To the editor: It is difficult for me to understand how President Trump can be on your “nice” list in your Christmas Day editorial list of the “naughty” and “nice” of 2018 for issuing a posthumous pardon to boxing champion Jack Johnson. Such actions by Trump are always done in his own self-interest.
What is even more glaring is that Christine Blasey Ford is further down the list for her courageous testimony at the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Supreme Court confirmation hearings. She put herself at significant risk so she could inform the country about an unsuitable judicial candidate.
Susan Phillips, Barrytown, N.Y.
To the editor: I was impressed by the “naughty or nice” editorial, especially your citing of Patagonia’s donation of its tax benefit to charitable causes. And thanks also for recognizing the fine governorship of Jerry Brown.
Both made me reflect that $5 billion for a medieval wall is worse than absurd. Like that corporate tax cut, it is morally bankrupt.
I want a wealth tax on the top 5% to improve rural healthcare for the bottom 30%. Perhaps it might save the life of an innocent migrant child and spare a mourning father who was only looking for work.
Chris Ryan, Monrovia
To the editor: I find it rather fascinating that your “naughty” list included Amazon, Facebook, Twitter and Google.
The key players for these companies — Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, Twitter’s Jack Dorsey and Google’s Larry Page and Sergey Brin — are all billionaires, with Bezos of course being the top guy and Dorsey bringing up the rear with less than $10 billion to his name.
I’m wondering if these super-rich guys really belong in the naughty column, or if the editorial board was just expressing its displeasure with sour grapes.
Bill Spitalnick, Newport Beach