Notable: 2005-2006
Remove Consent Published in the Daily Item 9/6/05
Moving Tribute Published in the Daily Item 6/6/06
Verify Voting Published in the Daily Item 7/24/06
Propaganda Published in the Daily Item 8/13/06
Legally Human Published in the Daily Item 9/8/06
To the Daily Item 2002-2008
1.War on Iraq
From jcooper@bucknell.edu Sun Aug 4 06:35:56 2002
Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2002 14:15:54 -0400
To: letters@dailyitem.com
Subject: War on Iraq
Sir:
The Bush Administration is planning a war on Iraq. Troop deployments
indicate that it could come in October; a “surprise attack” could come
even sooner. The best estimates are that such a war that will likely:
* Cost thousands of American soldiers’ lives, if not many more;
* Kill many more Iraqi civilians, both through direct combat and
through the eradication of crucial infrastructure;
* Further destabilize the Middle East;
* Alienate America’s closest allies, almost all of whom (except Great
Britain) oppose an attack;
* Commit the military to a three-to-five year stay while Iraq rebuilds;
and
* Cost tens of billions in taxpayer dollars, all while the economy
crumbles at home.
Yet opponents of this scheme, including members of the military, were
few at the Senate hearings. One such imminently qualified, Scott Ritter,
a Republican, former UN weapons inspector in Iraq, and twelve-year Marine
Corps veteran, was denied an appearance at the Senate hearings but he
strongly, vocally opposes what is being planned.
“The clock is ticking,” he said recently, “and it’s ticking towards
war. And it’s going to be a real war. It’s going to be a war that will
result in the deaths of hundreds, if not thousands, of Americans and tens
of thousands of Iraqi civilians. It’s a war that is going to devastate
Iraq. It’s a war that’s going to destroy the credibility of the United
States of America. I just came back from London, and I can tell you this
– Tony Blair may talk a good show about war, but the British people and
the bulk of the British government do not support this war. The Europeans
do not support this war. NATO does not support this war. No one supports
this war.”
Ask yourselves, ladies and gentlemen, why! Why? Why!? Think, ladies
and gentlemen, think!
2. No War
From jcooper@bucknell.edu Fri Aug 30 16:19:06 2002
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 16:18:53 -0400 (EDT)
To: Craig Urey <curey@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Opposing the planned war on Iraq
Sir:
Wednesday, 28 August, meetings were held in each and every of these
United States between Senators or their representatives and groups of
individuals opposing the Bush administration’s headlong rush toward war
with Iraq.
As of Friday, 30 August, more than 160,000 people around the country
had signed an online petition protesting the plans for war against Iraq
and urging a more rational approach to the Iraqi issue. At the Wednesday
meetings, thousands delivered the first batch of these petitions to
Senators or their representatives.
Local TV stations broadcast interviews with participants in almost a
third of the meetings; and newspapers from the Austin-American Statesman
to the Chicago Tribune, from the Los Angeles Times to the Indianapolis
Star, have printed or are said to be writing stories covering them.
There appears to be a significant sentiment in this country against
rash, precipitate, unilateral action by the United States with respect to
Iraq. Certainly, that is the consensus abroad. The British Guardian
reports that, without a clear mandate by the Security Council of the
United Nations, military action against Iraq is considered unwarranted by
the European Union; nor do any members of the EU accept the United State’s
doctrine of a pre-emptive strike to prevent what has not occurred.
Yet our present leadership appears to be oblivious to international
opinion and heedless of established international law. Are we, a nation
of laws, to become lawless vigilantes? What does it take to stop the
United States’ itself becoming a ‘rogue state’, perpetrating violence
unilaterally against another?
Speak up, ladies and gentlemen. Make your voices heard.
3.War Proposal
From jcooper@bucknell.edu Wed Oct 9 05:34:24 2002
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 13:18:24 -0400 (EDT)
To: Craig Urey <curey@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Behind the war proposal
Sir:
Well, there you have it, ladies and gentlemen! The cat’s out of
the bag. George W. Bush, as shown on the Friday, 27 Sept., morning news,
includes in his rationale for attacking Iraq, the allegation that Saddam
Hussein tried to kill ‘my daddy’.
Regardless of the truth of that claim, are you willing to sacrifice your sons’
and daughters’, your fathers’ and brothers’ lives, to say nothing of this
nation’s economic well-being, and respect in the community of man-
and womankind, for a self-serving vendetta? Only the most hardened
cynics among George Jr’s critics and detractors would have imagined
so petty and personal an excuse.
This war proposal, which the Congress will vote on perhaps as
early as next week, is supported largely by innuendo, rumor and
unsubstantiated allegation. The American public is being hoodwinked into
an exercise in hillbilly ‘justice’. Perhaps it’s true as Sam Giancana is
purported to have said that, “Americans have to have a war with someone.
.. In the name of patriotism, Americans will do anything, go anywhere ..
they’ve just got to have an enemy.” Certainly, over the last 60 years, we
have been almost continuously at war with someone somewhere, in the
name of “peace” or “national self-interest”. How is our self-interest
advanced by engaging in precisely the sort of bullying thuggery of which
our antagonist is accused? Should he do as we say, not as we do? Or
should we?
Aggression to prevent the possibility of aggression is still aggression.
Wasn’t it George Jr’s own ‘daddy’ who promised a ‘kinder, gentler nation’?
Not any more, not even close! What kind of good neighbor attacks others
out of spite and vengeance, with malice aforethought?
4.War Vote
From jcooper@bucknell.edu Sun Oct 27 22:41:22 2002
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 22:37:18 -0500 (EST)
To: Craig Urey <curey@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Letters to the editor
Sir:
Paul Wellstone’s death lends new urgency to his two courageous votes
against wars with Iraq. “A unilateral U.S. attack on Iraq is wrong,” he
said. “I will not support it.” Although in a close race for reelection,
he did not hesitate to do the right thing.
A constant champion of the little guy in an age where political
decisions are too often swayed by three bigs – money, business, and lies-,
Wellstone ran against our prevailing corporate culture of greed,
militarism, and a privileged elite.
We have all seen insiders pocket millions while ordinary investors are
left with a shadow of their former savings. Seeking to distract Americans
from a faltering economy and corporate scandals, our current ‘leadership’
has exaggerated the danger of Saddam Hussein and led this nation to the
brink of war, climbing oil prices and underemployment as employers
announce layoffs while relying on temps. Our economy will recover only
when Americans regain their confidence in America’s commitment to:
renewable energy technology to lessen our dependence on imported oil;
rebuilding public transportation; a world community based on uniform
fairness, compassion, and caring for all, not an inherently unstable
‘balance’ of threats and terrorism; the new generation itself through
education. But America cannot do these things if our ‘leaders’ squander
our limited resources on military increases and tax cuts for the rich.
America’s strength is our capacity for work, reason and charity, not
panic hate and fear. Elect leaders who will put the nation to work
employing that capacity. Reject a Congress that supports militarism,
greed and fear. Support the vision of an America in which our elected
officials serve the common good of all humanity, not just the self-serving
interests of the few who have too much. Remember this when you vote
on November 5th, for all our sakes!
5. War’s Cost
From jcooper@bucknell.edu Wed Jan 29 15:00:36 2003
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 14:56:11 -0500
To: letters@dailyitem.com
Subject: War’s Cost
Sir:
If the Bush administration indeed pursues its ambition to wage war
on Iraq, a special World Health Organization task force has estimated the
cost in human life will be perhaps 100,000 Iraqi civilians wounded and
another 400,000 stricken by disease following the bombing of water and
sewage facilities and the disruption of food supplies.
In addition, United Nations agencies predict that the effect of war on Iraq
will be far worse than it was on Afghanistan owing to the urbanization
of so much of the Iraqi society. The nutritional status of some 3 million
out of the 26 million Iraqis is expected to be dire with four-fifths of those
children under the age of five and the rest pregnant or lactating women.
The United Nations also estimates that the kind of war projected by the
Bush administration will lead to between 2,000 and 50,000 civilian deaths
in Baghdad, between 1,200 and 30,000 on the southern and northern
fronts with up to 33,000 more if biological or chemical weapons are involved.
It’s astonishing to me that a self-proclaimed ‘born-again Christian’ would be
so intent on creating so much suffering and misery and be so blase’, so
indifferent to its consequences among a people whose principal guilt is
their victimization by their national leadership. ‘Collateral damage’ doesn’t
begin to convey the horror of what is anticipated by the United Nations agencies.
“If your enemies are hungry, feed them.” Romans 12:20. Wouldn’t it better
befit the great nation we like to think ourselves if we were to kill them
with kindness instead of bombs and missiles? How much food and health
care could provided with the $100s billions of dollars this adventure is
projected to cost? Or is it billions for death and destruction but not one
dime for humanitarian compassion?
6. Drift to War
From jcooper@bucknell.edu Sun Mar 2 13:10:37 2003
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2003 13:09:29 -0500 (EST)
To: Craig Urey <curey@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Drifting towards war
Sir:
Years ago, in another time of international crisis, a friend of
mine and I pasted bumper-stickers reading “Our Only Shelter is Peace”
beneath the fallout shelters in a major city. Those shelters have
disappeared but that truth remains.
Now America is panicked that terrorists may strike again; the Bush
administration carefully orchestrates a steady drumbeat of public
panic in a symphony of hysteria. Does it occur to anyone that if our
relations with the rest of this planet were less self-absorbed, less
self-interested, more concerned with other than gratifying our own selfish
impulses regardless the cost to others, we might not have to fear the
consequences of our ego-centric disregard for the welfare of the other
human beings on this planet?
Proud to be an American? I am embarrassed and chagrinned by, and
ashamed of, the behavior and policies, foreign and domestic, of our
current national ‘leadership’. At a conference this fall, a professional
counselor described the patterns of behavior to watch for to anticipate
and deter violence in schools. The behavior of the present administration
fits most of the earmarks of the pathologically pugnacious, physically
abusive, schoolyard bully. Our present foreign policy initiatives seem
designed to doom this country to decades more of that very hate,
resentment and hostility on which ‘terrorism’ and ‘terrorists’ feed
and flourish. Yet our ‘leadership’ is deaf, dumb and blind to the cries of
protest from an informed and inflamed citizenry.
I am proud of those admirable Americans who strive for peace, who
expose wrongdoing at home or abroad, who stand up to and against a
‘leadership’ that dishonors the principles and integrity this country was
founded to protect. I am proud to be among those whose patriotism
opposes the somnambulic drift toward the very fascism our parents
sacrificed to defeat sixty years ago.
7. Dissent
From jcooper@bucknell.edu Sat Mar 29 12:30:33 2003
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2003 12:30:22 -0500 (EST)
To: Craig Urey <curey@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Letter
*Sir:
The highest form of patriotism is dissent from immoral, illegal,
unjust, inexcusable national policies. A country IS NOT any given
administration, policy or war effort. A country is the principles and
history upon which it was founded and from which it has been formed.
The true patriots are not the mindless, knee-jerk automata who flock
lemming-like to applaud their country’s deadly and destructive policies,
but those courageous citizens who work to conserve peace and human life by
refusing to destroy either, who work to dissuade the populace from
disastrous international train-wrecks such as our current government is
presently pursuing. Any fool can make war; it takes courage,
statesmanship and wisdom to secure and conserve meaningful peace.
Our best, our only, defense against the folly of the current war, is to lay
down our arms, bring the troops home and work to build a better world
peaceably, not follow in the footsteps of those we despise. At this point,
we have lowered ourselves to the level of our ‘enemies’, if not below them!
How much further will we descend into the mire we have created for
ourselves and the rest of the world?
God Bless America? God HELP us .. to be a better people, a better
nation, better members of the world community. How will we live with
ourselves if we cannot learn to do a better job of living with others?
8. US vs Them
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 08:31:32 -0400 (EDT)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Craig Urey <curey@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Letter to the Editor: US vs Them
Sir:
Assassination, terror, revenge, vendetta, – like 30s gangsters –
mobster rub-outs, murder incorporated with malice aforethought,
ghoulishly picking the rubble for scraps of human flesh to assay,
America has bombed another convoy, with no evidence of having
succeeded in their intent. Remember the slaughtered Afghan wedding
party? If not Hussein, does anybody know or care who was killed this time?
What makes America a focus of so much animosity around the world,
is not a ‘them’, but us: the US. We are, to the majority of peoples on
this planet, the robber barons: living high on the hog, at the top of the
hill, in the lap of luxury, callously indifferent to the suffering we
tolerate if not outright cause at home and abroad. Wherever we turn,
wherever we are seen, wherever we leave our footprint on the lives of
others, it is marked by egregiously gross excess. Heavy-handed,
over-reactive, defensively self-protective, desperately in search of easy
enemies to conquer in lopsided conquests, our ‘leadership’ has taken us,
the US, down the path of retaliation and retribution while ignoring the
underlying causes of world discontent. What kind of country have we
become?
Assassination of other ‘leaders’, especially one fleeing, vanquished man,
will NOT remove the overwhelming sense of inequity, injustice and
powerlessness our dominance has imposed on hapless humanity.
We, the US, have no corner on righteousness, fairness, justice, equity;
we’d do far better to use our power and wealth to assist the other peoples
of this planet to achieve their dreams and aspirations than to try to force
our mold upon them. Might makes not right, but wrong triumphant.
Arrogant fat cats, wallowing in wealth, dictating to the oppressed and
impoverished of the world, is a role, a model unlikely to succeed in more
than the shortest of runs.
9. What’s Become
From jcooper@bucknell.edu Wed Jul 23 09:01:30 2003
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 09:00:27 -0400 (EDT)
To: letters@dailyitem.com
Subject: Letter to the Editor
Sir:
What has become of this country?
Where is the generosity, the magnanimity, the regard for human life
and well-being we used to pride ourselves on?
We were once seen as a good, kind people: generous, well-meaning,
good-natured.
Now we are seen as a hateful, fearful nation of wee, timorous, cowering
beasties: afraid of our own shadows, terrorized by our own government,
lashing out at imagined threats, swallowing fraudulent rationales to justify
the kidnap, imprisonment and slaughter of distant foreigners to save our
own hides! Why?
There was no imminent threat; there were no Weapons of Mass
Destruction; there was no connection to Al Qaeda. We’ve been were lied
to. Deceived. Conned. Hoodwinked. Led by the Pied Piper and his crew
to acquiesce to appalling, savage acts for no good reason.
Where is the outrage? Isn’t anyone appalled?
What if the real purpose of Bush’s Gulf War II was, in preparation for
the next presidential election, to disguise the record of an ignorant,
inept and ineffectual president behind the mirage of a powerful wartime
leader, to push through the Republican domestic agenda: Tax cuts for the
ultra-wealthy and over-privileged; and other policies and programs that
will continue the serious consequences we have already seen for the rest
of us, for the economy?
What if the real purpose is to destroy the institutional basis for
social support systems, to undercut Social Security, our educational
system, and any other programs based on the concept that we have the duty
of care and concern for the welfare of one another? The ideas that we owe
sympathy for, and solidarity with, our fellow human beings, that we should
care whether everyone has food, shelter or medical care, are dangerous
thoughts to the hoarders, custodians and beneficiaries of privilege and
benefits for the select few.
Pub SDI: 27 July 2003
10. Messing with the Environment
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 16:01:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Messing with the environment
Sir:
“Don’t Mess with Texas”, the bumper stickers read! But the world’s
most prominent Texan has no qualms about messing with other states:
Afghanistan, Iraq. What a mess he and his crew have made of those
blighted principalities: occupied Baghdad’s streets calf-deep in raw
sewage, its water undrinkable, its infrastructure obliterated. Dubya was
right when he said in the 2000 campaign that ‘nation-building’ was not
his thing. How true! Nation-destroying, more like!
