Publication Date: Wednesday, October 27, 2004
Letters
Letters
(October 27, 2004)
Thoughts from a teacher
Editor,
Recent letters have debated the value in having teachers live in the community where they work. Pat Marriott (ReaderWire, Oct. 20) lists various occupations and asks: "Why should teachers be any different?" when it comes to living farther away from their workplace.
As a Palo Alto resident and teacher who's had it both ways, I know the advantages of not commuting.
I have more time to get to know my students, whether helping with academics, supporting extra-curricular activities or just talking to them as a caring adult. I have more time to develop curriculum, collaborate with colleagues and deepen my own learning. I have more time to participate in school committees, improving the quality of the school.
I have more understanding of the community in which I'm working, improving my ability to reach students. My long-term commitment to education in this district is enhanced by my being a resident and the father of future students here.
I have the utmost respect for hard work, in any occupation. But is your plumber nurturing your children's growth? Does your electrician dedicate hundreds of hours to preparing your children for their future? Do your children get a special thrill from your accountant attending their school play? Do your children confide their problems to shopkeepers, and if so, do those shopkeepers have the background and experience to provide effective support and resources?
Forgive me if I reject arguments premised on the comparability of teaching with the work of technicians or waiters. Thankfully, I've been fortunate to work with parents and students in this community who do not see our partnership as a simple series of transactions.
David B. Cohen
Ramona Street
Palo Alto
Kleinberg conflicts
Editor,
I am disappointed that Palo Alto City Attorney Gary Baum decided to obtain the opinion of a private attorney about conflicts arising from Councilmember Judy Kleinberg's job with the American Electronics Association, instead of obtaining an opinion from the California Attorney General and written advice from the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC).
By obtaining an opinion from a private attorney, Baum and Kleinberg have chosen to keep secret the communications between them and that attorney upon which the opinion is based and interested persons are excluded from participating in the process.
If former Interim City Attorney Wynne Furth had sought an opinion of the Attorney General when the City Council authorized her to do so on June 7, 2004, the public would have access to both the opinion and communications between the city and the Attorney General concerning the legal issues raised in the request for the opinion.
In addition, "the Attorney General welcomes and solicits the views of interested persons concerning the legal issues raised in any question submitted for an opinion," and "all views submitted will be considered public records subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act."
Similarly, if Kleinberg obtained written advice from the FPPC about conflicts other than contracts, the public would have access to the information upon which the advice is based, and Kleinberg would have immunity from civil and criminal liability based upon the information she submitted, if she followed that advice.
Herb Borock
Colorado Avenue
Palo Alto
Political 'poison'?
Editor,
I don't know who could be a better poisoner than Mr. Poizner himself, as he poisons the very air we breathe with his unconscionable accusations and untruths about Ira Ruskin.
Ruskin is a very decent and honest man running for the California Assembly, replacing Joe Simitian, a likewise similar man.
Furthermore, would Poizner also take to Sacramento his version of democracy? Freedom of speech is basic. My road sign for Ira Ruskin was removed two weeks ago.
All those expensive mailers I receive daily are quickly recycled as I trust are those of all good Democrats and enough Republicans, too.
Lois Crozier Hogle
Old Page Mill Road
Palo Alto
Fresh perspective
Editor,
In a recent mailing to voters, the Republican candidate for State Assembly, Steve Poizner, was unjustly and falsely accused by his Democratic opponent, Ira Ruskin, of not supporting women's rights and racial equality.
Those charges are absolutely untrue, are diametrically opposed to the facts and were meant to impugn Poizner's character and record, both of which are exemplary. The inflammatory mailing was sent out on San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom's letterhead, purporting to be a letter of support for Ruskin.
Mayor Newsom could not clearly recall writing or signing the letter.
The president of the San Jose chapter of the NAACP recently responded to this offensive and patently misleading tactic by Ruskin by sending him a letter in which he is asked to cease "race-baiting campaign tactics" and attempts at misleading voters and to reject publicly such tactics.
False accusations and "misstatements" of facts in politics seem to be more and more commonplace. One would have hoped that in this area of highly educated and politically informed voters a candidate would not degrade himself and his candidacy by engaging in those kinds of insulting behaviors, as Ruskin has.
Contrary to the false accusations, Poizner's candidacy represents a fresh perspective, stimulating and promising ideas, proven personal accomplishments, integrity and political inclusiveness, embracing the very qualities that this Assembly District's residents deserve and have historically enjoyed in their Assembly representatives.
Ben Stolpa
Forest Avenue
Palo Alto
Council behind Ruskin
Editor,
I was pleased to see that all nine members of the Palo Alto City Council have endorsed Democrat Ira Ruskin for State Assembly of the 21st District.
I talked to a few of them asking them why they endorsed Ruskin. In explaining his endorsement, Mayor Bern Beecham said: "Ruskin was a leader in establishing state law to help ensure a safe and reliable water supply for the Bay Area."
Former Mayor Vic Ojakian said: "I've worked with Ira for more than six years. His experience and judgment have been invaluable."
Councilwoman Judy Kleinberg said: "Ira has consistently defended choice and equality for women's issues. I'm impressed that he is endorsed by important leaders such as Barbara Boxer, Anna Eshoo and Jackie Speier."
As a three-term Redwood City Councilmember and regional leader on the Peninsula, Ruskin has worked hard for the environment and education. He has a strong record of fiscal responsibility.
We will be fortunate to have someone with Ruskin's integrity and long list of outstanding accomplishments representing us in Sacramento.
