Untitled Document
We welcome letters. Please include your full name,
address, and telephone number. We edit all letters. Send them to Letters,
Illinois Times, P.O. Box 5256, Springfield, IL 62705; fax 217-753-3958;
e-mail editor@illinoistimes.com.
IRV INVENTED THE INTERNET?!! I just finished reading the article on Irv Smith
[“Party animal,” April 19], and I have but one question of
Dusty Rhodes: Was his ring the only thing she kissed? If I had never lived in the Springfield area and was
never exposed to the cutthroat politics that permeates every aspect of life
there, I would be blissfully ignorant of the truth (which apparently
escaped Rhodes) and see Smith as a real hero.
But I did, and I don’t. One has to read no further than partially down the
first column of the story to grasp the true persona of Irv Smith: “I
wanted to be a Democrat. I preferred it,” he says, “but
Sangamon County was Republican. I didn’t want to be in the minority.
I thought: If I want to have something to say, I’ve got to be with
the party that’s leading.” As early as 1956, Smith had decided
to sacrifice his “values” for the sole purpose of “being
heard.”
And equally clear is his lack of dignity, ethics and
compassion when he — proudly — boasts of using negative
campaigning to win an election: “I went after him because he had left
his wife. . . . I used that against him and just killed him.”
The rest of the story is nothing but typical
“Irvism”; to hear his side of the story, he virtually stood at
the gates of hell to fend off the evildoers of American society. In
reality, Smith is the evil one. How many families of Democrats lost their
incomes and homes just because of the way he manipulated the system to move
“his” people into their jobs? Smith suggests that he was a
champion of civil rights. Hmm, when was the last time the NAACP or Urban
League recognized him for being such a stellar public servant?
After reading his version of his accomplishments, I
wonder if there is anything Smith didn’t do; perhaps it was really he
who invented the Internet, or maybe he just perfected it while he was
correcting the inaccurate translations of the Bible. The only cover story you should be doing on Smith is
an honest, thoroughly investigated [examination] of the government he has
corrupted and lives he has destroyed. Aside from that, any story about Irv
Smith should be relegated to the fiction or cartoon pages. R. M. Martin Decatur
IRVINVENTEDDIRTYPOLITICS?!! I have always suspected it, but now it’s out in
the open for all to read. Irv Smith is and always has been two things:A
Democrat and, more importantly, the originator of dirty politics. Edie Miller Virden
IRV WAS ON THE GRASSY KNOLL?!! It was refreshing to see Dusty Rhodes and Illinois Times offer an
evenhanded, warts-and-all, portrait of Irv Smith. I cringed when I saw the
cover story, fearing the piece would trash him. I was dead wrong. Sadly,
not everyone in our fair city has displayed the journalistic integrity of Illinois Times. As your
readers must know, many of our less-than-informed local bloggers traffic in
tired, old, unsubstantiated Republican stereotypes, name-calling and
sophomorically absurd conspiracy theories. In their smear-based, fact-free
world, Republicans are evil, racist, homophobic, gun-toting,
money-grubbing, election-stealin’, über-Christian environmental
Godzillas, bent on destroying all things good and right. Thankfully, these
blogging ideological lemmings aren’t professional journalists (a
quick couple clicks of your mouse and you will see why!). Not surprisingly,
Smith was a frequent target of their obvious partisan hit jobs. These
bloggers (you know who you are) use lies and distortion the way a carpenter
uses a hammer and nails. Your piece on Smith talked about his courageous and
tireless work as an advocate for African-Americans (at a time when that
wasn’t well-accepted), that he’s a member of the Sierra Club,
his progressive acceptance of gender issues, his blue collar upbringing and
how that formed his world view, and much more. Irv Smith and other
Republicans are your friends, neighbors, co-workers and fellow
parishioners, not clichéd boogiemen to be feared and loathed. The bad news for you, Illinois
Times: By offering an honest,
well-rounded portrait, you’ve risked your lefty street cred with the
underground blog apparatchik who are sure that Irv Smith was on the Grassy
Knoll that day in Dallas. Dave Randall West Frankfort
CAHNMAN DOESN’T NEED A PARTY The election of Sam Cahnman to the City Council
should send a message that you don’t need the Democratic or
Republican parties to get elected. Also, people don’t like negative
campaigning. All the times Mr. Cahnman has run for any office, I have never
heard him say anything wrong about his opponents; he has always stuck to
the issues. Cahnman runs a very good campaign and could seek
higher office in the future. Danny Faulkner Springfield
NO KING TIM FOR SPRINGFIELD Well, it seems to me that the political experts do
not really understand what happened in Tuesday’s election. Tim
Timoney, the chairman of the Democratic Party, thought that they would win
at least eight seats on the City Council. Later he modified this to six,
then finally projected five. Timoney says that Mayor Tim Davlin’s
reelection shows the voters were satisfied with Davlin’s first four
years and the direction he was taking the city.
I think Timoney is wrong. First, 10 to 15 percent of
the voters voted for Davlin because they were voting against Ald. Bruce
Strom. Remember the smoking ban and all the small businesses that were
harmed? Remember the Wal-Mart stores that Strom stopped? I don’t think any of the Democratic aldermen
elected are blind followers of Davlin. I think the voters have decided to
put a hold on Davlin, get rid of his overpaid relatives and appointed
political hacks, take control of CWLP and the new power plant, and stop the
annual rape of CWLP to the tune of $8 million dollars a year. I look at this election as a complete rejection of
Davlin’s policies and his attempt to be king.
Marshall Selkirk
Springfield
STEP BACK FOR WOMEN’S RIGHTS As a mother and grandmother, I am both saddened and
alarmed by the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision to uphold the ban against
partial-birth abortion. Abortion is never a black-and-white choice. For many
women the choice is one made only when they really feel they have no other
alternatives, made after much thought and soul-searching. Abortion is not
an easy choice, but sometimes it is a necessary choice, made in the privacy
of one’s family, which is where such a choice belongs. To completely ban partial-birth abortions does two
things. First, from a medical aspect, it can put the mother’s life in
danger and perhaps make her susceptible to medical problems that may be
problematic for the rest of her life. It also limits doctors from providing
what they feel is the best medical choice given a certain set of
circumstances. Second, from an emotional point of view it can be
devastating for not only the mother but also the family. If the family has
decided to terminate the pregnancy because the baby has no chance at life,
this type of birth would at least give the mother and other family members
the solace of holding the baby before saying goodbye. It is a matter of importance to everyone in our
society that we do not take a step back in women’s rights. Among
those rights comes the ability to make decisions about their own bodies and
reproductive rights. Younger women do not remember the time when they did
not have this choice, but I do. I remember girls going to backstreet
doctors to have abortions and many times putting their lives in danger or
suffering consequences long after the surgery. This also became a class
issue, where people with money could afford to find someone willing to do
the abortion but girls without money had little or no choice other than the
backstreet establishments. We too often attempt to make abortion a moral issue
when in reality it is a private issue. This is where it should remain, and
as a society we need to remain vigilant that women are not again relegated
to being second-class citizens with decisions about their health and
welfare being made by people other than them.
Suzanne B. Woods Chesterfield
CORRECTION Farries “Mickey” Morrison was the first
male African-American teacher in the Springfield school district. Because
of an editing error, he was described as the first African-American teacher
in last week’s cover story [Dusty Rhodes, “Party animal,”
April 19].
This article appears in Apr 19-25, 2007.
