Letters to the Editor: ‘Liberate’ protests show why Trump is such a dangerous president
To the editor: President Trump is not always so supportive of “very responsible people” who gather to “express their views.” When the Women’s March protested the day after the president’s inauguration in 2017 (and did so without putting others’ lives at risk), he wasn’t such a fan.
With his tweets saying to “liberate” Michigan, Minnesota and Virginia, and his tacit support of people calling for the firing of Dr. Anthony Fauci, Trump continues to demonstrate just what makes him a very irresponsible and dangerous president.
If only our country could be liberated from Trump’s ignorance and confusion, and instead be guided by a leader with a clear vision and calming manner, we could all breathe a sigh of relief (six feet apart and wearing masks, of course).
Erika Wright, Mar Vista
To the editor: I read with interest about the protests against governors’ stay-home orders. Somehow or other, these demonstrators are making a political issue of guidelines to slow the spread of COVID-19, which the president has endorsed.
I am proud to say I voted for Trump, but my decision to follow his administration’s advice on social distancing and staying home is not a political one. I made this decision because I am not stupid.
I recently read about 81 people dying of COVID-19 in a single day in Los Angeles County. Also, I am turning 94 soon and would like to make it to 95 and even 100. I am staying in my house.
Barbara Hardesty, Los Angeles
To the editor: Protesters in Lansing, Mich., opposing Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s stay-at-home order marched on the state Capitol’s steps, and some brought with them assault rifles and Confederate flags.
Why bring assault rifles? Were the demonstrators going to shoot at the coronavirus? Were they going to show the coronavirus what tough hombres they were, therefore scaring the coronavirus into oblivion?
And why the Confederate flag? What does that symbol of hate have to do with stay-home orders?
Hugo Pastore, Lomita
To the editor: A little more than 20 years ago my daughter had cancer. The treatment required 16 rounds of chemotherapy; one treatment was given every 10 days.
What would have happened if she had refused her treatment because it was too hard or too scary? She spent days curled up in a fetal position, sometimes vomiting, but she toughed it out, and we now celebrate our grandchildren and our larger family.
I am having a hard time understanding the lack of perspective from those who cannot handle the treatment for this disease, which is staying at home. This virus is contagious, cancer is not. What are they thinking?
Jeffrey Gerber, Los Angeles
A cure for the common opinion
Get thought-provoking perspectives with our weekly newsletter.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.