Voters areincompetent

 ’Tis the season ofthe illusion of choice: When “the people” “consent to be governed” by anignorant and incompetent majority. Is majority rule equal to mob rule? Is therea legal difference between self-governance and consenting to be governed? Doesa voter/citizen have a duty to correct the error of their vote? Does Americanlaw respect the dissenting opinion of reason? Do those sworn to uphold stateand federal constitutions have a duty to protect those with “minimal contacts”with corporate government, and/or disagree with overboard police powers?

All are presumed to know the law. I attest that my 12 yearsof coerced public education followed by over three decades of personal witnessproves otherwise. Was the hard-earned 1986 9th circuit court decree of Lopez v.Okanogan County, et al., requiring a physical law library, circumvented by electedlocal officials; and, acquiesced to by the constituency, so as to increaserevenue by housing out of county prisoners in its place?

The voters have proven ignorance and incompetence bycontinually endorsing, or acquiescing to: A valueless money system;unsustainable domestic policies; hastily enacted legislation that grantsoverboard police powers over hard-earned liberties (e.g. PATRIOT Act, countybuilding code); war-mongering foreign policies; corporate rights equal toprivate individuals; victimless crimes – wherein the nonviolent offender is thevictim and “corrected(?)” via imprisonment with violent criminals and perpetualsub-citizen treatment; financially assisting criminals of banking institutionsthat stole the I have a reasonable expectation to be free from ignorant andincompetent voters.

Richard McQuade

Riverside

Publisher’sperspective

Mr. Forhan, although I seldom agree with you, I readthe perspective you bring to your paper with interest. As the publisher, youhave the privilege to share your opinions at any time in The Town Crier.

What I find unusual is your habit of personally addressingthose who have submitted letters within the letter’s section. It seems to methat the Letters to the Editor should be a section for your paper’s readers tovoice their concerns without being confronted by the publisher in a one-waydialog. I don’t believe you would find Sulzberger of the New York Times,Murdoch of the New York Post and the Wall Street Journal or any publisher of asolely owned reputable newspaper arguing with someone who purchases theirpaper and expresses their thoughts.

Being a publisher endows you with many responsibilities. Italso affords you a powerful platform to share your views. Please respectyour readers and allow them to share theirs without confrontation.

Sincerely,

Jeanne Fischer

Rocklin, Calif.