Dorothy Bender
Military Way
Palo Alto
Bold step forward
Editor,
Governor Schwarzenegger took a bold step in deciding to endorse Prop. 71, the Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative. By making a decision that is based on what is best for all Californians, instead of adhering to strict party lines, he showed us all that he has the heart and wisdom to make and support good policy, irrespective of doctrine or dogma.
In this period of increasingly bitter partisan divisions within our state and our country, it is refreshing to see that sometimes our lawmakers and leaders can act in a bipartisan manner for the good of the country as a whole. I think we owe the governor a debt of gratitude for stepping up to an important issue for all of us and our children.
Peter N. Rosenthal
East Crescent Drive
Palo Alto
'Good' vs. 'evil'
Editor,
I was appalled that Alexandria Rocha profiled Palo Alto High School students in support of President Bush, but read the article hoping to learn at least one good thing about being Republican, and (as I suspected), there was none. With this election, more than ever, the party lines are so dramatic.
Among so many other things, Bush is an arrogant man who stands for senseless losses of lives, reckless economic handling, abominable environmental policies and has the worst domestic and international record in history. Talk about "good" versus "evil."
That's what this race is all about. I continue to be amazed that John Kerry isn't in the lead by 90 percent.
It is no wonder that as one of the country's most intelligent communities, Palo Alto is overwhelmingly for Kerry. We get it. My favorite question to ask those Bush supporters is: What do you like about him? It's amazing the nonsense people answer with.
May this country come to its senses on Nov. 2. Otherwise, God help us.
Robert Chandling
Guinda Street
Palo Alto
Palo Alto intolerance?
Editor,
Alexandria Rocha's piece, "Growing Up Conservative" (Oct. 20), turned the spotlight on an important fact of life in Palo Alto. This community, which prides itself as bastion of tolerance, is surprisingly intolerant of those whose political views differ from the standard liberal line.
That such intolerance is taught in our schools while administrators turn a blind eye should chill us all, whatever our political viewpoints. What if instead of President Bush, the teacher had asked for everyone to raise their hand if they hated a named leader of the gay community, or the Jewish community, or the black community, or the Hispanic community?
The uproar would shake the earth and last for weeks. Palo Alto, it would appear, is a community more concerned about the murder of a mountain lion than the murder of our (conservative) childrens' rights. Shame on us.
Joel Henner
Walter Hays Drive
Palo Alto
Decline in civility
Editor,
As a longtime Palo Alto resident I accept that I live in a liberal stronghold. This diversity of opinion and freethinking has always been a part of Palo Alto's charms.
In recent months, however, I have witnessed a frightening decline in civility on the part of the liberal community here. Bumper stickers stopped being funny years ago; lately they have turned ugly, violent and hateful. Members of my own church are openly disrespectful of our sitting president.
A Palo Alto High School teacher says to their class (Weekly, Oct. 20), "Everybody who hates George Bush, raise your hand." Lawn signs supporting Republican candidates are routinely stolen overnight. It is troubling to see Democrats define themselves solely by their opposition to President George W. Bush.
When did hate and intolerance become the defining characteristics of the American left wing?
What prompts my letter is the visit last night of a John Kerry campaign canvasser. I politely greeted this earnest young woman, who opened with the question, "Will you help us to defeat George Bush?"
I asked why I should want to do that. She replied, "because of this horrible war in Iraq." I said, "Do you mean the war that John Kerry, the House and the Senate voted for?" She said, "Well, we think that John Kerry will handle the international community so much better."
I asked, "Because he speaks a little French?" She spun on her heel, muttered something dismissive and stalked off my front porch. She had come to my house to change my mind, but had no tolerance for any different opinion.
This morning I found the "Bush '04" bumper sticker had been scraped from my car.
Clearly, it is fashionable to hate George W. Bush. Endlessly declaring our president to be "an idiot" must make it a fact, and absolves the speaker of any need to make sense or justify their opinions.
My question to angry, smug, intolerant liberals is this: "If you're so much smarter than the rest of us, why are you afraid of a meaningful dialogue?"
John C. Crouch
N. California Avenue
Palo Alto
A suitable leader
Editor,
More than 3,000 of our fellow Americans were slaughtered under President Bush's watch during the attacks on the World Trade Center (not to mention more than 1,000 American soldiers who have been killed in Iraq), yet his fear-based advertisements dare to argue that he alone can keep the United States safe from terrorism.
If Bush could keep us as safe as he suggests, 9/11 would never have happened. If John Kerry is the "weak" leader Bush suggests, why did he put his life on the line in the hostile atmosphere of Vietnam? And where was Bush when soldiers were being paralyzed and murdered in that disastrous war?
Thankfully, it seems quite clear that along the American coastlines most Americans understand how much is at stake with this election: How many lives could be saved, how many families could have peace of mind and how many other countries could begin to respect the United States again.
Thank you, forward thinkers, for understanding that this election isn't about party lines. It's about who is best suited to lead this amazing country. Who has the intelligence, the fortitude, the forethought (do you even know what that word means, Mr. Bush?) and the ethics to be president.
And for all of the Bush supporters out there, I'm sorry to say your candidate doesn't possess those abilities. But there is a distinguished man from Massachusetts who does. What an honor -- and what justice -- it would be to see the Boston Red Sox win the World Series and Senator John Kerry win the presidential election.
Daniel Rand
Park Boulevard
Palo Alto
E-mail a friend a link to this story. | 
