Thursday, November 21, 2024
37.0°F

Letters to the editor - March 6

| March 7, 2014 12:18 PM

‘Sochi’ Dogs in Mission Valley

 I have adopted many “Sochi dogs.”  Of course, they were never described that way.  But there are hundreds to them around here and thousands in western Montana.  We don’t call them “Sochi dogs” but maybe we should.  It seems that Americans love these Sochi dogs and can’t get enough of them.  There is endless press coverage and heart-warming stories of American Olympians adopting them and bringing them “home.”  Homeless, neglected and abandoned animals don’t get much, if any, press coverage and they roam our area.  Their best shot is getting picked up by a stranger and taken to an animal shelter or rescue group.  Some will be adopted to forever homes, some are too sick to be adopted and some just grow old in their kennels/cages.  Where is the outpouring of compassion for these animals right here?  There are, in reality, more dogs and cats needing homes than there are people looking to adopt a shelter animal.  This is a huge problem because pets are not spayed or neutered, are not properly identified (through tags or microchips), run away and then reproduce as nature calls, starting another cycle of “Sochi dogs” needing food, shelter and homes.  Local shelters and rescue groups are limited by space and finances.  Foster homes are always needed.  If you are thinking about adding a dog or cat to your home, contact a local shelter or rescue group.  These animals all have stories to tell.  They all have value.  They will give to you a friend “fur-ever” as well as unconditional love.  If you can adopt a “Sochi dog” or “Sochi cat”, look no farther than western Montana.

Sharon Hawke

Vice President

Mission Valley Animal Shelter

Hope will come in 2016

Gosh, there are so many unreal and unacceptable events occurring these days that it’s impossible to focus on any one item to the exclusion of others!  

On the one hand, we have some Republicans complaining about how the governor selected John Walsh to replace Max Baucus. Will Deschamps, for example, has disqualified himself (in my book) from holding any leadership position.  It’s fair game to criticize the selectee, but one should be a big boy and recognize that the choice was Bullock’s to make without consulting with the opposition.  I doubt if I’d hear any such crying from him if a Republican or conservative governor made a choice without looking to his/her opposition!

As I sit at my computer today (Friday, Feb. 28) I hear Obama and John Kerry issuing ‘stern warnings’ to Russia with regard to the developing Ukrainian situation.  Sorrowfully, I find myself bemused by our government’s moaning.  Who, in today’s world, believes that Putin is going to worry about what our ‘leaders’ say?  This administration has spent five years wasting the credibility we owned pre-Obama (see Egypt, Libya, Syria, etc.) to the point, now, that we aren’t respected by our foes and are suspected by our ‘friends.’   It’s probably fair to say that the U.S. is close to being a laughing stock (behind closed doors).  As a prime example, Defense Secretary Hagel’s announcement paring back on the military should end any doubts that we have no wish to maintain our posture as an example of freedom and principle to the world.  

Let us hope only that we can turn this around when the likes of Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Schumer, etc. are voted out of their positions of power!

Bob Hanson

Dayton

What is the presidency for?

“Well, what’s the hell’s the presidency for?” So asked President Lyndon Johnson, as he sat with key advisors at his kitchen table.  They were working on Johnson’s speech to Congress right after Kennedy’s assassination.

From Gary Younge’s Guardian report: “The nation was still in grief and Johnson was not yet able to move into the White House because Kennedys’ effects were still there.”

As they sat there discussing what to put in the speech, one of his wise, practical advisors around the table spoke up on the civil rights issue saying, “The presidency has only a certain amount of coinage to expend, and you oughtn’t to expand on this since it has no chance of passing.”

Johnson sat in silence at the kitchen table as his aides debated.  Finally Johnson spoke up,  “Well, what the hell’s the presidency for?”

In his speech to Congress a few days later Johnson said this:

“First, no memorial oration or eulogy could more eloquently honor President Kenney’s memory that the earliest possible passage of the civil rights bill for which he fought so long.”

Five years later, he signed the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, launched the war on poverty and introduced Medicaid and Medicare.  That’s what his presidency was for.

Fast forward to 2008.  Mr. Hope and Change, Barack Obama, spoke volumes on a vision for America; on education, the environment, health care, immigration, economic stability, people power, job growth and manufacturing revival, and all the many things our nation’s elected leaders should be responding to rather than just the next election and big money interests.

Four years later, we have a do-nothing Congress simply engaging in partisan battles over every piece of legislation. Sitting on the sidelines of this ‘battle of the political parties’, all I see is in fighting and stagnation, frustration and ridiculous compromise, and too much tail-bone and not enough back-bone.   

This question really grabs my attention. Well. What the hell’s the presidency for?

Bob McClellan

Polson