There are no words to convey the gratitude we feel toward The Blade for "coming to the rescue" of our Seneca County Courthouse. The Tiffin Historic Trust has struggled mightily to represent the citizens' best interests, but we have been more than perplexed and confounded by the silence of the "leaders" of the community, and, especially, our local newspaper.
Your support for our grand, historic landmark has given us renewed faith in the press. It is vital to our community's economic future to cultivate and expand its heritage. Timing is right for revitalization of our downtown and to renew collective efforts. The city and county can join together and take advantage of the incentives being offered by state and national governments.
Thank you so much for appreciating our valuable, irreplaceable heritage. Our unique courthouse represents the values, skills, and hard work of all past, present, and future citizens.
Jacqueline and William Fletcher
Members, Tiffin Historic Trust
Courthouse fixtures priceless to many
Every component of the Seneca County courthouse may be priceless to someone somewhere. An Internet search reveals many salvage companies that will gladly and gently dismantle historical buildings to resell as piecemeal components to true connoisseurs world-wide. Of course, huge crocodile tears would be shed by bleeding-heart Seneca County dwellers as they watch this treasure being carted away to perpetual glory in priceless, beautiful, and exotic manors around the globe while hungry wrecking balls rust away and waiting landfill operators cancel country club extravagances.
Constitution isn't just 'good idea,' it's a right
Jack Kelly's recent column inadvertently got to the heart of the controversy over warrantless wiretapping, and the crux of the pseudo-presidency (aka monarchy) of George "Wiretap" Bush too.
He said "Most Republicans (including the President) think it a good idea to require warrants for eavesdropping on American citizens." A "good idea"? They call the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States a "good idea"? It says people have the "right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures" and that "no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Patriots call it "set in stone," "iron-clad," a "done-deal," and "nonnegotiable." These guys call it a nicety.
Mr. Bush swore to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States" but he's trampled it underfoot since the day he ascended his throne. Besides his secrecy, his utter disregard for Congress and the separation of powers, and his suspension of habeas corpus (the right to know why the government is holding you), he also reinterprets laws, via signing statements, despite a constitutional mandate that the president "take care that the laws be faithfully executed."
He has done more damage to our country than the terrorists, and every day he uses the threat of more attacks to gain the acquiescence of the masses, which isn't too hard to do anyway. I've heard well-intentioned and/or frightened people say you shouldn't mind warrantless wiretapping if you've got nothing to hide. He has people practically begging him to take away their rights. But warrantless wiretapping is no different from King George (now or then) busting down the door of every house in your neighborhood and rifling through everyone's file cabinets.
What should we fear, terror or politicians?
America is facing a greater danger than terrorist attacks from without:
•when the integrity of a government is jeopardized by the decay of government from within. The greed, corruption, and self interest of unscrupulous political leaders;
•when government leaders abuse their power and deem themselves above the law;
•when congressmen abandon the people they were elected to represent and become government puppets for prestige and political gain;
•when the criterion for election of the highest government office depends on which candidate can raise the most money to buy the most votes, qualified or not;
•when the voice of the people is abducted by the voice of government power and made silent, and
•when the government for the people, by the people united, becomes a government divided.
Mayor's dog faced two dangers in car
Mayor Finkbeiner left his dog in the car - windows down, with water, in the shade - for 45 minutes. Fortunately, Scout is OK and the Toledo Area Humane Society has addressed the issue of his safety.
Has anyone thought about how easy it would have been to steal Scout from those open windows? Perhaps those who engage in dogfighting would have considered it.
It seems Scout dodged a bullet twice that day.
Finkbeiner should try living in a crime area
As a working American and homeowner in the city of Toledo, I would like to express my opinion of our mayor and his crime analysis.
Carty Finkbeiner made a statement about the decrease in crime for Toledo. He said, "We only had six murders so far this year." His statement was in response to the city hiring more police officers.
I'm not sure where Carty lives but I would like him to live on my street for a few months.
Just like the landlords who don't fix their properties and get sentenced to live in them, Carty isn't fixing the crime in Toledo and he should be forced to live where the crime is, not in his cozy safe-haven away from the real world.
Maybe Mr. Finkbeiner would like to walk our streets at night, since he thinks they are so safe. I highly doubt he would leave young children to play on our streets and walk to the local carryouts.
The families of the six people who were murdered this year probably don't share Carty's feelings. His analysis didn't include the elderly women being raped in their own homes or people who were jumped on in the streets, beaten, and left for dead. I could go on but there is no point since the mayor seems to think crime is under control in Toledo.
Earmark disclosure bill still has loopholes
The Senate voted 83 to 14 on Aug. 2 to make lawmakers disclose their pet projects, how they will fund them, and how they raise money from lobbyists. Senators will now have to identify special projects (earmarks) and disclose lobbyists who raise $15,000 or more for them. The bill bars senators and staff from taking gifts from lobbyists or their clients. Great. Sounds good, or does it?
Why does the Democratic bill allow the majority leader to declare a bill earmark-free? In the bill, senators are supposed to publicize their plans 48 hours in advance of a vote and state they have no direct financial interest. Yet the bill allows a senator to state that "disclosure was not feasible." Why the double talk? And what about the money up to $15,000?
Some Democrats have called this bill a "landmark" and "the most sweeping reform bill since Watergate." Baloney! It is a talking point for the Democrats and still will benefit lobbyists and those with special interests, some whom we elect. Some of us are watching!
I have watched the TV and read in the newspaper about Carty's dog being mistreated. If I die and had to come back as a dog, I would want to be his dog.