Now he plans to give his coterie of industrialist supporters a pass on US
regulations controlling the emissions from power plants. Twenty-five
years of trying to get the power industry’s act cleaned up through the
Clean Air Act dismissed, dismantled, undercut and set aside in favor of
soot, ash, foul smells and air-polluting discharges. The pirates have
boarded the ship of state, ladies and gentleman. At what will this man
stop in his attempts to set this country, this planet, back a century?
Having thoroughly mucked it up abroad, having made a shambles of the
tragedy of the Middle East, our glorious leadership now turns its
attention to the security of the homeland’s energy supply. Does it occur
to them that the blackout, the collapse of the Northeastern power grid,
stems from their predecessors’ deregulation of the power industry, the
consistent, short-sighted sacrifice of upkeep and improvement on the twin
altars of unbridled competition and greed for profit?
These are careless people, who leave their messes for others to clean
up, who care less and less for the welfare of us, the US, or anyone
outside the circle of their business partners and associates. Trashing
the environment, fouling our nest, leaving a filthy legacy for our
children and grandchildren seems to come second-nature to this
administration. Suffer the little children? Suffer, future generations’
environment; suffer, suffer!
Pub 26 Aug. 03
11. Bush Bashers
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 21:44:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Bush-bashers explained
Sir:
In a letter to the editor, Sunbury Daily Item, 7 Sept. ’03, a
correspondent alleged that “Bush bashers” do so because he is both
Republican and Christian.
Wasn’t it Paul Hill, the recently executed, self-righteous shotgun
slayer, who said that he was confident Jesus, too, would have pulled the
trigger?
I concede Dubya and his gang of caterers to special interests have no
clue what constitutes the Democratic process.
But I, for one, believe that no political persuasion has a monopoly on
virtue, or folly.
I, for one, assess others not on what they call themselves but on their
behavior: what they do and how they act.
In what way have Bush’s, and his cohorts’, actions have been remotely
Christ-like?
It seems to me that Bush and his colleagues have done precious little
this last three years that is consistent with the teachings of Christ.
I suspect that the vast majority of Mr. Bush’s critics object, not to
whatever labels he may pin on his lapel, but to his actions and their
consequences.
Pub. 26 Sept. 03
12. Support the Troops
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 11:37:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Supporting the troops
Sir:
In your October 21, 2003, editorial enjoining citizens to support the
Troops, you correctly observe: “Support for individual soldiers does not
imply support for the war itself. Indeed, to fully support soldiers, the
nation would avoid war at all costs so as not to put them at risk in the
first place.”
Absolutely! Bravo! Well said! By Jove, I think you’ve got it!
Further you add, “But in a dangerous world, there always will be a need
for brave people to do dangerous tasks.”
Quite so, and nothing is so dangerous in this world as rule by clueless
leaders who lurch and lunge at the opportunity to make war without giving
peace-makers sufficient chance, leaders who concoct false pretenses to
cloak their ulterior motives! How else can it be that every failure to
discover the prior rationales for war results in secondary, tertiary, nay
quaternary excuses to justify, after the facts, the fait accompli.
War is the failure of politics, the failure of humanity to overcome
coarse animal instinct, the international equivalent of spousal abuse,
aggravated assault, resort to violence when words fail. This war was
initiated by little men with little imagination and little patience for
dealing with fellow human beings as equals, with equal rights to their
own if different aspirations.
The tragedy of our soldiers abroad is not just their deaths and
injuries, not just the maiming and slaughter of many, many more Iraqis.
It is that this enterprise was unnecessary, uncalled for, unjustifiable
ethically and morally. Even the soldiers who return alive without
physical trauma will have to deal with the fact that they were pawns in a
political game played by politicians more concerned with movements on the
board than the welfare of either them or their so-called enemy.
Help them to understand.
Pub. 23 Oct 03
13. Being Thankful
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:28:40 -0500 (EST)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: On being thankful
Sir:
Something is seriously wrong.
From interpersonal to international relations, almost any abuse, or
risking, of others’ welfare seems to be justifiable in the name of
self-interest, -convenience or -gain:
Barging in front of others in line;
An epidemic of unflushed public toilets;
Reckless endangerment of others on the roadways;
Three million jobs lost while executives of failed corporations bask
on Bahamian beaches; An environment exploited for short-term
corporate gain; Malicious attacks against non-existent threats abroad for political
gain at home … multiple incivilities to our environment, animate and
inanimate.
Something in our current national culture seems to celebrate treating
others as objects to be mined, exploited, abused and discarded like some
disposable resource, rather than as human beings deserving precisely the
same regard and consideration we lavish upon ourselves.
Where has basic human decency and respect for others gone?
We are in a life-or-death struggle for survival. Our antagonists, our
principal threat are OURSELVES. We are our own, and this planet’s,
worst enemy. Our species is presently engaged in a tragi-comedy of
self-destructive behaviors in the name of petty loyalty to national,
state, tribal, clan and personal self-interests. We pillage, rape and
exploit the environment to the detriment not only of ourselves but other
species on this planet as we engage in fratricidal wars that soil what’s
left of the biosphere. If we don’t learn to live together as a single
species – as protectors, custodians and stewards of this planet -, we
shall, like the dinosaurs, leave nothing for the cockroaches, beetles and
bacteria but to repair the damage done by the evolutionary dead-end we
appear to be fast becoming.
Rather than congratulating ourselves for all we have that others now
lack, might we seek ways to prompt others’ thanks for our contribution to
the well-being of this planet?
Pub 24 Nov. 03
14. Patriot Act
From jcooper@bucknell.edu Fri Dec 19 14:05:22 2003
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 11:23:33 -0500 (EST)
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: USA Patriot Act
Sir:
The USA Patriot Act, passed 26 Oct. 2001, contains provisions that
contradict the Bill of Rights. Concerns have prompted over 200
principalities and at least one state to pass resolutions expressing
their reservations to such provisions of the USA Patriot Act as:
– The definition of terrorist is broadened to make domestic activist
groups engaged in some types of civil disobedience subject to prosecution.
– The government is permitted to monitor Internet traffic and e-mail
communications without probable cause by obtaining web addresses and
routing information. Such traffic information for the general public
cannot be separated from such information on the activity of targeted
individuals.
– Law enforcement is allowed to conduct secret searches. Investigators
may enter your home or office, take pictures and seize items without
informing you about the search until after the fact.
– Law enforcement is given broad access to personal records – educational,
medical, financial, sales, library, etc. – without probable cause;
holders of this information, such as librarians are prohibited, under
threat of incarceration, from disclosing release of such records to the
authorities.
– The government is allowed to seize assets of an individual or
organization without prior hearing or notice if the government alleges
that either has engaged in, or is planning to engage in, an act of
domestic terrorism. In practice, the government could bankrupt an
individual or organization so designated without prior hearing or notice.
– The government is permitted to detain and incarcerate immigrants and
other non-citizens indefinitely without having to show that they are
terrorists.
– The government is permitted to gather information on US citizens and to
share that information with CIA and other non-law enforcement officials
without the judicial oversight and other safeguards required heretofore.
For comparison, see Amendments I, IV, V and VI to the US Constitution.
Pub. 23 Dec. 03
15. Am-Bushing Mars
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 13:33:07 -0500 (EST)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Letter to Editor
Am-Bushing Mars
Sir:
What ever happened to the principle of finishing one project
before embarking on the next grandiose scheme? Mr. Bush now proposes to
send a man to Mars, perhaps on to the rest of the solar system.
Caesar said, “If you can’t give them bread, give them circus!” A
Martian circus perhaps?
Mr. Bush, there is sufficient business you’ve started and left
unfinished on this planet for several lifetimes of conscientious
restitution and reparation: the mess in Afghanistan, the mess in Iraq,
the mess of our budgetary deficits, the mess of your jobless recovery,
the mess of your tax-give-aways for the well-to-do, and so on. It will
take this country decades to recover, fiscally and otherwise, from the
holes you and your administration have dug, dropped us in and
abandoned us to. Why should we take on more obligations with those
we already have, left unfulfilled?
Were we to undertake more obligations, it seems to me we might
better consider the needs of our own people .. for jobs, for universal
healthcare, for a far more reasonable and equitable distribution of
wealth, for a domestic environment free of government sponsored
hys-terror-ia watches, for a government respectful of the Constitution
and the Bill of Rights, for a foreign policy consistent with the rights
of other peoples to pursue their own destinies in their own ways without
the imposition of our government’s will upon them. But these I recognize
will require regime change, at home!
Until that happy day, may I suggest, Mr. Bush, you attend to the
clean up necessitated by the projects you have already initiated on this
planet rather than embark on new ones to distract the populace from those
left as yet undone: clean up this our nest before moving on to sully the
rest of the solar system.
Published, 29 Jan. 2004
16. Ask Why
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 01:10:45 -0500 (EST)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Craig Urey <curey@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Letter to the Editor
Sir:
Ask why:
– America foisted a war upon Iraq on the basis of incorrect, inaccurate,
misleading ‘intelligence’. Hundreds of our own and over ten thousand
Iraqis have been killed and five times as many wounded on the basis of
false premises, yet nowhere has our government offered the slightest
remorse, contrition or apology for this country’s murderous blunder.
Why not?
– Terrorism is one among many possible responses of the weak and
oppressed to force and oppression. The lesson of the Iraq quagmire,
as indeed the Palestinian imbroglio, is that violence begets violence;
force begets retaliation. The continued imposition of force and
oppression as a response to terrorism is transparently counter-
productive to deterring terrorism as it furthers the pre-conditions for
additional terrorism. Are we learning impaired? Why not remove the
causes of terrorism, empower the weak and cease our oppression?
– Democracy is rule by the people; oligarchy: rule by a few; plutocracy:
rule by the wealthy; chrematocracy: rule by the pursuit of wealth. We
say we wish to export ‘democracy’ to the rest of the world, yet when
did you last see a business, or an institution run democratically? Isn’t
our national practice better described as an oligarchy, a plutocracy, a
venal chrematocracy or worse? Wouldn’t ‘democracy’ be more salable
to others if we first, truly practiced it here at home?
– Workers in this country, those who create, produce and maintain things
of real value, are the worst compensated, are treated like disposable
commodities: mined, exploited, used up and discarded like industrial
waste. Why do they put up with such treatment? Why doesn’t our most
precious resource protest their mistreatment?
– The present Administration promised this country honor, dignity and
integrity. What about our credibility? Where are these gone now?
Published 24 II 04
17. Toxic Leadership
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 05:12:32 -0500 (EST)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Craig Urey <curey@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Letter to Editor
Toxic Leadership
Sir:
[Mr. Bush says that he knows just where he wants to lead this country!
See how far he’s come in three short years:]
An illegal war of aggression initiated on false pretenses and manipulated
“intelligence”.
Lies, deceit and disinformation to cover up the murderous fraud; when
Clinton lied nobody died, but this administration’s falsehoods kill!
A conscious, deliberate, corrosive erosion of the Constitution; our
precious, celebrated Bill of Rights trampled underfoot in the name of
“homeland security”.
Programs for education, the poor, the ill, the elderly and children gutted,
while tax cuts are provided the most wealthy for decades to come.
The environment sacrificed on the altar of greed, profits and junk-
science; even the Pentagon says our future is put at risk.
Three million jobs lost by an out-of-control government, increasingly
of corporations, by corporations, for corporations; the people, now
second-class citizens. Mussolini declared Fascism is “corporatism,
for it is the merger of state and corporate power!”
A national culture increasingly hateful, prejudiced, hysterically
suspicious and narcissistic; an ethic of bigotry and dogmatic intolerance
promoted in the name and guise of religious fervor.
A “mainstream” press following our “leadership” around, wagging its
tail behind it, not daring to question or criticize them for fear of losing
its access to them, thus losing readership.
A once caring, compassionate people now sociopathically[, if not
psychopathically,] insensitive to the misery and suffering our arrogant
actions bring others.
A pariah, rogue nation reviled, ridiculed, despised and hated the world
over, ever more deeply sowing the seeds of terrorism in our oxymoronic
of an unending “War on Terrorism”! War IS NATIONAL terrorism!
All this in just three short years? Is this the America we want? [How
much more of this demagogue’s Bush-league, toxic “leadership” can
this country stand? We can, we must, do better!]
Published 30 Mar. 2004 with passages in [] above, all reference to
Bush and the passage on psychopathic, deleted by the editor.
18. Self and Others
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 17:32:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Letter to the Editor
Interests: Self and Others’
Sir:
Over and over again, ‘interests’ are used as justification for
offensive acts from personal indignities to military atrocities.
‘National interests’, are said to justify subjecting other peoples to our
will: invading their countries, terrorizing, slaughtering their populace,
imposing our ethics, morals, governmental procedures on them and
consuming their resources, for our own sakes.
A mugger approaches you on the street. Although his interests are
served by robbing you, or worse, it is unacceptable in ‘civilized’ society
for his interests to supersede yours; others’ interests stop where your
person begins. Similarly, a thug’s, rapist’s, cheat’s, charlatan’s or
scoundrel’s ‘interests’ may well be served by their physical, fiscal or
emotional assault upon your being or person. Yet at the individual
level that assault is an unacceptable act. Why then are such assaults
supposed legitimate and acceptable among nations, when between
individuals they generally are not?
When individuals’ ‘interests’ are in conflict, how is it decided
whose shall prevail? In ‘civilized’ societies, police, the courts and
clerical mediators assist in attempting to arrive at ‘fair’, just or
equitable resolutions: something for everyone. An individual cannot
disregard the police or courts without becoming an outlaw.
Between states, the United Nations or the World Court provide means
for obtaining solutions respectful of the competing ‘interests’ of
individual countries. But necessary to the effectiveness of such agencies
is the condition that nations work cooperatively within these agencies’
framework toward a resolution. When a nation or its military, defying
the UN or the World Court, contemptuously acts pre-emptively
regardless of the ‘interests’ of other nations, is that not also the
behavior of an outlaw state? Might makes, not right but, a mockery
of fairness or justice!
What has become of our country’s founding principles for which it
was once so widely admired?
Published 28 IV 04
19. Getting It
Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 14:25:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Craig Urey <curey@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Letter to the Editor
Getting it?
Sir:
“Why are there so many intelligent people out there who just don’t get it?”
a friend asked.
Good question! It’s clear that ‘intelligence’ has no bearing on the ability
of Americans to ‘get’ what it is about our country’s sickening, appalling
behavior that prompts the wrath and enmity of so many others. And if
you’re not appalled, you’re simply not paying attention. Certainly, the
sort of analytical, synthetic intelligence we think of IQ as measuring isn’t
sufficient. If intelligence is relevant at all, it must be EI, emotional
intelligence, the ability to empathize and sympathize with others, to
relate to and put yourself in their shoes, particularly of those that your
social environment invites you to loathe or hate. If you don’t understand
what it is like to be the victim of your enmity and hostility, you have no
motivation to mitigate your hate and contempt with compassion.
Contrast that emotional understanding with the odious bumper sticker,
“Revenge is not an option; it’s a necessity!”
What a mindset! How awful is it to be inside such a head? I wouldn’t
want to be there! No how, no way!
Whether of our multi-national gulag of prisons or our continuing war
on Iraq, the ability to comprehend the personal horror their victims
experience differentiates compassionate observers from indifferent:
what must it be like to be on the other side of the camera’s lens? Every
day that we stand by, acquiescing in atrocities committed in our name,
is a day we will have to explain to our future selves, our children and
grandchildren.
