Franzi wrong about liberals
Mr. Franzi wrote (Explorer, 1/4/12) that liberals would not be missed in 2012. He irrationally concluded that liberals are not concerned about quality education for children, but only seek more money for unions and political allies. This fallacy is to say that since Group A and Group B support the same ideal, Group A must be subservient to Group B. To be fair, liberals have also been known to employ this rhetorical device. Liberals have accused Franzi’s radical right of being owned by the corporatists because they invariably vote consistently with the Wall Street bankers and the Chamber of Commerce moguls. That doesn’t necessarily mean that the far right Republicans are owned by the bankers and corporations; it only means that they share the same ideals; e.g. corporations are people, money is speech, and workers have a right to only five cents an hour above involuntary servitude (unless someone in Bangladesh will work for four cents an hour). Liberals are not subservient to teachers unions, but they share the same value placed on public education and dedicated public school teachers. The empowered far right, conversely, purposely wreck public education by defunding it, scapegoat the wreckage they caused on the teachers, and then demand privatized alternatives.
Their strategic failure to keep mandatory prayer in public education has led them to the alternative of destroying public education, and confiscating taxpayer dollars to fund religious schools. This exposes their true value of indoctrinating children above educating them.
Grant Winston, Tucson
Franzi incorrect about Mathis
Emil Franzi falsely accuses Chris Mathis of being a Democrat and claims that his wife, Independent Redistricting Commission Chair Colleen Mathis, is therefore a Democratic shill.
Of course, both Mathis’ are registered Independents and have contributed to, and supported candidates and campaigns of both Democrats and Republicans.
But, if Mr. Franzi is truly concerned about spousal influence, he might well turn his attention to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas whose wife, Virginia, receives hundreds of thousands of dollars from conservative organizations including $700,000 from the Heritage Foundation.
These groups have a direct interest in cases that Clarence Thomas has already ruled on (Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission, for example) and similar ones that he will rule on in the future.
Worse yet is the fact that Thomas falsified his annual income disclosure forms for 13 years by his failure to reveal his wife’s earnings. After being caught, he has filed amended forms. Criminal sanctions can be brought for such a failure.
Perhaps Mr. Franzi will lead a movement to impeach this tainted Justice and restore integrity to the court.
Doug Sanders, Tucson