Schneiderman must look into corruption
News Flash: New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman is making the headlines in the news with his relentless war on the daily fantasy league sports. This is, simply put, an amazing waste of state energy, tax dollars and resources.
I, myself, find it be so trivial when we in New York state have so many other huge issues of corruption, which seem to be reported on local television and in daily newspapers on quite a regular basis. With all the corruption going on constantly in our state capitol involving the political figures, you never hear —or at least I have never heard— a comment from the New York state attorney’s office, let alone an investigation started with any of the abuse of taxpayers’ money.
You have to ask yourself, “Why?” Why is it that the attorney general’s office is so infatuated with the fantasy sports leagues and not much, much bigger fish to catch that happen to be sitting right under its nose? Oh, I do agree that taxes have and should be paid for the fantasy league to be operating in New York state, absolutely. But come on, does the attorney general’s office read newspapers or look at the news or the segment on television called, “You paid for it?”
The corruption is staring them right in the face, but the light bulb in the attorney general’s office doesn’t seem to be on now, does it? I guess it’s business as usual. After all, this is New York state, and according to many polls it’s the most corrupt state of them all.
Come on New Yorkers. Wake up. Election time is coming. Time to clean house.
Is it too late to stop unqualified Trump?
The seeming indestructibility of Donald Trump’s candidacy for president has dumbfounded politicians, the media and voters across the nation.
Supporters claim he displays qualities of being a good leader, a great businessman, someone who does not hold back from the truth and a new face to an age-old party establishment. However, despite his many “attractive qualities,” Donald Trump also displays attributes that are unfit for a candidate running for president.
To start, every one of our 44 presidents have had either a government or military background before taking office. However, Donald Trump, a former reality television star, has never served a day in public office or had any military experience.
Even more disqualifying, is Trump’s suggestive language and lewd behavior. For example, as a result of his poor performance in an August 2015 debate, Donald Trump said in a CNN phone interview “You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever,” to debate host Megyn Kelly. He has also ridiculed a disabled New York Times reporter and mocked Sen. John McCain for being a POW.
As the Republican convention nears, Republicans are becoming increasingly worried about Mr. Trump receiving the nomination. According to The New York Times, Mitt Romney and John McCain — both being distinguished members of the Republican Party — have spoken out against Trump. On March 3, Romney said, “Here’s what I know, Donald Trump is a ‘phony’ … a ‘fraud,’ his promises are as worthless as a degree from Trump University.”
If a member of the Republican Party as experienced as Mitt Romney feels it is necessary to publicly condemn Donald Trump, it ultimately speaks to how unsuitable Donald Trump is for the Republican nomination.
To conclude, charm and a strong idea have always been the algorithm for a successful campaign. Donald Trump ironically possesses neither. So the question lies: What is the secret to his success, and is it too late to stop him?
Casino street should be named Alco Ave.
In response to March 25 letter, “Name casino roads after reactor, pollution”: It’s obvious Mr. Glenn Raymus you are anti-casino along with the church groups, community activists and even Roger Hull.
But there are some of us who are pro-casino. I do agree with you, though. Residents should have a say on the name of the new street. My choice is Alco Avenue.
My father worked for Alco until it closed. It’s part of Schenectady’s history and should be named so, not after Rush Street Gaming.
Alco Avenue has a nice ring to it. Don’t you agree?
New justice must act for the equality of all
My intent with this letter is to join in on the conversation regarding the Supreme Court and the Constitution. The Constitution was written by property-owning white men who took their cue from the Declaration of Independence, “all men are created equal,” which the Constitution affirmed.
There is nothing wrong with keeping the original intent of the forefathers intact as long as you clarify that if “all men are created equal,” that has to include “all” in the equation of rulings.
That’s why the court ruled in favor of gay marriage, as there is nothing in the Constitution that prohibits it. Justice Scalia, however, did not use his orientalist interpretation in this marriage case, but went against it in his dissent. He let his personal intolerant beliefs color his ruling, as over the years he compared homosexuality to murder, polygamy, bestiality, incest, child abuse and prostitution.
He again went against originalism concerning the Voting Rights Act, which he described as “a racial entitlement.” Regarding Affirmative Action, in his dissent he stated “black students might do better at a slower track school,” which drew audible gasps from those in attendance in the court for its racist attitude.
In the past it was Congress that acted on issues like this. It took many courageous citizens to compel their congressmen to act to amend the Constitution to assure the vote to blacks and then to women. Today, due to congressional inaction, many similar issues have been left for the Supreme Court to decide. Many times, the court ruled narrowly on cases presented to it, thereby not completely resolving the issue in hopes that Congress would take it up.
The terms “do-nothing Congress” and “legislating by the court” have resulted.
So we can acknowledge that the constitutional amendments, 27 in all, show the evolution of interpreting the Constitution in light of modern circumstances. It’s not mired in cement, as so many of Justice Scalia’s opinions were, but is constantly guarding the premise that “all men are created equal.”
Sandra J. Natale
Categories: Letters to the Editor