What is it about that fact, what is it about us, that so many still don’t
get? How can we self-righteously continue, casually or deliberately,
to impose pain and suffering needlessly on others?
Published 24 May 04
20. Bush’s Legacy
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 11:18:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Craig Urey <curey@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Letter to the Editor: Bush’s Legacy
Sir:
Recent recitals of Ronald Reagan’s ‘legacy’ beg reflections on
what G. W. Bush’s will be; what has he accomplished so far?
Consider the record:
– Hundreds of our own and tens of thousands of other countries’
citizens slain in military adventures launched on false premises and
fruitless ambitions, two countries in shambles: the most effective
recruiting tool for our enemies yet devised.
[ – Alliances disdained, treaties revoked, the fragile coherence of
international accord destabilized; nuclear proliferation aggravated by a
reckless, arrogant, belligerent foreign policy.]
– Worldwide reserves of trust in, and reliance on, America’s fairness
and good judgment squandered by an antagonistic, willfully
unknowledgeable, incompetent regime.
[ – Principles of law and democratic government, for which this nation
was once so envied and admired, disavowed.]
[ – A crushing national debt foisted on the next generation to repay and
resolve.]
– Decades of progress in environmental protection abandoned for
corporate profits.
– Under a continual drumbeat of homeland hysteria, the country
divided against itself politically, socially, economically, gnawing
neurotically at its own entrails in anguished anxiety.
– Diversity suppressed; a climate fomented of bigotry and intolerance
for others’ differing opinions, views, beliefs and practices.
[ – Millions of well-paying jobs lost, only partially replaced with
minimum-wage drudge work.]
– A ‘leadership’ for ‘the haves or the have-mores’, utterly
insensitive and indifferent to the plight of ‘the have-less and
have-nots’; the national income disparity ever widening.
– Not just one child but an entire educational system ‘left behind’,
by a hollow rhetoric of promises unfulfilled and expectations unfunded.
All these accomplishments and more under the restraining umbrella
of concern for his re-selection prospects! [Imagine the possibilities in
the bright sun of a second term for which yet a third is proscribed!
Wake up America, the choice is yours!]
Published 24 June 2004 with the passages above in [], 92 words of
294, omitted.
21. Primitive Tribalism
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 07:28:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Craig Urey <curey@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Letter to Editor
Primitive Tribalism
Sir:
Who are you?
Who are we?
How do we see ourselves?
How do we see Americans?
How do we see America?
How do others see you, us, this nation?
Deposited by the mothership on this minor planet of a middling
star in a backwater arm of an unexceptional galaxy some sixty-six solar
orbitings ago, I was charged by my immediate progenitor to observe and
record the customs of its most dominant species. I am now persuaded the
question most crucial to the survival of this species is that recently
posed me by a correspondent: “Will we ever get rid of tribal thinking?”
All Earthlings think and behave tribally. Their chief distinction is how
wide a net they cast to define their tribe. Self alone? Family?
Neighborhood? Village? Nation? Species? Genus? All life-forms? It makes
a difference.
Yet my observations, experiences and recollections suggest no
matter how narrow, parochial and limited their definition of ‘tribe’, the
behaviors of its members toward others invariably become petty, vicious
and destructively self-serving. Whether Palestine, My Lai, Chile,
Grenada, Fallujah, Nasiriya, Najaf, or Abu Ghraib, it’s all about putting
others at risk, in harm’s way, jeopardy or worse, in service of ‘self’
first. From the aggressive driver, callously endangering others
for his or her own convenience, to rapacious corporations wreaking
havoc on, wrecking, lives, to reckless nations rolling over others to
profit their own ‘interests’, it’s always about the tribal ‘self’ versus ‘them’.
“O wad some Pow’r the giftie gie us
To see oursels as others see us
It wad frae monie a blunder free us …
What airs in dress an’ gait wad lea’e us” – Robert Burns, 1789
Aren’t we the sum total of how we are perceived?
Truly, will we ever get beyond thinking and acting tribally?
Published 1 Aug. 2004.
22. If Bush Wins
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 22:10:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Craig Urey <curey@dailyitem.com>
Subject: For 24 Oct. section
Sir:
What if Bush wins? Imagine the probabilities:
– His policies continue unabated, with no re-election concerns to constrain
his excesses;
– More wars of ‘liberation’ reducing inconvenient, marginal countries to
dysfunctional rubble and their populaces to incandescent rage;
– More foreign policy reversals that abandoned prior solemn commitments,
understandings and undertakings made to the world community;
– More ‘war on terror’ that exponentially expedites the recruitment effort
for terrorists;
– The draft reinstated at the expense of our youth;
– Using the threat of foreign terror, domestic agencies consolidate their
death grip stranglehold on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights –
Patriot Acts III, IV .. etc. enacted -, the two-century-old edifice of
American democracy disassembled;
– Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid – the social compact among
Americans to care for the sick, the disabled and the elderly – disabled
or dismantled;
– Tax and monetary policies further enrich the wealthy at the expense of
the needy, struggling and impoverished;
– The environment handed over to profiteering corporate developers for
exploitation;
– Jobs continue to disappear overseas, while the domestic out-sourcers
profit from reduced labor costs;
– Educational failures whitewashed with ineffectual paper programs;
Think! You have a choice!
Published 24 X 04
23. Sameness
From jcooper@bucknell.edu Mon Jan 17 08:56:25 2005
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:56:15 -0500 (EST)
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Letter to Editor
Sir:
In an important sense, your headline, 17 Jan. 2005, “We’re not all the
same”, misses a crucial point. Manifestly to the most casual, indifferent
observer, men and women are NOT CREATED equal. We are each and
all unique and different.
But we ARE each and all entitled to the same: courtesy; respect;
consideration; freedom from abuse and oppression by others; the right
to live in peace and enjoy and develop our differences so long as that
enjoyment and development do not ill or adversely affect our fellow
beings; and, perhaps most importantly, our obligation and responsibility
for ourselves and to others to insist on the above for all.
The point of celebrating diversity is not just to recognize or
acknowledge it, but to celebrate, encourage, strengthen and support it.
In our diversity is our strength and our well-being, no matter how broadly
‘our’ is defined.
Pub. 21 I 05
24. Where are we headed?
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 21:44:56 -0500 (EST)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Where are we headed?
Sir:
Shortly after last month’s inauguration, I received an anonymous post
containing clippings of my Letters to the Editor, predicting last fall,
the consequences of Bush’s election to a second term. They arrived
covered with a variety of rude epithets including ‘sore looser'(sic).
Since then the Bush administration has amply fulfilled those forecasts:
from its extended tax-cuts for the well-to-do to its assaults on Social
Security, Medicaid, and now Medicare. Its proposed $2.57-trillion budget
will cut so many domestic programs to children, seniors, veterans,
farmers and the poor by $20 billion dollars next year, it has been called
the War on Workers. Everything about our current political and
economic system seems designed and geared to extract wealth and
power from those who have little enough of either and transfer them
to those who have far more of each than they know how to use wisely
or humanely.
If the purpose of government is to redress injustice and attend to the
needs of its people, then I and the vast majority of the American
electorate who declined, passively or actively, to endorse Bush’s
election are indeed ‘losers’. This administration is moving steadily
toward disabling and dismantling much of what once made this
a country caring, compassionate and concerned for the welfare and
well-being of all its citizens not just the fortunate few. We are not so
much ‘sore’ as deeply saddened that the dictum of the philosopher,
Joseph de Maistre – “Every country has the government it deserves!” –
is seemingly as relevant today as it was two centuries ago.
Still we earnestly pray, not with the facile bumper slogan “God bless
America” but, may “God help America” to become a better nation
to its own people and a better neighbor to the rest of long-suffering
humanity everywhere.
Published 19 II 05 with the omission indicated.
25. Independence Day
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 10:07:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Independence Day?
Sir:
July 4th. Independence Day. Just what is it America is independent of? It seems
we are overly dependent on some things. My town had a parade. To many of us
the overemphasis on militarism was nauseating: guns, cannons, a B-25 flying
overhead. Some of us asked to join the parade as private citizens, protesting
the militarism, displaying advocacy for peace, celebrating pacific endeavors.
We were not welcome. The Episcopal Peace Fellowship was allowed one banner
with their name only; otherwise peace could not be mentioned. To do so would
spoil the ambiance.
The parade was alleged not to condone militarism but “to honor those who
gave their lives for their country.” Language is important. Apart from the
fact that very, very few of those lives lost were “GIVEN” — as opposed to
TAKEN, wrested from their victims violently, ruthlessly, brutally –, why do
we celebrate only those lives taken in or about the battlefield? Surely many
others have been lost in constructive service to their country. Does violence
against other peoples really serve our best interests, or principally the
politicians and industrialists whose re-election or profits depend on others’
misery and suffering? Perhaps we should declare our independence of
militarism, war, and aggression as a tool of foreign and domestic policy.
Rather than independent, America is far more dependent on other peoples,
countries and nations than our founders ever envisioned. Why not
celebrate, applaud and encourage not just those whose lives are sacrificed
in service to flawed foreign policies, but acknowledge and support America’s
interdependence with all the peoples of this planet, our mutual reliance on
each other to behave responsibly, act decently, and be considerate of the
well-being of all this planet’s inhabitants and environment, not just of the
tiny minority who call this country home.
26. A Pet’s Death
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2005 15:43:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: A Pet’s Death
Sir:
Milo died. Sometime Saturday mid-morning, he was hit in the 600 block
of Market St., Lewisburg. Thrown on the sidewalk by the impact, skull,
both jaws and one leg fractured, lung punctured by a broken rib, he lay
bleeding and meowing we know not how long until a mother and
daughter jogging past, stopped and assisted him. They were from
California.
Indifference and multiple callous and compassionate acts affected his
life, to its end. Born on a college campus, Spring a year ago, he was
brought up with 44 others in a rescue house for kittens abandoned
when their cuteness had faded. We adopted him, fed, loved and cared
for him and another for almost a year.
Milo was the family clown, gentle, loving and needy as only an orphan
can be. He wasn’t that bright, but he was a comic genius, happiest
when eating, sleeping or playing with his mates. He lived in a closed
yard, fenced on all sides, rarely got out and never wandered far; we
trained him to be wary of cars and trucks but obviously not well enough.
How many locals saw and heard his pain yet passed on by? What were the
thoughts of the driver? Another stray, a squirrel, a rabbit, or duck
unworthy of consideration or concern?
Unable to find help in Lewisburg, his rescuers took him, still crying
in pain, to Sunbury where his injuries were determined to be fatal.
There was nothing the vet could do but release him from his misery.
Surely there’s enough pain, suffering and needless death in this world
without more being visited by indifference and callousness. We thank
all those who helped him throughout his short life and wonder how
those who caused or ignored his misery sleep at night.
Thomas Paine Award, ACLU 2005
27. Governmental Efficacy
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 11:22:14 -0400 (EDT)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Governmental Efficacy
Sir:
What do you call a government that, hearing the warnings by knowledgeable
experts of impending disasters, still proceeds for years, even decades,
without meaningfully effective attempts to solve or avoid
the problems?
What do you call a people who, knowing that their government is failing
them irresponsibly, ignoring their welfare and inviting disaster, kicks back
and coasts on, trusting in the competence, benevolent concern and
leadership of their elected officials?
What do you call a country that combines both the elements above?
In the real world, causes have effects; actions, even inactions, have
consequences. The denial of the evidence of our senses, the wisdom of
our experts, the experience of history lubricates our descent into a
morass of unintended consequences.
For years experts have predicted disaster along the Gulf Coast as
development in the flood plains and lowlands of the southern US has
increased. Our government, not just Bush’s, but a succession of
governments have, for decades, been warned but have failed adequately
to prepare.
As we ignore the consequences of previous disasters and situate
ourselves in the line of action for the next, we fulfill one criterion
of insanity: performing the same operation under the same circumstances
repeatedly ‘hoping’ for a different result. As a mechanism for effective
problem solution, ‘hope’ just doesn’t cut it. ‘Hope’ is no substitute for timely,
innovative, effective action, BEFORE crises occur not afterward!
Legitimate government derives from the consent of the governed.
It is long past time: to remove our consent from ineffective, self-
serving, dysfunctional government; to demand that government function
for the well-being of ALL the people; to insist that government envision
and plan for the long term based on reason, plausibly effective strategies
and rational attempts to avoid undesirable consequences, not denial,
delusions and wish-fulfilling fantasies.
28. Belief vs Knowledge
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 17:44:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Belief vs Knowledge
Sir:
The debate over ‘intelligent’ design ultimately reduces to knowledge
vs faith. Knowledge is about that part of the truth that is known and
has been verified by experience. Faith is about belief. The two are
coupled in Reagan’s slogan, trust but verify. Trust is faith based;
verification is experientially based.
As Carl Sagan wrote, believing is wonderful fun, but what is believed
ain’t necessarily true (or even verifiable).
Evolution is an example of something that is known about as well as we
humans are able to know anything, via extensive experiential verification.
‘Intelligent’ design is a belief some choose to hold. It is not
verified, probably cannot be so, but anyone who chooses to live his or
her life according to hope and wish-fulfilling fantasies is at liberty to
do so, so long as s/he doesn’t unduly entrain and seduce naive and
unwary others, e.g. children, in the delusional process.
Outside of Sunday school, teaching unverified and unverifiable beliefs
as truth, paid for and supported by the tax base at large, seems to me a
profligate squandering of the public trust and treasury. The good news
is that ultimately relying exclusively on hope and fantasy, in lieu of truth,
will likely upgrade the quality of the gene-pool.
Published 13 X 05
29. Electoral Choice
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 10:14:09 -0500 (EST)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Letters letters@dailyitem.com
Subject: Electoral Choice
Sir:
In a recent (5 Nov.) letter to the Editor, Bruce Barr urged the impeachment
of the current president.
While it is clear to any objective observer that this president is among the
most incompe(te)nt, inept, inexcusably ineffective and dissembling chief
executives ever to disgrace the office, it is not clear that impeachment is
the most desirable solution.
Does anyone seriously want Cheney in the office? He might just be Bush’s
best insurance for completing his term of office!
To me the national problem is not just with the present regime. Something
is seriously wrong with what passes for American ‘demonocracy’. Once upon
a time this, our system, elevated men of the quality of intellect, discernment
and judgement of Jefferson, Lincoln and FDR to high office. Now we are
routinely left with distasteful choices between Tweedledum and Tweedle-
dummer: which is the lesser of the available mediocrities?
Regime change by impeachment bespeaks a sick and broken system. It is
not enough to deplore the consequences of our electorate’s folly. Something
has to be done to make the choices available to us all more meaningful
and brighter with the prospect of benefit and a better world for all.
Pub 14 Nov. 2005
30. Lives Lost
From jcooper@bucknell.edu Tue Jun 6 07:22:55 2006
Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 09:37:36 -0400 (EDT)
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Re: Remembering Lives Lost
Sir:
Thanks are owed to Joseph Manzi, David Young and the others who
organized and oversaw the exhibition, Eyes Wide Open, this past
weekend of boots and shoes representing the lives of Pennsylvania
soldiers and Iraqi civilians lost in the current conflict. For the most
part, those lives were NOT given, but taken from them brutally,
violently, involuntarily.
The sight of the soldiers’ empty boots occupying a corner of the
parking lost was wrenching; but the sight of those little children’s
shoes broke me up. Had the representation been truly proportional,
the civilian shoes would have covered the parking lot. The evil of
violence done to others for national gain really came home to me.
