisement

Call me a Philistine, but if that’s art, I’ll eat it.

Spencer Grant

Laguna Niguel

Would Green be calling for the ouster of Clough at the Smithsonian if the artwork that provoked so much controversy had depicted ants crawling on a crescent and star instead of a crucifix?

Allen Hagenbaugh

Pasadena

Paying what you owe

Advertisement

Re “Debt was charged off, not forgotten,” Business, Feb. 1

Add my name to the list of those who received a “past due” notice from Capital One — not only one but, after three month’s time, I received another.

Each statement added “interest charges.” I sent a note back with a copy of the second statement advising that not only was I not paying but that the debt had been included in our filing for personal bankruptcy. So much for their hassling.

Thanks to David Lazarus for his cogent columns advising people on their rights and what to watch out for.

Don Shulman

Los Angeles

Lazarus’ article typifies what is wrong with America today and what is partially to blame for the financial crisis in 2008. He tries to make Capital One out to be the bad guy.

Advertisement

The subject of this article owes Capital One $2,000. Why didn’t he pay it originally? Did he enjoy his vacation in Europe or his new living room furniture? Capital One loaned him the money. He should pay it back.

I’m sure some people are working two jobs to pay their debts, and they are not complaining about getting a statement in the mail that says they owe money that they really owe.

Lazarus should spend his time and energy on issues where the people deserve his help.

Gary Pinson

Sylmar

On Al Jazeera

Re “Al Jazeera has an American moment,” Feb. 1

Several years ago while traveling in Nepal, my husband and I tuned in to Al Jazeera English. Initially, it was out of curiosity to see why it was virtually banned in America.

Advertisement

We were impressed by its depth, thoroughness and evenhandedness. We found it more engaging than BBC and far more fair and balanced than the most-watched U.S. news channel.

Al Jazeera is serious reporting from a critical part of the world. But it doesn’t stop with the Middle East. It reports on science, culture and a full array of topics from around the world.

We would be well served to have it as an optional television news source.

Linda Shahinian

Culver City

Inside the mind

Re “Patt Morrison Asks: Elyn R. Saks,” Opinion, Jan. 29

Patt Morrison’s graceful interview with Elyn R. Saks struck me as deeply poignant. The need for mental evaluation is often recognizable by lay persons in families and social settings.

Advertisement

We all harbor transient chaotic thoughts and dreams as part of our normal mental process, but in the schizophrenic, the chaos is greatly exaggerated and uncontrolled, owing to instability in the chemical mechanisms that control these thoughts.

There is a need to better educate the public on ways to intervene and engage these people. We all should strive to offer more sympathy and sensitivity toward those struggling with mental illness.

William Solberg

Los Angeles

Big WikiLeaks

Re “WikiLeaks unplugged,” Opinion, Jan. 30

The way Doyle McManus tells it, the WikiLeaks revelations were really no big deal.

If so, why is Army Pfc. Bradley Manning locked away in solitary confinement? If so, why did Sweden resurrect previously dropped charges against Julian Assange? If so, why did the U.S. government pressure PayPal and other major Internet service providers to cease doing business with WikiLeaks? If so, why is the New York Times — a reliable voice for the government — opening an “official” leaks depository?

Advertisement

John R. Yates

Los Angeles

Advertisement