Friday's Letters to the Editor

<p class="bold allcaps">FDR’s vision</p> <p>EDITOR: “Capitalism: A Love Story,” Michael Moore’s film, is so full of facts humorously presented that you need to see it again to get it all. Most compelling is his reading of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s second Bill of Rights presented in his Jan. 11, 1944 State of the Union message:</p><p>“Every American is entitled to:</p><p>“The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries, or shops or farms or mines of the nation;</p><p>“The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;</p><p>“The right of farmers to raise and sell their products at a return which will give them and their families a decent living;</p><p>“The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;</p><p>“The right of every family to a decent home;</p><p>“The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;</p><p>“The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, and sickness, and accident and unemployment;</p><p>“The right to a good education.”</p><p>Send this to congresspersons questioning what Americans are entitled to, especially on health (death) care issues.</p><p>E.L. ROBERSON</p><p>Santa Rosa</p><h3>A common fallacy</h3> <p>EDITOR: Over the past month you have published four editorials/op-eds favoring severe new restrictions on firearms and ammunition. Your 200-word letter limit will not permit me to deal with the many incorrect facts and specious arguments in those editorials.</p><p>However, the four pieces, published Sept. 24 (“More gun violence victims in America? It’s a dead certainty”), Sept. 27 (“Going after the real killers,” pressdemocrat.com), Oct. 15 (“Exploiting gun law loophole”) and Oct. 23 (“Ammo check”), share one common fallacy: that the type of legislation advocated actually accomplishes its alleged goal.</p><p>For the unpleasant facts on this issue, please refer to “First Reports Evaluating the Effectiveness of Strategies for Preventing Violence: Firearm Laws,” which is available on the Centers for Disease Control Web site. The CDC, which has advocated restrictive firearms laws for many years, set up a task force that spent two years evaluating the effectiveness of all conceivable types of firearms laws by examining all the available published peer-reviewed studies. From its summary: “The task force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws or combinations of laws reviewed on violent outcomes.”</p><p>Other people may differ, but I like to see evidence that something works before I do it over and over again. Violence has complex causes and finds a way of being expressed no matter what tools are at hand. Advocates of severe firearms laws would rather adopt feel-good and do-nothing laws than have to think about this inconvenient truth.</p><p>FRED BAUER</p><p>Petaluma</p><h3>Recall politics</h3> <p>EDITOR: George Barich totally approves of the recall process — except when it applies to him. In 2000, another council member and I were the subject of a recall publicly backed by Barich because we didn’t appoint his choice for mayor. He was happy to spend thousands to remove us. His attempt failed for lack of public support, and now we have Barich turning 180 degrees in his recall ballot response. Hypocritical, to say the least. </p><p>As for the claim that Barich is an upstanding citizen, his campaign materials state, “I will not accept benefits or salary,” yet he signed up for full benefits his first month in office and has postponed taking his pay but not refused it.</p><p>Barich has violated Cotati’s sign ordinances and political reform rules. He disregarded a 2004 resolution passed by the City Council by sending an unauthorized letter to the president designed to look as if it were official city business, and he went behind the backs of the public to do so. He has cost Cotati more than $35,000 in staff time. It’s all documented at City Hall.</p><p>As a former mayor, in my book that is misconduct and good reason to recall Barich. </p><p>HAROLD BERKEMEIER</p><p>Cotati</p><h3>Enough of Cheney</h3> <p>EDITOR: In response to former Vice President Dick Cheney’s recent comment that the Obama administration is “dithering” on Afghanistan, Vice President Joe Biden’s one word response, “irrelevant,” is on point.</p><p>My one word response to Cheney is “Blithering” (with a capital B) followed by any number of nouns (the word “idiot” comes to mind).</p><p>The Obama administration’s measured response to further engagement in a war that can’t be won is the only solution.</p><p>“Blithering” needs to retire from the public scene, go home and fish (ideally no hunting) and be thankful that this country tolerates and doesn’t prosecute former administration officials for human rights violations. Cheney, this country is safer without you.</p><p>PATRICK RUTTEN </p><p>Santa Rosa</p><h3>A library’s value</h3> <p>EDITOR: I was disturbed to read comments by Santa Rosa school board members Tad Wakefield, who was “very comfortable” with eliminating librarians as the district struggles with budget cuts (“Santa Rosa school librarians face ax,” Tuesday). Wakefield also remarked that “kids use technology on their own” and that libraries are used to “hang out.” </p><p>Students indeed use technology. They are incredibly adept at using it for entertainment and socializing. However, for academic purposes, I hardly think that Googling up answers is what Wakefield would want our students doing “on their own.”</p><p>Kids do not come to school hard-wired with sophisticated research skills. They must be taught, developed and practiced over time. And it is the teacher librarian who guides and instructs students as they develop their information problem-solving skills. </p><p>And if the library is a place to “hang out,” would this not be an appropriate place for students to read, study and work with friends and peers? Wakefield might visit a few school libraries and speak with the dedicated teacher librarians who run book clubs, host student poetry slams and provide safe and caring environments for students to congregate during their free time.</p><p>There are worse places to be. </p><p>SUSAN THOMPSON</p><p>Petaluma</p><h3>New buyers?</h3> <p>EDITOR: Petaluma Councilman Mke Healy and the Rev. Chip Worthington may have good reasons for opposing the casino proposed by the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, but history is not one of them (“Why we are suing to block the casino,” Wednesday). They claim that “voters intended to approve Indian gaming on historical Indian lands and not on newly purchased lands.” The Pomo and the Miwok lived on the land in question for at least 5,000 years before the white man came and “purchased” it from them. Exactly, who are the new buyers here?</p><p>MARTIN KOUGHAN</p><p>Sonoma</p>