Published shortly thereafter.
Thomas Paine 2006
31. Voting Machines
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 12:06:10 -0400 (EDT)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Verifiable voting machines
Sir:
Verifiable paper trails for balloting are now in the majority. In 2004,
only 27% of voters cast their ballots on voting machines in states
requiring a paper trail. This year, 65% of voters have, or are about to
have, a paper trail.
The vulnerabilities of paperless voting machines to manipulation
and attack are well-known and established. The good news is that
also well-known and established are the means to reduce the risks
and provide solutions.
Has Don Sherwood, our Representative in Congress for the 10th
district, taken up the cause for a paper trail of every vote? We need
our representative to co-sponsor H.R. 550-the Voter Confidence
and Increased Accessibility Act. We need one-hundred % of voters
to have a verifiable paper trail and a mandatory random recount to
have assure everyone’s vote is accurately counted.
The confidence of the people in the electoral process requires a
verifiable record at balloting.
Published 29 July 2006
Thomas Paine 2006
32. Islamo-Fascism
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 17:58:23 -0400 (EDT)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Islamo-Fascism
Sir:
The use of the phrase ‘Islamo-Fascism’, recently heard in the mouths
of members of the Bush administration and our own Senator Santorum
in Lewisburg Sunday, is a fine example of the art of the propagandist:
the misuse of words to promote false and emotionally misleading
impressions and assumptions.
Fascism, Mussolini said “should be properly called corporatism, since
it is the merger of state and corporate power”. Surely that description
far better fits 21st century America, with her wholehearted endorsement
of Eisenhower’s military-industrial complex, than it does any economic
or political entity in Middle East. But the use of ‘Fascism’ in this context
is intended to arouse the anger and resentment of survivors and veterans
of WWII, our war on ‘Fascism’ appropriately defined, not accurately to
characterize any of the fundamentalist Islamic states or organizations
presently emergent. It is an attempt to engender enmity toward the
latter by a false and inappropriate allusion to our former enemies.
What about the ‘Islamo’? The attempt is to connect Islam with Fascism.
Is Fascism by any other religion less odious? What about Christian-
Fascism? Germany and Italy were after all nominally Christian states
in the 1930s-40s. What about Judeo-Fascism? Is it any more admirable
than the other kinds? Is there a Confucian-Fascism? How about secular-
Fascism?
Think about those who use such a phrase to try to engender enmity and
hate in the place of thoughtful and considered reflection on the true
nature of those states and organizations that presently challenge
America’s world domination. Is not rational response vastly more likely
to be effective than knee-jerk reactions to emotional appeals based on
bigotry and prejudice?
Published 15 Aug 2006
Thomas Paine 2006
33. Illegals
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 13:41:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Trying again
Sir:
The letter in Sunday’s (3 IX 06) Daily Item titled “Illegals are illegal” demands
rejoinder.
First, the title is false. NO human being is ‘illegal’. Ningun ser humano es ilegal!
Persons’ presence or behaviors may be, but their humanity is not, on the face of
it, ‘illegal’.
Second, observing the prevalence of flagrant traffic laws’ violations for instance,
in the central Susquehanna Valley, I’d warrant there is no one so self-righteous
as to merit pointing the finger at others’ ‘illegality’. As the most famous of all
‘law breakers’ admonished, “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone!”
Third, this author’s lumping “illegal immigration” with “drug dealers or sex
offenders” is a gross mischaracterization. Far more ‘illegal’ immigrants
contribute constructively and beneficially to our society than do it any harm!
The stains on the cheeks of Lady Liberty must be from tears of shame at what
has become of the country that once greeted newcomers with the welcome:
“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.”
If the author wishes to stamp out immigrants’ ‘illegal’ behavior, how about
starting at home, first, with that of the businessmen, families and farmers
who provide immigrants and foreign laborers the incentive to come here,
exploit and abuse them, and then try to send them back ‘home’ when they
are done with them?
Published 9 Sept 06
34. Why War
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2006 13:54:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Why war?
Sir:
The cancellation of Secretary of State Rice’s visit to Bucknell
University 13 October is indeed a shame. So many had questions
they wished to pose:
“When will the killing stop?”
“Why, Madame Diplomat, does war take precedence over
effective diplomacy?”
“What has become of America the ‘beautiful’, the benevolent,
the beneficent and constructive participant in world affairs?”
“If violence is the voice of the unheard, why is war the answer
preferred by those who refuse to listen?”
America might have got answers to these and other questions
had the opportunity to pose them not been voided.
Authoritative answers are still needed. We’re waiting.
Pub 13 X 06
35. Ecological Collapse
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 15:24:49 -0400 (EDT)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: curey@dailyitem.com
Subject: Ecological Collapse
Sir:
Rolf Helbig’s admirable letter (Oct 25) misses the larger dilemma:
It’s not just the meat-eaters who hazard the future of this planet.
It’s all of us!
The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) recently warned that at current
levels of general consumption this planet’s ecosystems face collapse
by the middle this century.
The WWF’s sixth biannual report, The Living Planet, says that earth’s
environment is being degraded “at a rate unprecedented in human
history” with the United Arab Emirates, the United States and Finland
having the largest, most detrimental “ecological footprints”. Humanity
in general is running up a “serious ecological debt”.
The report concluded that earth’s global footprint in 2003 exceeded
its capacity to support life by 25%; others claim by a factor of three!
And it’s not got any better in the last three years.
It’s not just the ‘meat-eaters’. It’s not just the end of cheap fluid fossil
fuels. Unsustainable “Western” styles of living, consuming, wasting
and polluting, to which other nations now aspire, are putting this
planet on an irreversibly declining environmental and ecological
trajectory.
If humanity doesn’t wake up and make sane, sensible, global choices
quickly, the prospect for our children and grandchildren, as well as
the other lifeforms on this planet, is grim indeed – meat or no meat.
Pub 27 Oct 2006
36. Accountability
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 12:27:52 -0500 (EST)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Accountability
Sirs:
The headline read “Snow squalls, slick roads cause accidents”! (SDI 11 Jan 07 B1)
Really? “Cause” in my dictionary means “to bring about or be the reason for.” Absent driving practices that are grossly inappropriate for the road conditions, accidents are few and far between, as most drivers, who respond appropriately to poor road conditions can attest. Driving instructors, traffic specialists and accident reconstructionists all verify that slick roads and snow squalls do not rise up and strike moving vehicles. Rather vehicles, recklessly and imprudently driven too fast for conditions, break loose or are unable to stop in short distances on slick, slippery roads. Studies of driving practices verify that even experienced drivers commit potentially fatal errors every few miles or so. No one is immune.
Despite Penndot’s and local authorities’ best efforts, we cannot prevent poor driving conditions from happening. But drivers can reduce, minimize, maybe even prevent, their inappropriate driving practices. Blaming the weather breeds a climate of helpless victimology. Smart drivers read and reckon on extant driving conditions and modify their behavior accordingly. Each of us can do that much. Let’s put the accountability for accidents, however tragic, where correction can be effected: on the driver, 90+% of the time. Blaming the weather makes about as much sense as blaming the stars or a passing comet.
Pub 12 I 07
37. Bush’s Defeat
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 08:51:11 -0500 (EST)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Bush’s Defeat
Sir:
Our glorious leader, Mr. Bush, declares over and over again that ‘defeat’ is
‘not an option’. Sounds like he thinks all he needs to know about leading
this planet’s mightiest nation he learned at a football game. If so, he’s
wrong; dead wrong.
Mr. Bush, this life is not a game. People are dying out there. Thousands
of our people, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and Afghanis have already.
Millions more are placed potentially at risk, at home and abroad by the
folly of your gamesmanship. What is success for you? Stopping the killing?
Halting the violence? Restoring peace, order and tranquility to these
troubled lands? If defeat is not an option, why do you stubbornly,
intransigently persist in behaviors that have, over the last seven years,
failed utterly even to approach those objectives in the Middle East?
If peace and order are your objectives, please understand that they
cannot be achieved by war, violence and killing. No country, not even
America, can successfully impose its ways on other peoples. One of your
few successes this past six years is conclusively to demonstrate the folly
of assuming and acting as though we could. We can’t.
War begets war; violence begets violence; hate begets hate; injustice
begets injustice; lawlessness, lawlessness; terror, terror. The only
way to break the cycle is to stop perpetuating it. This is the lesson
you’ve taught us.
America could be a constructive example to the rest of the world. That
would truly be and require leadership. Sadly, this past six years, America
has become a destructive example of the worst kind.
That, sir, is the defeat you have already brought on yourself, and this
country. That is your ‘legacy’. This vainglorious game you’ve embroiled
us all in has gone on far too long.
Stop it! Now!
Pub 4 II 07 (Lead letter in Opinions Section SDI)
38. Valor?
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2007 08:43:15 -0400 (EDT)
From: Cooper John N <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Valor?
Sir:
“Uncommon valor in an unwinnable war,” the Editorial in the Daily Item read,
25 March 2007. “Discretion is the better part of valor,” Shakespeare wrote.
Does it show discretion to throw lives, one’s own or others, away in an
unwinnable endeavor, one after another? Is not ‘valor in futility’ an oxymoron?
“Direct force is such a poor solution to any problem, it is generally employed
only by small children and ‘great’ nations,” David Friedman noted. America,
more than any other country today, has become the Warfare state; not welfare,
warfare. Dwight Eisenhower truly, but evidently futilely, cautioned us, the US,
about handing over our nation’s leadership and policies to the military-
industrial complex. Yet so we have.
Why? Economically, too many people, corporations and profiteers benefit
from our continual state of armed conflict. But profit is always taken at the
expense of others, specifically those willing or unwilling victims of the taking,
in this case of the lives of soldiers and civilians lost, the so-called collateral damage.
But there’s another cause, well, if ironically, described by the late pop psychologist
Eric Berne, author of ‘Games People Play’. When confronted with difficult dilemmas,
people will often resort to the game of ‘Uproar’ rather than address the issues at
hand. Creating and sustaining a commotion distracts the participants from dealing
with their roles in perpetuating the conflict and their responsibilities in settling it.
Sam Giancana rightly observed, “… in the name of patriotism, Americans will do
anything, go anywhere; … they’ve just got to have an enemy.” If we can’t find one,
we’ll make one … or more!
What will it take, when will we decide, to exercise true valor, the discretion to
find other ways of conflict resolution, interpersonally or nationally, rather
than the ready, eager, even lustful resort to force and violence?
Pub 29 III 07
39. Unintended Consequences
Date: Tue 29 May 07 7:45
From: jcooper@bucknell.edu
To: curey@dailyitem.com, Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Unintended Consequences
Sir:
War breeds war; violence, violence; force, resistance. Quite apart from its
morality or ethics, war has never worked out as expected and has invariably
raised as many problems as it has solved. Throughout her history, America’s
resort to war has inexorably resulted in unintended domestic and international
consequences that far exceed, usually deleteriously, the war-makers’ proclaimed
intents.
Wars have no place in the twenty-first century, historians who have studied
the major wars America has waged in the last 2-1/2 centuries have concluded.
From our ‘Revolutionary War’ to the current Iraq imbroglio, war-makers have
failed accurately to predict, limit or control the consequences of their wars. With
appalling regularity, the use of force to attempt to achieve national objectives
has resulted in unanticipated and often unacknowledged disasters in terms of
the stated initial intents, even setting the stage for the next wars in the sequence.
In the last 60 years, Europe has learned from its previous 500 years of conflict
that alternatives to armed conflict are available and effective. But America and
its leaders have yet to learn this vital lesson. For the sake of the future survival
of democracy as a political system at home or abroad, it is essential that the US
do so, too.
For all those who believe that wars ever go ‘right’, history provides an extremely
uncomfortable narrative. American political leaders apparently choose
systematically to embrace a comfortable version of history rather than an accurate
one. Rather than a greater or expanded use of military force, the United States
should look for ways to encourage democratic change through restraint and
patience at home and abroad. The historical record demonstrates the wisdom
of this counsel.
It does not, however, hold out much hope for that counsel’s being heard or
acted upon.
Pub 30 V 07
40. Homophobia
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2007 12:11:09 -0400 [12:11:09 EDT]
From: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: Homophobia
Sir:
A letter [in the SDI 5 IX 07] presumes that the decision by Mr. DiRocco to cancel a high
school band trip to Knoebel’s Grove was owing to “fear of gay people”.
It seems to me that supposition is unfair both to most gay people and to most straights,
even to some decision makers. Gay persons are for the most part fine, upstanding,
courageous and creative members of and contributors to the community. In general,
they are not child-molesters or predators. They simply differ from the straight
majority in their private and personal behaviors and suffer from a discrimination
as odious as any based on race, creed or political orientation. Some few do seek to
impose their preferences on others, but the same can certainly be said for the
intolerant members of the straight community. Our culture stigmatizes homosexuals
out of all proportion to any real or rationally assessed threat they pose. Live and let
live, and respect for diversity, are clearly insufficiently present on either side of this fence.
If fear of others in fact did motivate the decision to cancel the band’s outing, those who
feared ought to examine very closely what it is they truly feared and determine whether
that fear is in any way rationally based. In my experience homophobia is often the
product of some deep-seated neurosis[, such as the fearful party’s ambivalence about
his or her own sexuality. “Fear of gay persons” may well stem from something not
about the gay persons but in the fearful’s own self, a fear of being or discovering his
or her own gay proclivities and thus becoming subject to the very discrimination that
that “fear of gay persons” engendered].
Understanding, of one’s own self and others, is a better solution than fear or avoidance of difference.
Published 7 IX 07 with that in [ ] omitted
41. “Illegal” Aliens
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 14:55:07 -0400 [14:55:07 EDT]
From: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Subject: “Illegal” Aliens
Sir:
Hazleton mayor Barletta’s and Ms Snyder’s recent comments reported in the
Daily Item contain some logical flaws.
Mr. Barletta justifies his pursuit of ‘illegal’ aliens, invoking the ‘rule of law’.
Yes, we are a nation of laws, and lawmakers, some good, some egregiously bad.
The Jim Crow laws, for one, kept segregation alive and well for 100 years after
the Civil War. We are also a nation of lawbreakers. Let [s]he who has never
done so cast the first stone.
What’s legal is not necessarily just, ethical, moral or compassionate. King
Solomon knew the difference. So usually does the ACLU. Civil disobedience has
a long and honorable history exposing the difference between the good and bad
legislation. Proposed immigration laws now seem designed to create a class of
serfs to be exploited for cheap labor then returned to their home countries
when they are worn down and out. Where’s the goodness, ethics, morality
or compassion in that treatment of others?
Mr. Barletta and Ms Snyder seek to condemn all ‘illegals’ on the basis of the
felonious behavior of a few. You might as well condemn all Italians because of
the Mafia, or all Anglos because of John Hinckley or John Wilkes Booth.
Throwing out the baby with the bathwater never makes much sense.
Mr. Barletta is correct in observing that we are all of immigrant stock! Even
the First Peoples came across on the Bering land bridge during the last Ice
Age. Historically each new wave of immigrants to this country has had its
fingers on the ladder’s rung crushed by those above. Ask the Italians, the
Irish, the East Europeans.
Lady Liberty, douse your torch and hide your face in shame at what has
become of this country’s charity toward those ‘huddled masses’ yearning
to be free. For shame!
