Known as hypocrisy
In regard to the June 12 letter from Mr. Harvey Warburton, I would like to address the issue he raises that pertains to a government official advocating for smaller government but receiving government funds for a private enterprise, as well as a government paycheck.
How often have we heard the statement, “Government doesn’t create jobs,”? Often. How often is it coming out of an elected official, essentially working a government job? Quite often.
Usually, those who advocate for smaller government have no qualms about helping themselves to as much of the pie, as it were, as possible. Where they want to make the cuts aren’t to those programs that enrich themselves, no, that’s necessary spending. Those cuts need to come from elsewhere, like education or maybe the fire department.
Where I come from it is known as hypocrisy to advocate for something for others and another thing for yourself.
Additionally, I fail to see the connection Mr. Warburton tried to make between a wealthy, private individual advocating for higher taxes on the wealthy and an elected official taking a government salary, government funding for a private enterprise and advocating for smaller government (aka “spending cuts”).
The Wednesday, June 12, editorial cartoon insinuating that Americans who worry about illegal immigration are only interested in “white” immigrants was ignorant, insulting, useless at best and boorish. Other than that it was a fine example of editorial commentary.
John Michael Casteel
Linking is a disservice
I agree with the intent (I guess) of Randy Bond’s letter targeting the silliness of the Agenda 21 conspiracy concerns of the Leelanau county commissioners.
However, the jocular grouping together of Winston Churchill and the comedian Pat Paulsen as “two great men” almost nullifies the purpose of the letter. Churchill, with his human frailties, was a great man.