Letters to the Editor: January 5, 2024

Enriching citizenry

The Viewpoints piece on freedom of religion, by Leland Thoburn, was a great example of how your paper enriches our citizenry. It was a very informative reflection on the origins and motives of our forefathers’ thinking when they were creating the First Amendment.

I love the N-R. Never stop publishing!

A free and healthy press is critical to democracy.

Tom Canales


Treat all the same

I’m confused as to why hate is so selective.

Hate is hate regardless of who it is directed at. Racism is racism no matter the race, religion and so forth.

All lives should matter. However, some folks they seem to think it’s OK to pick and choose who to hate.

What I find interesting and sad is that some seem to think it’s OK if this hate is directed to the Jewish community. But hate toward another, because of their beliefs or color or whatever, is just wrong.

Hate is hate no matter who is targeted.

Michele Reeves


Toss the suit

Fellow Yamhill County residents, have you ever heard of the advocacy group “Free Speech For People?” Me either, until recently.

I just learned this group has sued the State of Oregon to keep Donald Trump’s name off the presidential ballot.

The suit was filed by two Oregon attorneys, Dan Meek and Jason Kafoury, representing five Oregonians who don’t want Trump on the ballot.

So who are these attorneys? And who are the mere five Oregonians who want to dictate my choice for president? This must be the new form of ballot tampering.

Republicans and Democrats alike should condemn these sleazy attorneys. And their five clients, whoever they are. And this phony advocacy group, Free Speech For People, which is trying to squash free speech.

I praise our secretary of state, LaVonne Griffin-Valade, for doing the right thing and refusing to go along with this ballot-purging plot.

Judy Hromyko


Just say no to troops

Election year has some politicians running for offices, from president on down, threatening use of federal troops to suppress demonstrations. There is precedent for this, and it is all bad.

In 1894 in Chicago, striking Pullman railroad workers were demonstrating peacefully until troops were sent in to rout them. When the strikers resisted, the troops opened fire, killing 30.

In 1914 in Ludlow, Colorado, striking miners and their families set up a tent city. Troops dispatched to clear them out opened fire with machine guns, then set the camp afire. The assault left 21 dead, including two women and 11 children.

In the Great Depression year of 1935, local police and militia forces fired on striking loggers in Eureka, California, killing three. The death toll might have been much greater had the militia unit’s machine gun not jammed early on.

The common thread in all three of these incidents was the slaying of American citizens simply fighting for fair pay and decent working conditions. Unfortunately, they were going up against powerful men like Pullman and Rockefeller, who were able to sic troops on them.

The same depression-gripped year of 1932, troops were ordered to rout the so-called Bonus Army in Washington, D.C. The group consisted of 43,000 World War I veterans and members of their families, who had gathered to protest federal default on enlistment bonuses promised 15 years earlier.

The Army attacked with tanks, bayonets and tear gas, killing two veterans and an infant. As the protesters were fleeing the invading troops, led by Douglas McArthur with support from George Patton and Dwight Eisenhower, their encampment of tents caught fire and burned.

There’s a good reason U.S. law forbids use of troops against civilians.

In every example above, the victims were working Americans. They were members of what would come to be venerated as the American middle class.

Fred Fawcett



Web Design and Web Development by Buildable