Published 29 Oct. 07 with omission indicated in []
42. Careless Comparisons
From : John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
Subject : Re: “Some Killers Ignored”
To : jfinnerty@dailyitem.com, letters@dailyitem.com
Date: Tue, Feb 19, 2008 04:59 PM
Sirs:
Thanks to the writer of the 16 II 08 editorial noting that the efficacy of
efforts spent mitigating ‘infinitesimal’ risks is likely to be less productive
than similar efforts spent reducing common everyday risky behaviors.
The point is well worth making. However, the careless numerical
comparison of student deaths by shooting at Northern Illinois University
on one day to student deaths due to overdosing on alcohol, presumably
throughout the United States, in one year, 2002, is comparing a hand of
bananas to truckloads of apples.
A more meaningful comparison might have been, the total number of
student deaths from gunshot to the total number of student deaths from
alcohol intoxication over the same or similar cohort and time-span.
Arguments are always more convincingly made when the comparative
data pertain to a comparable collections of entities.
Published 24 II 08
43. Fact vs Fiction
From: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: letters@dailyitem.com
Sent: Sun, 9 Mar 2008 09:08:56 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Fact vs Fiction
Sir:
Facts: Immigrants, in general, are NOT the threat some say they are.
‘Public safety’ is NOT a reason to limit immigration.
Demagogues and political opportunists cite “public safety” to justify limiting
immigration, favoring high-skilled immigrants and/or increasing sentences,
to deter non-citizens from committing crimes.
That’s not necessary. The foreign-born, including those with little education,
show remarkably LOW rates of criminal activity.
The foreign-born ARE more likely to be young, male and have less than a high
school diploma — all factors that CAN contribute to involvement with crime.
Yet a new study confirms what previous national studies have ALREADY
found: Young males born outside the United States who have less than a high
school diploma have extremely LOW rates of incarceration in California state
prisons and county jails.
According to 2000 census data, more than 13% of U.S.-born men aged 18 to 40
who have less than a high school diploma ARE in state prisons, county jails,
halfway houses and the like. BUT for the foreign-born in that category, it is
LESS than 1%.
Further, since the early 1990s, during a period of high immigration, rates of
both violent, and property, crime in the nation have FALLEN to levels not
seen since the 1970s. Between the years 2000 and 2005, 29 California cities
with higher rates of newly arrived immigrants showed on average a greater
DECLINE in crime rates than cities with lower rates of newly arrived
immigrants. The Carly Snyder tragedy is the exception NOT the rule.
There ARE policy considerations for immigration that need addressing but
attributing increased violent crime to immigration misrepresents the facts
and distorts the issues with unnecessary fear and terror.
Published ca 12 Mar 08
44. Pro-Life
From : John Cooper jcooper@bucknell.edu
Subject : Point of Clarification
To : letters@dailyitem.com
Sent: Sat, Sep 13, 2008 10:59 AM
Sirs:
To the good folk (13 Sept. 08) who are planning their votes this year on the
basis of their ‘Pro Life’ position, I’d like a bit of clarification:
For whose or what’s life are you ‘pro’?
All life? What about the plants that you destroy for food, construction or
clear-cutting? What about the weeds you poison or pull up?
Oh, only animal life? What about the animals you eat or whose bodies
you use for shoes or clothing? What of the insects you poison, the spiders
you kill, the teeming myriad of critters whose lives you indifferently
extinguish daily just by your very living and breathing?
Ah, you say, just human life? Which humans’ lives? The millions of
children born each year into disease-infested squalor and poverty with
no prospect whatsoever of healthy or happy lives? The hundreds of
thousands of premature deaths due to the practice of punishing foreign
governments by imposing ‘sanctions’ on their people? Or the hundreds
of thousands of victims of America’s wars of military subjugation against
those we don’t agree with? Had those no right to life?
Mmm, I see, you are only ‘pro’ American lives? What about those
squandered lives lost or abused in our military’s wars based on lies
and distortions? Don’t they count? What about the lives of our own,
ordinary citizens condemned by poor health-care, poverty and
malnutrition to premature deaths by an economic and social system
that enriches the rich and impoverishes the poor?
I could go on, but you see my point? Sloganeering with vapid clichés
whose practice belies their slogan does little to enhance the credibility of
either the slogan or the sloganeer.
Published 21 IX 08
To the Daily Item 2009-2018
1. Gaza
From : John Cooper jcooper@bucknell.edu
Subject : Response to Prof. Massoud
To : Letters letters@dailyitem.com
Date: Mon, Jan 12, 2009 07:30 AM
Sirs:
Prof. Massoud is reported to have said (SDI 11 Jan 08, A1) that Israel is using too much force against the Palestinians in Gaza. The figures cited in the article suggest a Palestinian/Israel civilian kill-ratio in excess of 100/1. My question is what is deemed the appropriate level of force used by a nation in its efforts to suppress resistance to invasion, occupation, internment and ethnic-cleansing?
For example, was the U.S. Cavalry’s campaign against the plains Native Americans, to drive them from their homeland, kill those they could and intern the rest in reservations, an appropriate use of force?
Or the German suppression of uprisings in the ghettos of Warsaw and Lodz during WW II?
In France, then, the Nazi SS typically executed 100 civilians for every SS officer killed by partisans. Was that too much?
More recently the US cooperated with other nations to stop ethnic-cleansing by Serbs in Bosnia and Kosovo, but only when the level of violence became unacceptable. What level is acceptable? How is that determined?
Initially Gaza was a reservation, a refuge-camp for Palestinians displaced by the Israeli occupation of their homeland. Lately it has become a ghetto, a concentration- and now a death-camp in the strangle-hold of a regime seemingly bent on starving the Palestinians therein of food, water, medical necessities and sanitation. What recourse have Gazans against a militarily dominant regime that exercises absolute control over what or who enters or leaves their area of confinement?
What astonishes me is the fact that the descendants of the survivors of the 20th century Holocaust in Europe seem determined to perpetrate just such a holocaust on the 21st century occupants of Gaza if not on all Palestinians. I should have thought the Israelis might better have learned from the abomination of their forbearers’ persecution.
Published 16 I 09
2. Tim Hoffman
From : John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
Subject : Election Fiasco
To : Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Mon, Dec 07, 2009 10:50 AM
Sirs:
Tim Hoffman is a senior political science and history major at Bucknell.
Mr. Hoffman has lived in Lewisburg for the last three and one-half years, with the exception of summers and the one semester when he studied abroad.
He has shown more interest in and concern for the issues affecting Lewisburg than the vast majority of those voters in Ward III who failed to vote last November.
Tim won the election to Borough Council in Ward III by almost a 3:1 margin against an entrenched incumbent who has challenged the vote on the technicality of ‘continuous’ residence.
Although Tim consulted with the local election office before he ran, they refused to rule on his eligibility because [he] was a write-in candidate, thus wasting the time, hopes and ambitions of Tim and his supporters.
This technicality means that virtually NO students at Bucknell can ever be eligible to run for Borough Council. They can vote, but they can’t be represented by one of their own.
In 1964, the poll tax was eliminated as a criterion for voting. This ‘continuous’ residence requirement accomplishes for holding local office what the poll tax used to for the voters’ roll — systematically discriminating against, and eliminating, one entire class of individuals from participating in the governmental process.
Twenty persons from Lewisburg including members of the Borough Council signed a petition objecting to seating Tim. Pray, what has anyone NOT a resident of Ward III to say about who represents Ward III?
Is this how we encourage our youth to become part of the ‘democratic’ process? Tim represented a voice for change, innovation and representation for an historically under-represented minority! The real losers in this mess are the residents of Ward III, Lewisburg, students and non-students alike. This fiasco is clearly a wrong in need of righting!
Published 9 XII 09
3. Voter Participation
From : John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
Subject : Mandate to Serve?
To : Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Date: Tue, May 18, 2010 10:14 PM
Sirs:
Seventy-six of the 2193 voters registered in Ward III of Lewisburg appeared and cast their votes in Tuesday’s, 18 May’s, primary election. Another 8 or so absentee ballots were also cast. That means that 3.8% of this ward’s registered voters bothered to exercise their right to voice their preference for candidates for our state and local government. Three point eight percent!
A reporter at the polling site asked whether the rainy weather was a cause for the poor turnout. One of the voters suggested that perhaps general dissatisfaction with the choices available was more important as 96.2% of those entitled to vote did so with their feet by abstaining.
Even discounting the 500 or so registered Bucknell students who have left campus for the season, this is an abysmal participation event. It is clear that there was no winner in Tuesday’s polling. No candidate can claim a ‘mandate’, no matter what his or her majority over her or his opponents. And certainly, the electorate as a whole was a loser, the vast majority of whom simply voted ‘NO’ by submitting no vote.
Democracy cannot, does not, work in such a climate. Something is seriously, seriously wrong with the way things are being done. What needs to be done differently?
—
Not published
4. Regrets
From : John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
Subject : Regrets?
To : letters@dailyitem.com
Date: Fri, Jun 11, 2010 03:10 PM
Sir:
Your political cartoon[, 11 Jun 10,; ‘recent’ inserted] depicts Helen Thomas asking her mirror whether she has any regrets. What’s most regrettable about the Thomas’ imbroglio is the prevalence of bigotry and intolerance of dissenting opinion among the public and media.
George Orwell, wrote “If freedom means anything, it means the freedom to criticize and oppose.”
What’s most disturbing about the on-going gang-rape of Ms Thomas is not just the breadth of the participation in the exercise of her vilification but the even broader passive acceptance, if not condoning, of her abuse. Isn’t the loss of her professional credentials and access to the public sufficient for the mad-dogs of conformity?
Defensive over-reaction is a strong indicator of guilt, culpability or at least something to hide.
Ms Thomas expressed a point of view shared by [millions of ]victimized and oppressed peoples. Of course, the oppressors and persecutors don’t what to hear it. Perhaps that is one reason they should, more often. A fair and reasonable culture would welcome her expression of her perspective, unpopular though it be with some.
[By the way,] to those who accuse her of anti-Semitism: Arabs, Palestinians and numerous other ethnic groups are also Semitic. Labels are more effective if based on facts.
Published 14 VI 10 with that in [] omitted and titled ‘Labels should be considered’
5. Debts
From : John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
Subject : Social Security v. War
To : Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Date: Tue, Jul 20, 2010 10:52 AM
Sirs:
The President’s newly appointed National Commission on Fiscal Reform – the “debt commission” – is threatening to deny the solvency of Social Security and then use those solvent funds for other purposes, for example, to reduce the national debt.
In fact, the principal drain on our budget and economy is the implementation of a continuously hostile and belligerent militaristic foreign policy which necessitates a massively wasteful and non-productive military establishment – precisely the military-industrial complex of which Eisenhower warned in his last presidential address. A sane and pacific foreign policy with a much-reduced military establishment would solve the deficit problem in fairly short order.
Recipients of Social Security – who have contributed, paid their dues, tithed to the Social Security system for 30, 40, 50 years in the ‘full trust and confidence’ that their government would honor its commitment to them – are among the LEAST able, financially, to contest the inequities and iniquities of our governmental bureaucracy. Of course, that bureaucracy will attack where resistance is least likely to arise.
What do you call a person who undertakes commitments then consciously and deliberately reneges on them to pursue other projects? Bankrupt: morally, ethically, financially, whatever. That goes for nations and governments, too.
6.Tom Marino
From : John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
Subject : Unemployment v. War
To : Letters <letters@dailyitem.com>
Date: Sat, Jul 24, 2010 05:25 PM
Sir:
Tom Marino, in declaring he would not have supported extending unemployment benefits for four months, said “.. we just continue to spend ridiculous amounts of money we don’t have.” [SDI p. A1 24 July 2010]
Mr. Marino, for the last decade America has squandered many, many times the amount benefits for the unemployed will cost in meaningless wars wasteful in both lives and dollars against Iraq and now Afghanistan, wars that benefit no one but the profiteers of our military-industrial complex.
How is it we continue to support raining death and destruction on foreign lands, but you would deny assistance to our own workers in desperate need?
Published 27 VII 10
7.Right Thing
From: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: letters@dailyitem.com
Date: Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 11:40 AM
Subject: The right thing to do
Sirs:
“U.S. must turn right” your headline reads! Absolutely correct, Mr. Toomey, you’ve got that right! But right (l.c.), means equity, fairness and justice for all, not inequity, inequality and special treatment for the rich, privileged and well-to-do at the expense of the rest of us. The right way to do things is to show consideration and respect for all, not intolerance and persecution of others who differ. The right way to do things is to take care of the less-fortunate among us, not exploit them for the further enrichment of those with more than they need or can possibly use.
A true conservative (l.c.) is one who truly conserves, who supports conservation, not taking from others and keeping for oneself, not one who exploits the environment for personal or corporate gain. America needs leadership that looks out for all the people, not just those whose wealth can buy elections. America needs leadership that shows pity, compassion and concern for helping and assisting others, not taking advantage of others weakness for personal or corporate profit. [Mark Twain wrote, “The truth must be wondrously precious, so many seek to economize on it!” The truth is: America needs to find leadership with ‘heart’ and ‘soul’, compassion and consideration, tolerance and generosity and a government that works for the betterment of ALL (u.c.). That is the ‘right’ thing to do.]
Published 23 Oct 2010 with the last three sentences [] omitted.
8.Humans’ Rights
From: John Cooper jcooper@bucknell.edu
To: letters@dailyitem.com
Date: Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 12:03 AM
Subject: Humans’ rights
Sirs:
Mr. Obama is reported to have counseled Mr. Hu on China’s Human Rights policies.
Is it not ludicrously hypocritical of a US President to wax moralistic over another country’s human rights record when you consider Guanta’namo, Abu Ghraib, rendition, torture, the solitary confinement of political prisoners and now our own House of Representatives’ voting to repeal affordable health care for the uninsured?
It’s a bit like the pot calling the kettle dirty, don’t you think? Much of the rest of the world sees our hypocrisy and considers this country’s claim to moral and ethical respect non-credible!
[O would some power the giftie gie us to see ourselves as others see us. – R. Burns]
Published 24 I 11 with the R. Burns quote omitted.
9.Rep. Mirabito
From: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: letters@dailyitem.com
Date: Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 6:21 PM
Subject: Letter to Editor
Sirs:
[Once again, the Daily Item completely misses the point.] The [ins. recent] coverage of the Forum at Bucknell Thursday night [(3 March 11)] on the severance tax or impact fee for the fracking companies failed to mention the high point of the evening: the clear, coherent, articulate, informative and professional presentation by Rep. Mirabito. [Ins. Parag.] In contrast, Sen. Yaw’s presentation was flawed, unclear, inarticulate, confusing and unprofessional. The differences could not have been starker.
[In the questioning that followed the two presentations, Mirabito was again clear, concise, well-informed and considerate of the concerns of his questioners. On the other hand, Yaw consistently appeared not to be prepared or in command of the facts and was evasive.] When unable to answer questions, [instead of admitting his ignorance, he] [ins. Sen. Yaw] grew defensive, tried to answer questions with questions, displayed open hostility towards any who disagreed with him and finally refused to answer when called on to do so.
What the Item reporter called ‘heckling’ was the sincere attempt by concerned citizens to find out what has been going on and why. They were just doing their jobs as responsible members of the electorate. Mr. Mirabito showed respect for their concerns. His performance was a credit to his profession. [Sen. Yaw’s was not. His performance was a parody of how a responsive and responsible Senator should interact with his electorate.]
What did become clear is that the corporations have taken control of the fate of Pennsylvania’s resources, wilds and wildlife. The citizens, the electorate, the voters have been overruled by corporate interests and their representatives. [It’s a sorry state of affairs for what was once termed the common-wealth of Pennsylvania.]
