Letters to the editor

Out-of-district funds stifle constituency’s free speech

Re: “Outside support helped Dems flip GOP seats” (Page A1, Dec. 12):

It seems the Limousine Conservatives have been “hoisted with their own petard” (harmed by their own plan). The mantra of these moneyed folks is that “money is free speech,” which was supported by the Supreme Court.

However, the Limousine Liberals have found that it works for them, too. The recent flipping of seven California congressional districts from solid Republican to Democrat was done with about 90 percent of the overwhelming campaign contributions for the Democratic candidate coming from outside of the district, with very little outof-district contributions for the Republican candidate.

Did money affect these election results? Money is fungible; it is of equal value wherever it comes from. The “grassroots” political metaphor for the local constituency is not fungible by definition.

The Supreme Court should reconsider this issue in regard to the free speech of the true constituency.

— Elliott Pflughaupt, Los Gatos

The real worth of trees is often underestimated

In this day and age, with our expressed concern for the environment, we must change our perspective on the value of trees.

A 50-foot-tall, established tree cannot be “replaced” by one to three nursery-stock trees. There will be equivalency — but only in 30 to 40 years.

Sometimes a tree is not removed but people dig, build or pour concrete directly over the drip line of an established tree, which means death by strangulation.

Carbon sequestering, oxygen generation and wildlife habitat all are impacted. Microclimate HAVE YOUR SAY Letters to the editor: Commentaries: at the site (sunlight, temperature, humidity) will be altered. Replacement trees need water and care for those first three years and that is not always provided.

In our usurping of the woodland and the thinning of our city forest, let’s consider and respect the real worth of our trees. — Patrick Pizzo, San Jose

Mea culpa due Kavanaugh over Planned Parenthood

The “progressive” whiners who dogged Trump’s recent Supreme Court appointment need to take a good look at the fact that Kavanaugh (yes, that very Kavanaugh!) just joined Chief Justice John Roberts and the court’s four liberal jurists in turning away a pair of cases asking whether patients can sue states for excluding Planned Parenthood from state Medicaid funding.

All you who screamed your bizarre fantasies and insults might send him a nice little note saying “Thanks for the vote, Brett. We sure made fools of ourselves howling about how you’d vote against Planned Parenthood and destroy all womankind. Guess you really are a fair and unbiased justice, just like you said you would be. Sorry about all that goofy shrieking we did.”

— Frank Louis Blair Koucky III, Carmel Valley

Did Davis clan ever care about Raider Nation?

Re: “Raiders end negotiations to play in Oakland in 2019” (Page A1, Dec. 13):

Amid the predictable chaos accompanying the Raiders’ now failed negotiations with the city of Oakland about where the team will play the 2019 season is the Silver & Black owner Mark Davis’ absurd contention that “… for the fans, is something I’ve got to think about.”

To borrow a quote from the courageous Parkland, Florida, high school students, “We call BS!”

Lest we forget that Mark’s old man Al took the money and ran to Los Angeles from 19821994, to believe that the “Just win, baby” Davis family ever truly gave a damn about Raider Nation is preposterous.

— Barry Goldman-Hall, Raider fan from Kenny

Stabler days, San Jose

‘Liberal’: objective, tolerant, rational — not bad

With the word “liberal” bashed around these days, and often used in a derogatory way, it behooves us to recall John F. Kennedy, who said: “If by a ‘liberal’ they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind … someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights and their civil liberties … then I’m proud to say I’m a ‘liberal.’ ”

Dictionary definitions of “liberal” include objective, tolerant, impartial, reasonable, rational, unselfish, open-minded, not prejudiced, for general broadening of the mind, favoring individual liberty and political and social reform, trending towards democracy and personal freedom, regarding many traditional beliefs as dispensable, invalidated by modern thought or liable to change.

So, if you are proud not to be a “liberal,” what are you, besides “conservative”? Asocial? Or simply the opposite of all the above?

— Jorg Aadahl, San Mateo