Letters to the Editor for March 19, 2012

By Baker City Herald readers March 19, 2012 03:25 pm

Limbaugh is just plain nasty

To the editor:

What were you thinking, Jacoby?

You took half a page to try to let Limbaugh off the hook. “So what’s the big deal? (to paraphrase you). So he went a little overboard this time with his trademark slander. What’s so wrong with that?"

I am a freedom of speech man as much as anybody. And so I must defend Limbaugh’s right to defile himself with whatever he chooses to issue form his mouth; I don’t have to listen to him, and I don’t. Laws against libel, and common decency deter most folks from such atrocious utterances; but not Limbaugh.

But I must say for these people whom you chide for their flood of strong objections to this excessively vile slander: They must object. Every decent person ought to. To witness such a singularly offensive, nationally published libel upon a private citizen performing a citizen’s honorable public duty then remain silent is to be complicit to some degree. Such silence may be taken for agreement. So of course they must protest; who wants to be thought such a piece of poo?

You say he doesn’t work for the GOP of for any of their campaigns of candidates, and I presume you mean he is not on their payroll. Well he isn’t on the Demos payroll, either; but nobody thinks he works for them, surely. Nevertheless, he IS a major GOP party asset because thousands, maybe millions, of people who ought to know better listen to him and then go vote GOP. Maybe they ought to pay him.

Limbaugh’s stock in trade is vicious nastiness: libel, slander, gross misrepresentation. He pitches to the mean-spirited and ill-informed and those hungry to believe the libelous distortions and whoppers he poisons the airways with. Yet without the votes of the people who actually like such crap the GOP couldn’t elect a township dogcatcher, much less the president or flock of congressmen.

Dan Martin

Baker City

Not ready to reconsider wolves

To the editor:

Mr. Wally Sykes explains further about the wolf’s predilection for killing only barren ungulates on Page 4A of the March 12 edition of the Baker City Herald.

I would like to direct his attention to an article on Page 3A of the same edition entitled “Pregnant cow in Wallow County died of wounds caused by wolves.”

Mr. Dave Talbot, the owner of the cow, also has one of his newborn calves missing.  If Mr. Talbot can be convinced of the barren ungulate theory of wolf predation then I too will reconsider my view on this matter.  In the interim I remain skeptical and am still convinced wolves kill everything they can catch.

Neal Jacobson

Baker City