Published 10 Mar 2011 with the alterations/omissions indicated in [].
10.Bankrupt War
From: John Cooper jcooper@bucknell.edu
To: letters@dailyitem.com
Date: Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 9:23 AM
Subject: [Bankruptcy of War]
Sirs:
Our American Congress is wrestling with the national budget and the deficit. But it is not addressing or even considering the principal cause of our impending national bankruptcy: America’s addiction to war as a means of controlling other peoples.
The last few decades of conflict have ignored developing diplomacy in favor of military strategies that have inflicted so much suffering on others including the Iraqi and the Afghani people and taken a huge toll on US soldiers as well. Through our eight-year occupation of Iraq and our ten-year involvement in Afghanistan, a more insidious toolkit – based on the aggressive use of force – has been developed that professes to limit civilian casualties. [But consider our:]
Arming unmanned drones (spy-planes) have become the weapon of choice for targeted assassination;
[Adopting the use of torture, most notably in Abu Ghraib prison, which has corrupted the US morally; and
Pitting tribal, ethnic and sectarian groups against each other – the ‘colonial’ tactic of divide and conquer – which is creating more internal violence.]
There IS a better way.
Non-military options work. Popular movements demanding change have proven to be the best antidote to oppression and militarism. We have witnessed this over and over again – in Lebanon in 2005, in Tunisia and Egypt this year, where people are demanding their economic and human rights.
The contrast between the US military strategy for change and people-centered movements could not be starker.
Give constructive, creative peace a chance!
Published 24 Mar 11 with the omissions above noted by []
11. Greatness
From: John Cooper jcooper@bucknell.edu
To: letters@dailyitem.com
Date: Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 10:25 AM
Subject: Greatness
Sirs:
Something sad has happened. What has become of our once ‘great’ nation, where ‘great’ included just, compassionate, charitable, fair, equitable, kind and generous? Now our ‘leaders’ seek to disown and disavow their predecessors’ commitments: to the elderly, the ill, the infirm and the weak. And why? Because there isn’t enough to go around for those above and the wealthy, the military, the bankers and corporations and their hirelings? “First things, first”, right? Cheney said it well: “It’s our due!”
And what, pray, is the ‘due’ to the rest of us – the workers, the unions, teachers and nurses whose reward for their service is to be, “Work until you die then pay for your own burial?” [Beasts of burden are not so mistreated in a civil society! They – who spend and continue to spend their lives in the creation of the very wealth and well-being that others seek disproportionately to claim for their own, their ‘due’ – are truly due far better!]
Once upon a time, America stood for fairness and equity, for justice and generosity, for compassion and kindness, for honoring its commitments unto the least among us. As Lincoln put it, “With malice toward none and charity for all!” Seems as though those two have been reversed of late – far more malice, far less charity, for all. [Who is next? What a shame, what a crying, bloody shame!]
Pub May 3, 2011 as
“Working for very little”
Something sad has happened. What has become of our once “great” nation, where ‘great’ included just, compassionate, charitable, fair, equitable, kind and generous? Now our “leaders” seek to disown and disavow their predecessors’ commitments to the elderly, the ill, the infirm and the weak. And why? Because there is not enough to go around for those above and the wealthy, the military, the bankers and corporations and their hirelings? “First things, first”, right? Cheney said it well: “It’s our due!”
And what, pray, is the “due” to the rest of us, the workers, the unions, teachers and nurses whose reward for their service is to be, “Work until you die then pay for your own burial?”
Once upon a time, America stood for fairness and equity, for justice and generosity, for compassion and kindness, for honoring its commitments unto the least among us. As Lincoln put it, “With malice toward none and charity for all!” Seems as though those two have been reversed of late, far more malice, far less charity for all.
12.Congressional Misbehavior
From: John Cooper jcooper@bucknell.edu
To: letters@dailyitem.com
Date: Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 10:16 AM
Subject: Congressional misbehavior
Sirs:
An article
[ http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/mortarboard/2011/aug/30/beekeeping-in-schools, by Frederika Whitehead Tuesday 30 August 2011 07.30 BST guardian.co.uk ] in today’s Guardian UK reports that beekeeping takes flight in primary school. Learning to look after bees has transformed the behavior of unruly pupils.
The headteacher wholeheartedly recommends beekeeping: “When I first looked into it, I was thinking of the curriculum. But it has had unexpected spin-offs – it has given parents and children a common interest, improved the behavior of disaffected pupils, and worked on the two extra ‘r’s’ in the curriculum: respect and responsibility.”
What, I wonder, would it take to get Congress, or the PA Legislature for that matter, back to doing its job, the PEOPLE’S business?
Send in a swarm of bees?
Bzzz[zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz]!
Published 1 Sept. 2011 with that in the [] omitted.
13.Intolerance of Dissent
From: John Cooper
Sent: Mar 4, 2012 7:44 AM
To: letters@dailyitem.com
Subject: Intolerance of dissent
Sirs,
Recently there have been calls to stifle the fumings of the merchants of hate, sexism, bigotry and intolerance, like Rush Limbaugh and his attacks on Sandra Fluke. What a glowing symbol of strength and serenity she makes compared to the flying spittle of his attacks! Although I understand and share the revulsion persons of taste and decency feel toward Limbaugh, it’s never a good idea in the struggle against such character defects as his to try to silence them! Their frothing and spewing is their own worst enemy. It’s never a good idea to interfere with your enemies in the process of destroying themselves. Just keep pointing out that their hatefulness, bigotry and disgusting symbolism is repugnant, but not revolutionary.
Trust the good sense and taste of the majority of the public who are disgusted by the pitiable racism, sexism and bigotry of these wretched souls. Give the public credit for having a modicum of taste, discretion and self-awareness. Trying to stifle the ugliness of the rabid right is actually counter-productive to their withering away. Rather, let the foolishness and insane hatred of their postures prove our points for us! Louder and funnier, they are their own worst enemies!
Published 8 III 12
14.Voter IDs
from: John Cooper jcooper@bucknell.edu
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 9:39 AM
subject: Voter ID Law
Sirs:
“Tab for ID law: $3.7M” your 7 Oct. headline reads! Just so! On how much better good for the public at large might these funds have been spent than this cynical attempt by the Republican party to suppress PA voter turnout and obstruct of the will of the people?
Respect for our legislatures is at its lowest ebb in decades. The disrepute engendered for these houses accumulates daily, nationally and statewide. Democracy depends on the consent of the governed – where the presence or absence of that consent is voiced only by free and fair elections, not those manipulated for the benefit of select incumbents.
Voter-suppression and obstruction attempts to secure a false mandate by those already in power trumpets their corruption and unfitness to serve the public. Vote them out!
Published October 12, 2012, entitled Vote Them Out, otherwise as submitted.
15.Lying
from: John Cooper jcooper@bucknell.edu
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 11:12 AM
subject: When all else fails …
Sirs,
It was recently reported in the British press that a member of Parliament was deprived of his seat after having been judged to have lied, deliberately and knowingly, to the public in the furtherance of his campaign!
What a pity, what a shame, what a tragedy that the same standards of ethics and honesty do not obtain on this side of the Atlantic!
Published as written, 31 X 12, except with the title, “The cost of lying”.
16.Gun Violence
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 2:57 PM
subject: Stop the Gun Violence, NOW!
Sir:
Sen. Yaw and his fellow think-alikes are probably right. Meaningful and effective gun control legislation would likely not have prevented Friday’s tragedy in Newtown, CT.
But heaven knows it would have been a step in the RIGHT direction!
A journey of 1000 leagues begins with a single step. For far too many decades, the welfare and well-being of common citizens, little children included, have been subordinated to the whims some of their elders.
Enough! It will take decades to reverse the damage done to the domestic peace and tranquility by the continuing lack of meaningful and effective gun control, but now is the time to begin.
People, call or write your legislators. Make your voices heard! If not now, WHEN?
Published 17 XII 12
17.Vote
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 8:29 AM
subject: Vote!
Sirs:
Did you know?
For 99% of us, income has risen just 0.4% over the three years 2009-2012; for the top 1%, it climbed by 31.4%.
Mr. Lincoln got it wrong. Our government is NOT of, by and for the people! It’s of, by and for the wealthy … and their minions, the corporations.
If you can’t give them bread, give them circus. – Juvenal
Bread would be a government that actually does the people’s business.
And our circus is the dysfunctional collection of ineffectual clowns in Congress, ever seeking to do the will of their financial backers while telling the people “It’s for your own good!”
Every nation gets the government it deserves. – LeMaistre
These guys can be fired! There’s an election coming up. When did you last vote?
Published 1 X 13.
18.Animal Rights
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 10:12 PM
subject: Defending Ducks
Sirs:
Your 2 July article reporting an incident between a local resident of North 7th St. and children whom he believed to be harassing wild ducks in Bull Run raises questions that need examination.
I know the accused personally to be an ardent and devoted care taker of the welfare of our wild duck visitors. His interest and concern for their well-being is wholly commendable. Period.
If, as alleged, he ‘harassed’ or ‘stalked’ the 12-year-old children, that might constitute a serious error in judgment on his part, were it not for the reported behavior of these apparently unsupervised minors whose upbringing apparently did not include respect for wild animals or their welfare.
Where were these children’s parents? Were they brought up to respect wildlife? How else might the alleged have stopped, and/or prevented further recurrence of, the children’s behavior – or determined who their responsible adults were – than by following them as they fled? Did they flee from fear of him, or of consequences for their behaviors? Note also that, absent a breathalyzer, or blood, test, mere presence of alcohol on the breath does not constitute ‘public drunkenness’.
It sounds to me as though the alleged may have been merely exercising due diligence in his attempts to stop animal abuse and to bring appropriate consequences to bear on the apparent harassers of wildlife. Animals have feelings, too. Anyone who thinks otherwise is not paying them sufficient attention. Animals have rights, too.
—
Published 7 July as:
July 7, 2014
“Animals have feelings”
For The Daily Item
http://www.dailyitem.com/
— Your article reporting an incident between a local resident and children whom he believed to be harassing wild ducks in Bull Run raises questions that need examination.
I know the accused personally to be an ardent and devoted care taker of the welfare of our wild duck visitors. His interest and concern for their well-being is wholly commendable. Period.
If, as alleged, he “harassed” or “stalked” the 12-year-old children, that might constitute a serious error in judgment on his part, were it not for the reported behavior of these apparently unsupervised minors whose upbringing apparently did not include respect for wild animals or their welfare.
Where were these children’s parents? Were they brought up to respect wildlife? How else might the alleged have stopped, and/or prevented
further recurrence of, the children’s behavior — or determined who their responsible adults were — than by following them as they fled? Did they flee from fear of him, or of consequences for their behaviors? Note also that, absent a breathalyzer, or blood test, mere presence of alcohol on the breath does not constitute “public drunkenness.”
It sounds to me as though the alleged may have been merely exercising due diligence in his attempts to stop animal abuse and to bring appropriate consequences to bear on the apparent harassers of wildlife. Animals have feelings, too. Anyone who thinks otherwise is not paying them sufficient attention. Animals have rights, too.
19.Frivolous Law Suits
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 1:45 PM
subject: Frivolous Federal Lawsuit
Sirs:
This week, the House of Representatives will vote on legislation to authorize House Speaker John Boehner’s lawsuit against President Obama. Their core charge? Ironically, they’re complaining that the president isn’t implementing Obamacare fast enough.
With all that’s happening in our nation and world, Speaker of the House John Boehner has chosen to leverage his power and leadership for a frivolous lawsuit. And the Republicans must be made to pay a political price.
New polling confirms that a majority of Americans oppose wasting millions of our tax dollars on this political stunt. Do the voters want to be part of this GOP madness with its malignant hypocrisy? Or will they move to stop wasting millions of taxpayer dollars on this partisan lawsuit.
This is your chance to demand a sensible, responsible Representation from your Representative. Ask him to distance himself from his party’s willful neglect of, and disdain for, their responsibilities to the PEOPLE! Ask him, “Whose Representative are you, anyway?”
Not published
20.End War
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 3:38 PM
subject: End War
Sir:
The media call the U.S. public war-weary.
Yes, the people are war-weary after seemingly endless and pointless wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. As we continue military action, Al Qaeda has continued to grow. Most people know and understand that endless war is not a solution. We cannot bomb an organization, ideology, religious fanaticism or sectarian strife out of existence.
History shows that short-term military victories turn into long term nightmares. The battle for Fallujah was waged with horrendous consequences. Ten years ago, U.S. private contractors were brutally killed there. Now ISIS controls Fallujah. For the people of Fallujah, the U.S.-instigated nightmare continues.
There are alternatives to bombing ISIS in Iraq. These require the U.S. to replace military action with a real international diplomatic response that will provide the political power, the economic incentives and support for rebuilding a non-sectarian Iraq, humanitarian aid and an end to the Syrian war.
– Stop the bombing and military escalation. We’ve seen before how unintended consequences can spiral out of control, causing more pain and suffering in the region and hurting U.S. security.
– Hit ISIS where it hurts: the wallet! Take steps to cut the cash flowing to ISIS. Crack down on Turkish, Iraqi, and other oil dealers who are purchasing ISIS’s oil on the black market, which would cut ISIS off from its most important revenue stream.
– Build a coalition for a political solution, not military action! Support a United Nations-led effort to convene Iraq, Egypt, Turkey, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Iran, European Union and Russia to develop strong diplomatic, economic and political initiatives to restrict the flow of arms, militias and finances across borders. Support restarting UN-sponsored negotiations to end the Syrian civil war.
[Blessed are the peacemakers,]
Published 20 IX, well after the vote! [] omitted.
21.Plutocracy
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:38 AM
subject: System failures
Sirs:
One-percent of the US population owns or controls 50% of more of this country’s wealth. Pretty much the same holds for the world population: 1% owns or controls 50% or more.
The current vogue among pundits is to decry the failure of our economic system. That’s a mistake. Economics is the study of what happens when certain decisions and actions are allowed or taken. Our economic system is doing pretty much what it was designed – or has evolved – to do: Take as much wealth as it can from those who have too little and concentrate it in the hands of those who have too much. Evidently it is working as intended or expected.
The system failure, both here and abroad, is political. We all have stood by and allowed the wealthy to take over our rule, both here and abroad. That’s called Plutocracy: Rule by the wealthy. [Dick Cheney said “It’s our due!” Sez who?]
Published 23 X 14 as “Rule by the wealthy” with [] left out
22.Force Fails
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:31 PM
subject: Failure of Force
Sirs:
One month has passed since air strikes were launched on ISIS in Syria. Yet ISIS power has failed significantly to diminish and may have grown despite our military intervention.
ISIS has adapted to the heavy air strikes and other military force used against them in the small city Kobani and may yet prevail there.
It’s too early to know the effects of air strikes on the 80,000 barrels of oil per day controlled by ISIS. The 20% drop in oil prices since June may be impacting ISIS oil revenues more than military intervention. In addition to the increase of recruits from civilian deaths and the destruction of civilian infrastructure by air strikes, there may be a growth in contributions from outside sources.
Instead of provoking more extremism with air strikes to reduce oil revenues, better options include freezing accounts of ISIS supporters, negotiating with local villages where oil pipelines are being used and cracking down on the market of cultural artifacts from Syria and Iraq.
Most of ISIS’ weapons were stolen from Iraq, which obtained them from the U.S. Now there are claims that U.S. weapons meant for Syrian rebels and Kurd fighters have been captured by ISIS.
