<b>A new priority?</b>

EDITOR: The election is over. The Senate Republicans are now relieved of their top priority, as was stated in 2010 by the minority leader: "My No. 1 priority is making sure President Obama's a one-term president." So maybe their top priority for 2012 could be doing the work they were elected to do. Please?


Rohnert Park

<b>America loses</b>

EDITOR: I am disappointed in the election. Are we looking at four more years of failed policies or worse?

Obamacare won't be repealed, which means Americans are facing $2,500 to $4,000 in tax increases and doctors leaving private practice.

President Barack Obama bragged about jobs created but failed to inform us most jobs were in the federal government.

If people were unhappy with Congress, why send them back? Will Obama and the Senate continue to hold America hostage and blame Republicans?

I expect the next four years to be worse. Recall, Obama told the Russians to wait until his second term as he will have more flexibility. I see us losing freedoms, paying higher taxes, and America will become a Muslim-controlled nation. Christians will be openly persecuted, and in the end, America will lose.


Santa Rosa

<b>Foolish risk</b>

EDITOR: I was relieved and appalled reading about the boat that capsized in Tomales Bay last Sunday ("Four kids, three adults saved after boat flips," Monday).

I'm relieved because seven people are alive today, thanks to Sonoma County sheriff's deputies, the Coast Guard, Marin County firefighters and Point Reyes National Seashore rangers. I am sure others were involved in the rescue. I am appalled that three adults endangered the lives of the children by not having all on the boat wear life jackets.

I hope someone throws the book at the the adults because they not only placed themselves in danger but also the many rescuers who had to go into the water after them.




EDITOR: Hurricane Sandy has reminded me of the danger climate change poses. It's time our society takes progressive action to curb the negative impact our practices have on the environment. Today, widespread clear-cutting exists in California, expediting climate change.

Mature forests store large amounts of carbon. Clear-cutting releases 50 percent of this carbon into the atmosphere, intensifying global warming. The timber industry claims to offset the carbon issue by replanting clear-cut areas with forest plantations. These trees, however, will not absorb a comparable amount of carbon for at least 20 years.

The effects of clear-cutting and climate change also endanger California's water supply. Forests provide 75 percent of the state's water. Our climate's rising temperature causes the snowpack of the Sierra to shrink, melting earlier in the spring. Where forests have been clear-cut, the land grows hotter and drier, storing less snow during the winter, creating summer water shortages. Our mountains no longer fulfill their natural role of storing water from snow that may be used later in the season when needed.

Clear-cutting is a destructive practice that is inappropriate in this era of climate change. It's time that California ban it to halt the severe and dangerous threats it poses on our planet and its people.



<b>Who killed Prop. 37?</b>

EDITOR: It was no surprise that Proposition 37 was defeated, with Monsanto and friends outspending us about 10 to 1. The real surprise was the California's newspapers didn't do the research on GMOs before they swallowed the party line and parroted it back to their readers.

Every letter you printed was in favor of the measure; every article you printed was against it. Couldn't you have done due diligence and sent one reporter to find out the truth about Roundup, superweeds and what genetically modified foods are doing to the health of the planet? Why do you suppose 61 countries (including China, Russia and the entire European Union) demand labeling? Why do pediatricians who see kids with ADD and leaky gut make their first response pulling the children off GMOs? Why has so much scientific research on GMOs been suppressed?

I'm terribly disappointed in you. There's a huge story, and you ignored it. Makes me wonder why that was.



<b>Three little words</b>

EDITOR: I cannot help but think that three little words could have changed this election. They are "rape is bad," period. If Mitt Romney had said them and other Republicans backed him, it would probably have turned many females minds, at least enough to elect him president and take control of the Senate. So simple but so hard to do. I don't mean rape is bad except, or but, or sometimes, or when. I mean rape is bad, period.


Santa Rosa