Guest Column: Response to Jim Thacker’s ‘Thank the lunatic left for the Republican majority’

In response to Jim Thacker’s July 19-25 article, “Thank the lunatic left for the Republican majority.”

I think it’s more like Dorothy arrives in the present-day U.S. and says, “Toto, we’re not a democracy anymore. (Democracy according to one definition, ‘Government by the people… The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community’). Toto, it’s been real and all, but I’ve gotta ditch ya; gotta get an above-minimum wage job, or I’ll have to cook you up.”

I’m not going to defend the “lunatic left” by name-calling to the right. I would never call a person attempting to think outside the box, and keep government under a watchful eye by reporting their wrongdoings, a lunatic. It’s those people who keep society balanced (a word that our executive branch doesn’t understand in terms of power, as this administration holds more power over all three branches than any in the past). Sure, radicals exist from either side, and those from the far left do make a bad name for us. Peter Beinart, author of The Good Fight, calls it “doughface fantasy” when liberals denounce the government’s actions without accepting the consequences or producing better alternatives. I don’t agree with these people. However, if they didn’t exist, we would all be too busy trying to make ends meet, to notice our administration incrementally stealing power and constitutional freedoms.

I see the world quite differently than Mr. Thacker. Upon waiting on Jim, we’ve had several political debates, although I always respect his beliefs. Surely, he wouldn’t be name-calling. Even I know better, professionally and characteristically, than to childishly call people with different views lunatics. It resolves nothing. It only produces more aid to a vicious cycle of discrimination and corruption, resulting in unconstitutional actions to prove false claims of who’s “right.” Simply put, it’s immature!

When are people going to realize that brutal attacks on opposing political parties don’t unify our people, yet we’re trying to unify other countries? What makes us different from radical/murderous opposing parties in other countries? We use money and politics to manipulate society and “kill” the “evildoers”/opposing communities in a slow, quiet and “legal” way. I sat with Mr. Thacker one afternoon and inquired as to why our government can spend billions of dollars overseas but can’t resolve our poverty, education or energy issues at home. He stated that too much government aid only produces additional problems, using welfare as an example. Well, since everyone can agree that welfare is completely unsuccessful, why does it still exist? Perhaps it makes for a useful tool in legally permitting slavery.

We have welfare-dependent areas in this country where police won’t even enter. The residents are simply left to die, like those in New Orleans. So, this country has managed to stay on top this long, and we can’t improve internal education or poverty? You may argue that aiding these “bad areas” would be a waste of taxpayers’ money, that they don’t want to change. Well, I don’t think the Iraqi community was begging for the American way of life, either, yet we are pouring billions their way. If we truly are this great hero, why haven’t we brought this much aid to Africa, who’s faced despair for decades? Because it’s very much about oil; Cheney wasn’t a top dog at Halliburton coincidentally. So we can “liberate” the Iraqi people but not our own? We can’t fund programs like Habitat for Humanity to give these people something to work for and be proud of, get police, counselors and EDUCATION in these areas? (JFK started the Peace Corps.) Another vicious cycle: most people born into these areas are taught to survive by any means necessary, the same means by which our politicians survive—corruption. How did the economy survive WWII if not for FDR’s government aid? (Oh, yeah, and a true reason for being at war!) We need to educate people, encourage them to think outside the box, and promote political/governmental interest, no matter whose side they’re on!

How can you claim George W. Bush is a smart man? I’m sure involvement in an elite secret society (Skull and Bones) and an abundance of money can earn anyone an Ivy-league education—it’s politics! Let’s take a moment to appreciate what his education has earned him:

“I’m the commander… I do not need to explain why I say things. That’s the interesting thing about being president.”—as quoted in Bob Woodward’s Bush at War.

“We need an energy bill that encourages consumption.”—Trenton, N.J., Sept. 23, 2002

“Do you hate blacks, too?”—to Brazilian President Fernando Cardoso, Washington, D.C., Nov. 8, 2001

“My plan reduces the national debt, and fast. So fast, in fact, that economists worry that we’re going to run out of debt to retire.”—radio address, Feb. 24, 2001

“See, free nations are peaceful nations. Free nations don’t attack each other. Free nations don’t develop weapons of mass destruction.”—Milwaukee, Wis., Oct. 3, 2003

“I don’t know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don’t care. It’s not that important. It’s not our priority.”—Washington, D.C., March 13, 2002

“We found the weapons of mass destruction…for those who say we haven’t found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they’re wrong, we found them.”—Washington, D.C., May 30, 2003

“There’s an old saying in Tennessee—I know it’s in Texas, probably in Tennessee—that says, fool me once, shame on—shame on you. Fool me—you can’t get fooled again.”—Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002

“Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.”—Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004

From “A lunatic is a commonly used term for a person who is dangerous, or unpredictable…”

Unpredictable? Dangerous? Who’s the lunatic? Who can’t see the myriad unanswered questions from the public regarding almost every action deriving from this man? And now, we’re faced with the hate of the entire world…thank the Bush votes!

Well, Jim, I hope I didn’t go too far. I don’t want to be a “leftist” ruining this great country’s name. I believe in a very strict interpretation of the Constitution. I believe in a strong judicial, legislative and executive power, which are equal, which produce results beneficial to America as a whole. I don’t have a master’s degree, a lot of stocks to protect, or a fancy title, but I have a voice backed by a lot of experience from many angles of life. I’ve been poor, I’ve been a successful network administrator, I’ve been a communications and computer operator in the United States Air Force, I’ve briefed some of the president’s right-hand men touring our facilities, I’ve lost a marriage to a heroin problem raging in Rockford, I’ve seen the world, and it can be done better—period!

Respectfully, an apparent lunatic, Kathryn R. Larson.

Kathryn R. Larson is a resident of Rockford.

From the Aug. 9-15, 2006, issue

Enjoy The Rock River Times? Help spread the word!