24 million viewers can’t be wrong
Re “Republicans stand apart from public, not each other” (Editorials, Aug. 8): The Sacramento Bee’s editorial board suggests that the first Republican candidate debate was entertaining, yet reflects how out of touch the Republicans are with national sentiments.
If that were so, why did 24 million viewers tune in? Did not those viewers have any other entertainment to tune into? Were they simply uninformed, bored but curious, also out of touch or simply on the wrong side of history? Is it possible that the Bee's editorial board could be missing something?
Matthias Mendezona, North Highlands
What if Trump wore a turban?
I can pretty much guarantee that the worshipers of Donald Trump would be up in arms about his nastiness if he were dark skinned and wearing a turban. Close your eyes and picture the same words coming from someone who has different beliefs and different skin color than yours. You would not want that person to lead us, would you? So why are you so enamored by this buffoon?
Karen Fong, Sacramento
Let’s change the channel on Trump
We watch as Donald Trump disparages women and makes outlandish claims about what he would do when elected president. The American public cheers him on. We should remember the story about the emperor who paraded before his cheering subjects in his apparent new finery until one small boy said to his mother “But mama, the emperor has no clothes.” Someone needs to speak up.
Constance West, Sacramento
Trump is funny, to a point
It is shocking and hilarious to watch Donald Trump be Trump. If he weren't polling so high, it would be much funnier. But the fact that many Republicans seem to adore him raises concerns about the Republican Party. Individuals with fragile egos, like Trump, immediately attack those who have wounded them. It is a very common scene in junior high schools. Trump never matured past the seventh grade. His behavior is predictable and it's best not to elect a junior high kid for anything requiring adult skills.
Mark Collen, Sacramento
Trump is kidding us all
Donald Trump is having a great time running for president, but he doesn’t actually want the job. He loves the spotlight. It’s a dream come true for his ego. He also won’t abandon the Trump Tower penthouse and give up his Trump jet for Air Force One and live and work at the White House.
Stephen Farr, Folsom
Speaking loudly by ignoring Sanders
Re “Sanders rising, but will it last?” (Viewpoints, Aug. 6): Nothing proves the influence that big money has in elections more than the limited attention Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign has received.
He is out-polling every Republican candidate and is largely responsible for the drop in Hillary Clinton’s approval numbers. But there’s barely a mention of him. With Joe Biden considering a candidacy for president, the press makes it seem as if Biden is the only candidate who could compete with Clinton.
Sanders is receiving virtually all of his financial support from individual donors giving small amounts of money. Due to his popularity, those contributions have added up to a sizable amount. Corporate donors influence the news we hear and contribute largely to Clinton and Republican candidates. They know that Sanders is more interested in serving the people than the big corporations.
Donna Ellis, Sacramento
Sanders raises important issues
Income inequality is the great moral dilemma of our time. A shrinking middle class is bad for everyone, including those on top.
A society with an increased class divide leads to increased crime, and decreased safety. Sen. Bernie Sanders’ platform offers solutions that are reminiscent of Franklin Roosevelt’s response during the Great Depression. He suggests we create jobs by building our crumbling infrastructure. He suggests we cooperate more with the United Nations rather than getting involved in costly wars that deplete our economy and destroy lives.
Sanders reforms include healthcare for all, education for all, and opportunity for employment for all people. Let’s let everyone have an opportunity for an equal share.
G. Mari Erlandson, Sacramento
Dropping ‘bomb’ was unnecessary
Re “Dropping ‘the bomb’ saved lives” (Letters, Aug. 7): I am disgusted that some Americans still rationalize the use of nuclear weapons in Japan during WWII, despite overwhelming evidence that it was neither necessary to end the war nor supported by our military leaders.
To unleash these ultimate weapons of mass destruction on concentrated populations of innocent women, children and elderly adults was unconscionable, barbaric and inhumane. These two blasts caused nearly 225,000 deaths and unimaginable pain and suffering to the disfigured and crippled survivors.
President Harry Truman deliberately exaggerated the invasion casualty estimates and refused the Japanese offer of conditional surrender, later accepted, to justify using atomic bombs as punishment for Pearl Harbor. The Cold War and arms race were lasting consequences of these nuclear attacks.
I am ashamed that our country committed these atrocious acts of terrorism and genocide. We must never forget Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and have a moral obligation to condemn torture and other reprehensible war crimes.
Harry A. Kreigh, Sacramento
EXTRA LETTERS ONLINE
Find them at:
HOW TO SUBMIT
Online form (preferred):
Other: Letters, P.O. Box 15779,
Sacramento, CA 95852
150-word limit. Include name, address and phone number. Letters may be edited for clarity, brevity and content.