The international community should rid the area of weapons, military expertise and foreign fighters, increase humanitarian aid and monies to deal with refugees, and invest massive resources in the political solutions needed to quell the Syrian civil war and the Iraq ethnic conflicts that provide cover for ISIS.
The U.S. military intervention in Syria may be illegal. Whatever, Congress continues to abdicate its constitutional responsibility to decide whether to declare war. Congress should debate and promptly vote – up or down – whether to authorize the ongoing use of military force (AUMF).
Never published
23.A Modest Proposal
From: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 4:02 PM
subject: A modest proposal
Sirs:
I was much bemused to read your front-page story (Sun. 2 Nov.) of the plight of a local landlord brought about by Bucknell’s intent to restrict off-campus housing for its students to a total of 200. I refer your readership to the lyrics of the classic folksong, “Pity the Downtrodden Landlord”, available via many search engines.
It seems to me that, since the deportment of students in the community figures large in the public’s acceptance of them, the University could score a major public relations coup – and do the surrounding community a public service – by requiring that students applying for permission to occupy off-campus housing must first demonstrate proficiency in the fine arts of courtesy toward strangers and consideration for others. That, in itself, should suffice to keep the number of applicants within tolerable limits.
Published 5 Nov 14
24.Democracy at Risk
From: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
To: letters@dailyitem.com
Date: Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 1:35 PM
Subject: Our Democracy is at Risk
Sirs:
Our Democracy is at risk!
Thanks to the Supreme Court’s decision – Citizens United – and outside spending, 2014 was the most expensive midterm campaign ever.
Altogether, conservative groups spent $306 million dollars, almost half of which came from groups that don’t disclose their donors. $150 million came from the Koch network. $70 million came from Karl Rove’s outside groups. These groups are trying to buy our government.
This is not Democracy, it’s Plutocracy, rule by the wealthy – one dollar, one vote. Are you OK with this?
If not, you can still demand that Congress end the effects of Citizens United and stop outside groups from buying elections. But act now, write your Representative and Senators. Time is short.
25.Police Surveillance
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 8:38 AM
subject: Police Surveillance
Sir:
Across the nation, state and local governments have assumed that protest is a problem and identified protesters as criminal by definition. But peaceful protest for the redress of grievances is protected under the bill of rights!
It is wrong when law enforcement agents of the police, state and federal governments – and the media – single out groups and individuals, accusing them of violence or criminal acts without any proof, yet the criminality and violence of police and national guard actions is ignored.
Black lives matter. Latino lives matter. All lives matter.
The city of San Jose, CA, has a new surveillance drone that they are trying to find a use for! How about the POLICE being subjected to surveillance?
Pub 14 XII 14
26.Charlie Hebdo
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 8:31 AM
subject: Charlie Hebdo
Sirs:
Violence is NEVER an adequate solution to conflicts between individuals or nations. But deliberate, insensitive disrespecting of differences in beliefs or cultural norms always risks untoward reactions, particularly by members of oppressed minorities who feel they have no other means of making their grievances heard.
United in their majority, the mob’s self-righteous indignation at untoward reactions by members of the minority risks ignoring the distress of the persecuted and oppressed. Along with Liberty, Equality and Fraternity, we need also to show Compassion and Understanding for, and attend to, the plights of even the least among us.
Pub 14 I 15, Re-titled:” Oppressed Minorities”
27.Budget Reduction
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 2:20 PM
subject: Reduce Pentagon’s Budget
Sirs:
[Earlier this week,] President Obama released his budget request for 2016. While there’s a lot to be pleased with – including important investments in strengthening our economy and the Middle Class – there’s one GIANT problem. The President’s requested budget for the Pentagon is the largest in U.S. history.
Yes, you read that right. The most money for the Pentagon. Ever.
Warfare is not the answer. If spending more money made us safer, throwing more than half a trillion dollars at America’s war machine might make sense. But we’ve spent 13 years throwing money into the Pentagon, and, trillions of dollars later, it has done little to keep us safe. More than a decade of record spending has been very good for Pentagon contractors, who have seen record profits, but it has not helped America. Our military is still burdened with massive weapons boondoggles[, like the F-35,] that cost billions, don’t work, and wouldn’t fight the threats we face today even if they did work. As our men and women in uniform return home from Afghanistan, they find an economy that is still struggling and a VA that is still underfunded while billions of [tax ]dollars are lost to waste, fraud, and abuse at the Pentagon.
Enough is enough.
Every dollar the Pentagon spends is a dollar less for early childhood education, nutrition assistance, and health care. It’s a dollar we don’t have to heal our veterans’ wounds after more than a decade of war. It’s a dollar we don’t have to fund diplomacy and international development to get at the root causes of the challenges that we’re trying to solve today with American bombs.
America has real security challenges, both at home and abroad, but we simply won’t solve them by buying weapons that don’t work and padding the pockets of contractors. It’s time to stop throwing good money after bad and end wasteful spending at the Pentagon.
Published 11 II 15 with [] deleted
N. B. The wording of this letter was adapted from one proposed by Win Without War. I endorse and stand by this wording.
28. Controlling Violence
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 3:31 PM
subject: Controlling Violence
Sirs,
Something needs to be done about the rash of tragedies in recent years involving gun violence. The recent tragedy in Charleston just reveals how little has been accomplished toward that end so far.
Vigils and Presidential pontification from the ‘bully pulpit’ just don’t seem to have much effect.
It has been my experience that it is impossible to change the thoughts, feelings or beliefs of those who do not wish to change them.
Rather, it seems to me, there is a way to work to prevent repetitions of this on-going series of tragedies – racially motivated and otherwise – this past decade or more, by restricting and/or removing access to weapons of mass destruction of which guns are a prime example.
Where is the call for IMMEDIATE and EFFECTIVE GUN CONTROL Legislation? The majority of the public wishes it but our hapless, feckless government is paralyzed by its fear for its electability.
Hatefulness, contempt, prejudice and vengeful desires are on-going, ever-present components of human nature. Pious preaching won’t change that. But controlling the ability to act on those impulses is something we have a chance of effecting by concerted community action.
How about initiating an effort to bring that about?
Not published.
29.No War on Iran
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 10:07 PM
subject: No War on Iran!
Sirs:
The Senate was designed to be the cooler, wiser body in the Congress. But it sounds as though some Republican Senators are caving in to the blood-lust of the war- and hate-mongers among their constituents.
Sam Giancana, the gangster, wrote, “America has just got to have a war. If it can’t find one, it will make one!” That’s as true today as it was in his day.
War is generally a disastrous, last resort. Rather than solving problems, it just kicks the can down the road for others to deal with. The Senators should listen to the wisdom of the world community and educate their constituents out of their hate and war-mongering rather than pandering to them.
War is not the solution, it’s the problem!
30.Affordable Housing
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 8:39 PM
subject: Affordable Housing
Sirs:
Poor, sad little Lewisburg and surrounds, all in a dither over the possibility of ‘affordable housing’ in the new Pennsylvania Commons. Once upon a time, this little ‘burg fancied itself a suave, smooth, enlightened community, the ‘Paris’ of the county, perhaps even the river valley.
Ah, sigh, no more! The truth appears to be that under the glossy veneer, hatefulness, bigotry, class-prejudice, even racism predominate. Where O where are the paragons of reason and virtue, with their starter mansions and pretensions to sophistication, who would stand up and counter those who would deny others access to housing in the ‘community’ on the grounds of difference in income, background, social status or god-knows-what other excuses for discrimination? Hunkered down in their foxholes, trying to avoid stray aspersions, it seems.
Mark Vonnegut, Kurt’s son, when asked what the purpose of life is, replied, “Why it is to help each other through this thing, whatever it is!” Well said, Mark. Would that we all lived by that precept.
As it is, Lewisburg and environs are shown by their actions and reactions to be NEITHER sophisticated nor humane. Another description comes to mind from another Mark, the great humanist, Twain: “It’s cheap .. and it’s shabby!” For shame, Lewisburg. [See how the mirror, your behaviors reflects!]
Published 9 VIII 15 with [] omitted and the front page filled with stories about ‘Affordable housing’.
31.Broken Government
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 8:47 AM
subject: Broken Government
Sirs:
I substantially agree with Shirley Pyers’ comment in Sunday’s (Aug. 16) Daily Item that government should get busy and get to work. But I want to generalize that comment to all government – federal, state and local – all of which appears to me to be either severely bent or totally broken.
Party politicians today reportedly spend most of their effort hustling for funds to get re-elected or jockeying for power in their particular venue, with precious little time spent doing the PEOPLE’s business, which is after-all what they were elected to do.
The party system has been blamed for this fiasco, but it is quite unclear whether banning parties altogether, dissolving the two-party system or some other change would solve the problem. Political scientists disagree. Rather than focusing on how the present system fails us, it would be desirable if some of those political scientists would come up with something that actually works!
If you, too, are fed up, speak up!
Not published
32.Severance Tax
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com bcc:
date: Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 7:14 AM
subject: Severance Tax
Sirs:
Governor Wolf’s budget would make drillers pay their fair share, invests in clean energy, and doesn’t block state officials from ensuring that the oil and gas industry adopts safe, modern practices that will protect drinking water and air quality.
Our state has the chance to move away from fossil fuels and invest in clean, renewable energy through more wind and solar power. Governor Wolf’s budget would invest millions to get the ball rolling. The Republican budget? Zero, nada, nothing.
The oil and gas industry is fighting for the status quo. Drillers went wild under the Corbett administration, operating with virtually no oversight and making billions in the process.
Republican leadership still refuses to force the oil and gas industry to pay its fair share, even though Pennsylvania is the only major drilling state without a severance tax.
Leaders in Harrisburg need to know that Pennsylvania voters are going to hold them accountable if they let oil and gas drillers keep doing business-as-usual at the public’s expense.
Not published
33.Wake Up Call
from: John Cooper jcooper@bucknell.edu
to: letters@dailyitem.com, newsroom@standard-journal.com
date: Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 8:39 AM
subject: Wake up call
Sirs:
This past Friday, Hurricane Patricia, the strongest hurricane ever recorded, made landfall in Mexico. By the time you read this, the worst part of the storm will have passed, but this massive storm was a powerful wake-up call. A lot has been said in the press about whether and how much Hurricane Patricia can be directly linked to climate change, but one thing is certain: our rapidly warming oceans and atmosphere mean stronger, more frequent mega-storms.
Patricia, the strongest storm ever recorded, occurred in the midst of one of the most prolific hurricane seasons on record, after the hottest June, July, August, and September ever recorded. Drought is impacting communities from Thailand to California. And it is reported that the world’s biggest fossil fuel company has known about (and denied) climate change for over thirty years.
Humanity is at an important crossroads. The U.N. climate summit in Paris is a little over a month away, and it could actually determine that the world is finally ready to tackle the climate crisis in a meaningful way. What’s needed in Paris is a bold, ambitious deal that keeps at least 80% of fossil fuels in the ground and finances a just transition to 100% renewable energy by mid-century
This past week negotiators met in Bonn to prepare for the summit, which promises to be a contentious gathering. Currently, a broad coalition of groups from around the world is calling for a huge day of political action on the eve of the summit in Paris. The climate movement needs to make a big showing — both before the summit, and afterward.
A Global Climate March is planned for 28-29 November, both locally and around the world. Please consider participating in this showing of support for constructive climate action.
Not published
34.Great Nation?
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 8:33 AM
subject: Great nation?
Sir, Ms or Madam:
The question was whether America was a ‘great’ nation, or could it become ‘great’ again? Of course, the first question in a rational discussion would be “What constitutes national ‘greatness’?” One faction seems to concur with the George Bush – Richard Armitage faction: ‘greatness’ consists of political, economic and military power, the ability to ‘bend others to our will’. If that’s the case, America certainly has an excess of those characteristics.
But I think that’s a mistake. True ‘greatness’ personally or nationally, is measured by the ability to attract voluntary respect and a following by dint of others admiration for, and appreciation of, very different characteristics. Among those are generosity, wisdom, kindness and magnanimity, consideration and helpfulness toward others and provident husbandry of resources: “With malice toward none and charity toward all”, as Mr. Lincoln said.
How are we doing on that score? Not too well, I fear. For much of the world, America has been seen – for most of my lifetime – as an international thug and bully, a nation that throws its economic, political and military might around like a school-yard tyrant, achieving its aims by threats, intimidation and violence. Oh, there are exceptions. The Marshall Plan after World War II was an extraordinarily generous and effective gesture, no doubt. But it was also exceptional, not the rule. We tend to express and use our power for our own benefit without regard for the detrimental consequences for the victims of our attentions. Fear is our principal export.
Could we become a ‘great’ nation? It’s possible, just. But only if we were to regard the other peoples of this planet as equal partners in the creation and preservation of peace and sustenance for all, not as just resources to be consumed and expended for the sole benefit of us and our cohort alone. How’s that working out for us?
Published 21 VII 16 but with one editorial change. The last sentence in the penultimate paragraph was published as “Fear is our principle export.” The adjective principal was altered to read the noun principle! Grammatically incorrect but the editor had his fireplug to piss on!
35.Right On
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Sun, Dec 4, 2016 at 7:43 AM
subject: Right on!
Sirs:
Congratulations to Peter Mazurkiewicz for his letter (SDI, 3 XII ’16), ‘On the Menu’, which eloquently articulated the motivation by many of Mr. Trump’s supporters. Ninety-plus percent of his comments are right-on.
But three points remain that occasion concerned caution.
1. Mr. Trump is and will remain, a MINORITY president. He did NOT win a plurality of the popular vote. In this case, plurality has not ruled. He HAS NO MANDATE.
2. “there’s a good chance he’ll hear the voter’s objection to some of his off-beat proposals”? – “Chance favors ONLY the prepared mind” – Louis Pasteur
3. “Perhaps Trump will represent the people”? – Seems to me there’s a lot riding on pretty flimsy possibility here. How’s that working out for us? Fasten your seat-belts. Time will tell.
Never published
36.Preserve ACA
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 1:22 PM
subject: Preserve the Affordable Care Act
Sirs:
Congressional Republican leaders have announced that they’ll begin the process of repealing the Affordable Care Act on January 3, 2017.
Presently, just under 25 million Americans depend on the Affordable Care Act for insurance, and another 5 million for Medicaid coverage. These 30 million are among the most under-served in America, across racial and geographic lines. Thanks to the Affordable Care Act, we also now have the lowest uninsured rate in American history.
Currently, women depend on the Affordable Care Act for coverage of preventive tests for cervical and breast cancer genes, and osteoporosis; a stipulation that women can’t be charged more than men; important maternity care; domestic violence counseling; a ban on discrimination due to a pre-existing condition; and more.
Twenty-seven million women have benefited from having all FDA-approved contraceptive methods without a co-pay, including emergency contraception. Nearly 3 in 5 women have stated they have struggled to afford birth control at some point in their lives, including 57% of young Latinas and 61% of young Black women.
The Affordable Care Act matters for all these reasons and more, because America is the only ‘first-world country’ that fails to provide adequate health care for its people. We MUST not abandon those in need.
37.Tom Price
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 11:16 AM
subject: Reject TOM PRICE
Sirs, Ms or Misses:
Please ask your senators vote “no” on drug company insider Tom Price, Mr. Trump’s pick to lead Health and Human Services. Not only does Price want to repeal the Affordable Care Act, he wants to gut Medicare and Medicaid. He must be stopped.
Internet source lost but see TomPrice.doc
38.Oroville CA
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 7:25 AM
subject: Oy vey!
Sirs:
At least we’re staying dry and AWAY from the Oroville valley and dam situation out in sunny(?) California! What a concatenation of catastrophes!
