To the editor:
Linda Johnson’s column in the Dec. 2 edition was about her beliefs as a liberal and a Democrat. As a conservative, not necessarily a Republican, I found much common ground, some of which was a bit shaky.
She began by complaining about discrimination against women by employers and society. I mostly agree. “Equal pay for the same work” is something I can almost agree on, the key being the definition of “equal work.” I don’t think we should pass laws requiring it. Employers know the value of their workers.
On her concern that women have to prove their ID after they change their name, that’s a natural consequence of name changing, and I don’t see how it can be avoided, except that they don’t actually have to change their names.
She worries about voter suppression. In my view, there’s no such thing. It’s a baseless charge by Democrats. It’s not too much to ask that voters show proof of identity as they must do for everything else.
Linda supports unions and their workers. This is a typical victimizing strategy of Democrats. They portray union people as victims of big business, as was often true in the 1800s and early 1900s. Current law makes unions at least equal.
She believes in individual responsibility. We agree there, but may define it differently.
She said she is reluctant to legislate morality. This may align her with people who want to legalize marijuana and resist or defy laws or social customs restricting individual behavior.
Linda says civil disobedience is OK if it helps change rules and laws. She may not actually mean this, since by definition it’s violating some law. Or she may. We’ve all seen a lot of demonstrations by the left which result in violence or property destruction such as the demonstration in Washington on Inauguration Day and mob actions by Antifa, Occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter.
There are several areas she mentioned where we agree, including checks and balances in government and the need for community participation.
Mrs. Johnson focused on social issues. She omitted some and didn’t mention fiscal issues and national concerns at all. Is she happy with our cities being invaded by illegal immigrants? Does she support sanctuary for illegal immigrant criminals? Does she want a strong military to defend us against external enemies? Would she welcome tax cuts for business to make our companies more competitive in the world? Does she favor tax cuts for individuals? Would she like to see our economy healthy and robust?
Is she happy with our current health care situation? Our illegal drug problem? The opioid situation? Our national debt? Our trade deficits? Attacks on law enforcement? The apparent need for immigration reform? Corrupt politicians, especially in the previous administration?
Does her political party have any concerns about the above problems? If they do, they haven’t proposed any solutions and haven’t aided Republicans in trying to address them. They did little if anything about any of them (except health care) in the eight years of the Obama administration, even when they had total control of Congress.
It was good that Mrs. Johnson revealed her beliefs. I respect them, and I hope I’ve implied no criticism. It seems we form our political opinions partly through our experiences and partly from what we read and hear in the media or in conversation with others. I believe that liberals focus more on social issues, while conservatives worry more about national ones. If she begins to think about national issues, she might change her party.