• Wed
    19
  • Thu
    20
  • Fri
    21
  • Sat
    22
  • Sun
    23
  • Mon
    24
  • Tue
    25

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Home / Articles / Commentary / Letters to the Editor /  Letters to the Editor 04/26/2012
. . . .
Thursday, April 26,2012

Letters to the Editor 04/26/2012

By Letters to the Editor

WOMEN AGAINST REGISTRY
Jerry Sandusky is at the center of the Penn State sex abuse scandal. Jerry Sandusky was not on any sex offender registry, which is the case in more than 95 percent of sexual offenses. [See “Reformers: six offender mandate would hurt Illinois,” by Patrick Yeagle, April 19.] More laws and more money being thrown at a failed system is irresponsible.

There are more than 763,000 men, women and children required to register across the states for “crimes” including urinating in public, streaking, mooning, exposure, sexting, viewing suggestive or abusive images of anyone up to the age of 18, playing doctor, prostitution, false accusations by a soon-to-be ex-wife, ex-girlfriend or angry and immature student, Romeo and Juliet consensual sexual dating relationships, endangering the welfare of a child and rape. Please do the math: 763,000 multiplied by 3 or 4 family members who are suffering the collateral damage. They are being harassed, ridiculed, threatened, beaten, wives lose their jobs, asked to leave their church and other organizations, have to move, have signs placed in their yards, have flyers distributed throughout the neighborhood. All this is because they are trying to provide a support system for someone who has paid their debt to society and wants to work and support their family. Keep adding more laws and you or someone you love will soon be awarded a place on the registry. Use funds instead to teach parents, teens and children about sexual safety, to include behavior that is appropriate toward them as well as behavior that is appropriate coming from them.

Vicki Henry
Women Against Registry dot com


CALIFORNIA COMPOSTER
I really liked your article in Illinois Times about feeding the soil [see “Feeding the soil builds sustainable lawns,” by Karen Fitzgerald, April 19]. I run a small company just north of San Francisco and we are advocating same. We also push aerated compost tea, mineral powder/dust, vermicompost, etc. Can’t beat good old compost.

Tom Bowen
San Rafael, Calif.


LIVING GREEN
Thank you for your “Living Green” edition. We need to be reminded that we should take care of the world that God gave us and not trash it as other civilizations have done in the past. Keep reminding us.

Margaret Niederer
retired educator


NEWSPAPER SOLUTION
The downsizing of newspapers in Springfield and Peoria hasto do with one thing only – they have lost their market. [See “Not playing in Peoria: Civic leaders say they’re concerned about SJ-R and Peoria newspaper,” April 19, by Bruce Rushton.] You can blame it on young people turning away from the daily paper in favor of online news but I attribute the slow decay of print journalism to one thing: liberalism.

Conservatives have grown tired of having reporters present only the liberal side of every story, and if you think I exaggerate, look at how the Springfield Tea Party has been treated.
Local papers find themselves losing readers. It seems that left-leaning journalists are losing their jobs because they only appeal to a limited minority.I have a simple message. Try reporting the news or, better yet, try treating conservatives with the respect they deserve.
Jerald Jacobs

Treasurer, Springfield Tea Party

DAILY TIMES
Sad, so sad [See “Not playing in Peoria: Civic leaders say they’re concerned about SJ-R and Peoria newspaper,” April 19]. But this gives you an opportunity to become a daily newspaper and compete with the declining SJ-R! I would love to pay for a daily newspaper. I have always viewed Illinois Times as the paper that fills a niche...but not so much “serious journalism.” Those days are in the past. The papers have switched roles. Illinois Times would make a wonderful daily!

From illinoistimes.com

 

  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
 
Jerald Jacobs seems to think liberalism and left-leaning journalists (the go-to villains of the right on all matters remotely political), while discounting the impact of the ever-increasing digitalization of media. Get real, Jerald, the right's definition of "left-leaning" is anything short of putting on a pleated skirt and waving pom=pons for the right. That's not journalism, either, but I have been an avid reader of newspapers since childhood - even during a somewhat lengthy foray into conservatism many years ago before settling to my current center-left view - and never experienced anything close to the "liberal bias" the right has been howling about for decades.

Face it, Jer, the Tea Party itself would have never achieved the profile it did without the "mainstream" media you so decry; certainly it wouldn't have become so visible had its media exposure been limited to the dedicated right-wing press (where journalistic objectivity fails to be paid even lip service) unseen by all but the like-minded. A conspiracy of liberal media could have killed the movement in its infancy through inattention but did not.

That your movement became - and remains - such a punchline is a testament to the dearth of leadership and overwhelming presence of high-profile whackadoos in the party, and the simple fact the Tea Party message lacks appeal with so many mainstream voters. You got lucky in the midterms. See how you do in a general election now that the public has had the opportunity to see your politicians in action.

 

tc
Golly gee - you can't agree with Mr. Jacobs because ???? you are his opposite on the political spectrum, even though you claim to be center left ? and have had a "foray" in conservative thinking?

Come on, be honest with yourself, it's your opinion of another persons beliefs and that doesn't make your beliefs any more right or wrong than anyone elses.

Lather, rinse, repeat

 

Thanks for your input. The fact that you wrote three paragraphs and then ended up using name calling to make your point speaks volumes.

 

 
tc,

Jerald Jacobs expressed an opinion, and so did I. In my opinion Jacob's opinion was based on an invalid bias. i am entitled to my opinion, and to challenge his, so I did.

You have nothing more to add than pointing out that I hold a different opinion as does Jacobs?

Bravo, tc, you've grasped the obvious.

got anything else to add, genius? You seem to think yourself clever. What else ya got?

 

More name calling, and you call him a genius?