The Demagogue-in-Chief and his collection of scalawag and scoundrel appointees seem to have missed the plain fact that Nature doesn’t give a twit (tweet?) whether we humans like, believe, think contrary to or deny the laws of physics, chemistry, biology and reality in general. She’s just going keep on doing her thing to our peril if we fail to attend to those facts as best we know them, (‘alternative facts’ to the contrary notwithstanding!). What a monumental SNAFU!? FUBAR!
There’s a Chinese curse, “May you live in interesting times!” I’m reminded of the Jesuit priest back at the end of the 18th century who, disgusted with the excesses of the French Revolution, wrote, “Every country gets the government it deserves!” What about those of us in the plurality, who tried desperately to say “NON!”
39.True Greatness
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 6:14 AM
subject: True Greatness?
Sirs,
True ‘greatness’, personally or nationally, is measured by the ability to attract voluntary respect and a following by dint of others admiration for, and appreciation of, very different characteristics from bullying, threatening and/or intimidation. What inspire true respect and admiration are generosity, wisdom, kindness and magnanimity, consideration and helpfulness toward others and provident husbandry of resources: “With malice toward none and charity toward all”, as Mr. Lincoln said.
Becoming a world class thug, attempting to bend others to our will, and disrespecting others’ rights to their own individuality are all signs of pettiness and fear of others independence. Far from greatness and leadership, such behaviors inspire nothing so much as contempt and disgust.
Mr. Trump’s nominations for his Cabinet and the Supreme Court, and the oft-repeated goal of his advisor, Steve Bannon, that his objective is to undermine, destroy, eviscerate and dismember much of the working apparatus of the existing federal government, suggest that the real aim of this administration is to weaken America, domestically and internationally, to the point of impotence. So far in the first five weeks of this regime, I have seen nothing to allay this concern.
40.Hypocrisy
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Fri Mar 17, 2017 at 8:21 AM
subject: Hypocrisy
Sirs:
True ‘greatness’, personally or nationally, is measured by the ability to attract voluntary respect and a following by dint of others admiration for, and appreciation of, very different characteristics from bullying, threatening, intimidation and/or victimization. What inspire true respect and admiration are generosity, wisdom, kindness and magnanimity, consideration and helpfulness toward others and provident husbandry of resources: “With malice toward none and charity toward all”, as Mr. Lincoln said.
Becoming a world class thug, attempting to bend others to our will, and disrespecting others’ rights to their own individuality are all signs of pettiness and fear of others independence. Far from greatness and leadership, such behaviors inspire nothing so much as contempt and disgust.
The issues of Healthcare reform and the proposed Budget exhibit NOTHING approaching greatness on the part of the current administration and Presidency. Rather they both seek to impose more misery and suffering especially on the weakest and most vulnerable members of our citizenry. The fabric of this nation is being rent by the ugliness and self-serving hypocrisy of our so-called ‘leadership’ in Congress and the Executive branch.
Pub 19 III 17
41.Good Data
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 6:49 AM
subject: Good Data
Sirs:
Thank you for the “By the Numbers” column on the front page of the Daily Item, Sunday 11 June. Numbers tell the story where words fail. 48 percent of households in the 10th Congressional district live below the poverty line. 78 percent of households in the 11th Congressional district live below the poverty line. The proposed budget for 2018 for the US Department of Agriculture would make a 21 percent reduction in nutrition assistance for the hungry. How does this proposal possibly contribute to “making America great again”? How can a country that ignores the needs of its people possibly prosper or even survive?
Think about it!
42.Careless Healthcare
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: Letters@dailyitem.com
date: Fri,Jun 23, 2017 at 10:56 AM
subject: Trump’s Care-less ‘Heathcare’
Sirs:
In order to provide a perk for the richest families in this country, the Republican caucuses in the House and Senate have proposed an obscenely punitive measure that will guarantee misery, desperation and deprivation for millions of the most frail, vulnerable and already victimized members of our population!
What’s clear is that our political system is hopelessly broken on the rocks of plutocratic greed and political self-service. Medicare-for-all would provide a fair, just and equitable alternative to this proposal and is consistent with the health care systems of the civilized and humane countries of the world.
It’s only a question of whether the barbarians in control of our Congress can find a way to grow up and respond imaginatively and constructively for a change to the needs of their constituents!
Published 26 VI 17
43.Meditation on the 4th
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 7:28 PM
subject: Meditation on the 4th
Sirs:
Independence Day? For whom, for what? WHY not celebrate Independence for ALL – us AND others – NOT military conquest and subjugation? But in fact, we are all INTER-dependent. What we do has consequences, intended or not, for us, for others, for the planet. Maybe we should have an In-ter-dependence Day! Really, I’d prefer that we celebrated, or at least acknowledged, that we’re all inter-dependent, need each other and at the very least ought to try to minimize the negative consequences of our acts and actions on others. First, do no harm? Second, try to do some good, with what you’ve got, in the time that you’ve got. If you can have a little fun along the way and encourage that in others, so much the better.
Happy Inter-dependence Day, Mother .. Earth.
Pub: 10 VII 17
44.Full Faith Credit
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Sat, Jul 15, 2017 at 5:55 PM
subject: Full Faith and Credit
Washington! We have a problem! When I was a boy in the 40s after the end of WWII, my father took me to the local bank to buy War Bonds for my brother’s and my future education. When I asked him why he thought they would be repaid 10 years thence, he cited “the full faith and credit of the United States government!” Technically that phrase – full faith and credit – from the Constitution refers not to the reliability of the US government but to the responsibility of the states to support and cooperate with each other.
However, in today’s world, the confidence of the people in their government is being sorely tested and challenged. Obviously, the election of Donald Trump was a response to the loss of full faith and credit of a substantial fraction of the people in the previous government. Since his inauguration, that loss of faith and confidence in the present government appears to be on even more shaky ground.
With our current population of just over 326 million, the threat of latest version of the proposed healthcare reform bill – to deprive 23+ million (7%) of our fellow citizens of their healthcare in order to provide tax breaks for the wealthiest, less than 1% of the population – can only further undermine the peoples’ faith and belief in the fairness, justice and sound judgement of their government.
This Congress has a problem! The people have a problem! Something needs to be done. Now!
Cling to the truth. It’s a FAR better bet than any of the alternatives!
Pub. 20 VII 17
45.Being Better
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 8:12 PM
subject: Being better
Sirs:
I deplore the torch-bearers in Charlottesville. I despise their actions. I disavow the racial and religious slurs they shouted. The violence that they inflicted on those around them must be challenged.
America is a melting pot of diversity. We are the land of Lady Liberty welcoming the tired, huddled masses. We are a people of many faiths, many tongues, and many colors, and we oppose blind and vile hatred directed at those who differ from us. Our differences make us great!
These are principles this country aspires to, but have yet fully to implement. I will keep working to realize this vision. Those torch-bearers do not represent me. We must all behave, and be, better than they have.
Pub. 19 VIII 17
46.Depraved Indifference
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 5:03 PM
subject: Depraved Indifference
Sirs:
In 1960[50!], my wife and her family emigrated as persons displaced from their Eastern European homeland during WWII. How they came to Lewisburg is a long story but, in general and for the most part, they found Americans compassionate, sympathetic and understanding of their situation: strangers in a strange land. They integrated well into the community and were granted citizenship in 1962. This, I had thought was the norm for immigrants to this country, and so it was until recently.
Now? Not so much! DACA, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program initiated in 2012 by the Obama administration, has now been cancelled by the current administration – subject to review by Congress by the end of Mar 2018 – thereby placing a roughly 800,000 at risk of deportation. Where is the compassion, sympathy and understanding accorded my wife’s family 67 years ago?
There is an expression in American law, ‘depraved indifference’, which seems to apply to the initiatives of the current administration, its supporters and apologists in our Congress. Indifference to the suffering of others – whether in the arbitrary immigration ban, the catastrophic cuts to the health care program, or the cancellation of DACA – seems to be the hallmark our current government’s ambitions.
I still believe the American people to be, for the most part and in the large, compassionate, sympathetic and understanding of the plights of others particularly those less fortunate. This government does not represent the good nature and spirit of its people. This is not who we are. We are better than this! Something must be done!
—
I cling hard to the TRUTH. It’s a FAR better bet than any of the alternatives!
Published 11 IX 17
47.On Respect
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 7:54 AM
subject: On Respect
Sirs:
Respect. It must be EARNED, continuously and continually, day after day, hour after hour, minute by minute, second by second. It can never be imposed, cannot be compelled or commanded, is never permanently awarded. It’s a delicate and fragile thing that can be lost or destroyed – whether in an eye-blink of callous indifference or abuse, or by sustained neglect. And once lost, is ever so difficult to regain.
What makes the American experiment so truly remarkable is whether, and to what extent, we fulfill our commitment to play by the rules of our own devising, namely, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the nineteen other amendments thereto. The first of these specifies the inalienable right of the people peaceably to assemble in protest of grievances.
America is neither perfect nor infallible! There is much for which we ought properly to ashamed: inequality, injustice, discrimination – the list goes on and on. But we’ll never make progress in the redress of these grievous failings if, first, we don’t accept, acknowledge and face their existence.
I stand proudly with my brothers and sisters – of whatever ‘race’, color, gender, ethnic or religious background – who link arms, take a knee – or two in prayer – for a better America in which we conscientiously seek to make ours a better country for us all. That will be truly worthy of our, and others, respect.
Pub. 28 IX 17
48.Puerto Rico
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Mon Oct 16, 2017 at 8:08 AM
subject: Puerto Rico
Sirs:
America’s mistreatment – specifically its neglect – of Puerto Rico in its time of need is simply unforgivable! While we rush to the assistance of our continental states – Florida, Texas, California – when confronted with natural disasters, we – this President, our Congress – throw paper towels as a publicity stunt to Puerto Rico then walk away. We treat Puerto Rico the way King Leopold abused its colony, the Congo, stripping it of its resources and neglecting, even abusing, its people.
The whole world is watching in horror and revulsion as we mistreat our colony and its people then walk away telling the helpless to help themselves. Whatever happened to “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”?
THIS COUNTY HAS LOST ITS SOUL!
Not published
49.Tax Bill
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 9:21 AM
subject: The Tax Bill
Sirs:
I am deeply concerned about the need to maintain significant support for crucial social and environmental programs. Our tax policy should ensure that the largest corporations and wealthiest individuals in our country are supporting broad-based prosperity, not the further concentration of wealth.
According to Congress’ Joint Committee on Taxation, over the next decade, the Senate Republican tax bill would give big tax cuts to the wealthiest and give big tax increases to people earning $10,000 to $75,000. The news is even worse for poorer Americans — tax increases for people earning $10,000 to $30,000 would start as early as 2021.
America needs for an economy grounded in social justice and environmental sustainability. The tax bill takes us in the opposite direction we need by:
* Concentrating wealth in corporations and the wealthiest families;
* Over-taxing lower income families;
* Slashing social security, Medicare, and Medicaid;
* Slashing public education and other community needs;
* Incentivizing the offshoring of jobs;
* Failing to sufficiently support the transition we need to a clean energy economy.
What we need is rejection of this bill and instead promotion of an economy that truly works for people and the planet – including support for healthcare, education, environmental programs, and community services.
Published 6 XII 17 with the clauses at * condensed into one paragraph and improper capitalizations.
50.RIP Democracy
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 8:43 AM
subject: RIP Democracy
Sirs:
Democracy: government by the people
Oligarchy: rule by a small group
When the majority party in both houses of Congress – at the behest of their financial benefactors – willfully, flagrantly, with malice aforethought ignores, overrides and dismisses the express will of the American people, I submit that the two-hundred-plus-year experiment in democracy is moribund, dying, breathing its last.
A conspiracy of dunces, seeking to serve their own interests in preference to those whom they were elected to serve, has violated the basic tenet of democratic governance.
Welcome to the oligarchy. For better or for worse, that is now our form of government.
Pub 10 XII 17
51.Santa Fe, TX
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Sat, May 19, 2018 at 3:01 PM
subject: Santa Fe, Tx
Sirs:
I am sick, tired and disgusted with the conspiracy of wimps, cowards and dunces in our government who have failed utterly to take definitive action to forestall, prevent or stop the string of 16 school shootings that have taken place in this country just this year.
If the majority of Americans were to demand that our government take more serious action NOW to address the tragic gun violence that continues to plague our nation – in our schools, our houses of worship, our theaters, at concerts, and in our neighborhoods – our will would be done! The STOP Violence in Schools Act that recently passed, does not go nearly far enough in offering protections.
Far too many children, educators, and Americans from all walks of life have lost their lives to senseless gun violence – in all of those places. And the list goes on. The time to act is long overdue.
I urge each reader to go further and support common-sense measures to help keep guns out of dangerous hands, including voting to require universal background checks, a ban on assault weapons, high-capacity magazines, and bump-stocks that have been used far too often to kill and injure massive numbers of people in single incidents.
I also urge every voter to vote against any proposal to arm educators. Teachers should be teaching their students, not acting as armed security guards. Instead, we should increase funding and access to school-based mental health services and address the shortage of mental health professionals, including counselors, in our schools.
Our country has to be better than this. No other nation faces with such blithering inefficacy such continuing tragedies. No other nation stands by and does nothing.
Please take action. Now.
Not published
52.Principles Vs Behaviors
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Jun 25, 2018, 9:33 PM
subject: Principles vs Behaviors
Sirs:
The headline (Sunday 24 VI 18) reports the attitude of one Trump supporter that it’s the latter’s principles that matter, not his behaviors.
One principle I would have thought that most thinking citizens would agree upon is to abjure causing suffering to others, particularly the weak, the vulnerable, the disadvantaged, particularly women, children, the handicapped and the elderly.
Causing such suffering, deliberately and with forethought, is certainly a deplorable, despicable behavior.
But violating the principle – to try to avoid such – is a consistent and repeated failing of this “president”, his administration, and the majority party in both houses of this Congress.
A principal measure of a society, nation or civilization is how it treats or mistreats the people under its control. At present, America is consistently failing to meet this criterion of decency, compassion and respect for others. As the sages have said, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” We, the US, are not.
Published 3 VII 18 substantially as submitted but with the title “U.S. fails to live up to principles”
53.Feckless
from: John Cooper <jcooper@bucknell.edu>
to: letters@dailyitem.com
date: Aug 4, 2018, 8:51 AM
subject: Feckless
Sirs:
There’s a word for it! Feckless, lacking initiative or strength of character; irresponsible, useless, worthless, incompetent, inept, good-for-nothing, ne’er-do-well, lazy, idle, slothful, indolent, irresponsible, shiftless, no-good, no-account. Ineffective. The word comes from the Scottish and Northern English dialect, ‘feck’, having an effect.
And where does it apply? Nay, where does it not? Congress, legislatures, administrations, government in general? How about our – private, personal, national, species-wide – flatulently failing response to global warming, the desecration of the planetary environment? The length and breadth of public need? You name it!
We swim in a public pool of want, a sea of necessity, for effective change and action. Yet our species seems incapable of rising to and addressing the issue(s). Time and again, the ball is dropped, kicked down the road, left in the ditch, abandoned. Let George – or Georgina – do it. Meanwhile, physical reality and its constellation of consequences, is, like Old Man – “He don’t say nothing, he just keeps rolling along” – River feckful. Nature is eminently feckful.
Inaction, failing to act, is also an act. It has consequences, too.
Published 7 VIII 18 as written except the title was changed to “Inaction has consequences“.