Three cheers for the Toledo Scouts and the Toledo Windjammers. Yes, yes, yes.
I love the Scouts. The tradition of "scouting" has touched many of us and the desire to be honest, brave, thrifty, clean, reverent. Mayor Carty Finkbeiner's dog is "man's best friend" spelled forwards and backwards. Our "pioneer" scouts covered the great trailblazers who came to the Black Swamp and changed the land, hopefully for the better.
I love the Windjammers. Toledo wants to be the "energy" capital of the area, state, and region, we use the windmills of Bowling Green for energy, and the winds of our waterways to produce economic and social achievements.
The windjammer is common to the shipping injustry of by-gone days. We love to "jam" and have fun at our sporting events. Remember the jammers of Roller Derby days?
How about those Scouts and Windjammers?
Liberty Center, Ohio
'Skeeters' defines who Toledoans are
In my opinion, naming a local sports team the "Black Swamp Skeeters" would more define who we are. Mosquitoes were probably one of the biggest obstacles as our land was developed. Strength, desire, and perseverance were mandatory if one were to survive, let alone settle and build a community.
The "Skeeters" were never defeated, as evidenced by the ongoing efforts to eradicate them. Here is a chance to tell who we are. It would be a great idea for a mascot and would not draw flack from any special-interest groups.
Woodpeckers name would drive off fans
Have officials of the Toledo Mud Hens forgotten about the naming of the infamous Toledo Glass Sox?
Now I'm hearing such names as the Woodpeckers, Peckers, and Peckerheads for the new arena football team.
Please, could we get some sane adult thinking before this happens to us again?
All my family and friends say they will not attend any team events if they are named any of the above, nor will I.
GOP good 'ol boys wrong on Stainbrook
I can't say that I was surprised by the Republican Party's reaction to Jon Stainbrook's successful recruitment of new candidates for the county central committee but they should be ashamed. I was surprised to read the reaction from the "Grand Old Party" (with the operative word being "old") to 93-year-old Zona Alspaugh's decision to become more involved in the party. Where is the outrage from senior citizens in this county? Where is the AARP? How old is too old to get involved in a party historically run by good "old" boys?
I can understand their fear of a group of young, informed, citizens who are fed up with the way the party has been run in this county for far too long but to attack a 93-year-old woman who is only trying to stay viable and be involved? Come on now.
The GOP should be thanking Mr. Stainbrook and the new recruits. They should be trumpeting the addition of so many people ready to become an active force in a tired old party. It is easy to see that Mr. Stainbrook is right and the good old boys are anything but.
Timothy James Ide
All for Stainbrook taking over of GOP
The Blade's Jan. 12 editorial "The Stainbrook insurgency" is right on target. John Stainbrook is an energetic and dedicated Republican who can organize and deliver.
When I served as former Gov. George Voinovich's re-election coordinator for the 18 counties in northwest Ohio, I repeatedly had difficulties garnering any kind of energetic organizational response from the Lucas County Republican Party in carrying out our campaign strategy; that is, until I met Mr. Stainbrook. He recruited young people for sign placement, organized and staffed the phone banks, and supplied volunteers - mobs of them - and followed through on every assignment we gave him. Governor Voinovich was re-elected in a landslide.
If "The Stain" is taking over the party, I'm all for it.
James E. Seney
States have the right to ask voters for ID
Regarding the Jan. 14 editorial "Right to vote is absolute," please check Article 1 in the U.S. Constitution. The federal government guarantees no person the right to vote. All eligibility questions are left to the states to decide, with the exception of race, color, age, and sex.
That the state feels it necessary to have proof of identity before voting is well within the state's right as the setter of standards for voting. How quickly the staff at The Blade has forgotten Mayor Richard Daley and his Chicago machine, or the even older Tammany Hall in New York City. Voting is a privilege granted by the state. If it feels it necessary for voters to verify their identity, the federal government has no recourse. The Constitution grants the states that right.
The Blade needs to brush up on the actual Constitution rather than the one they seem to wish was in place!
Intelligent design is not even a theory
The Blade's Jan. 9 editorial "In defense of Darwin" was well written and offered a lot of clarity to the conflict between natural, organic evolution and the idea of intelligent design. Once again, however, anyone literate in science would have refrained from referring to the idea of intelligent design as a theory, as the editorial did. It is not a theory. Intelligent design does not even rate as an hypothesis. It is simply an explanation based on what somebody said. That's all.
In science, a theory (which is what science is all about) is a statement of probable fact based upon a body of experimental evidence. There is nothing experimental about intelligent design. Therefore, it has totally nothing to do with science and, on that basis alone, should be excluded from any science curriculum. It's as simple as that, and there should be no room for debate.
Samuel A. McCoy
Thermodynamic law rules out Big Bang
The Blade's numerous bold assertions from its Jan. 9 editorial, "In defense of Darwin," shows real conviction - that's admirable. That it chose not to offer even one scintilla of the "abundant empirical evidence" in support of its conclusions left me scratching my head though.
I fully expected The Blade to challenge one or two of the most vigorous dissents to evolutionary theory. Creationists are predictably quick to inject the first law of thermodynamics into any theory of origin debate. The first law is known as the law of conservation: All energy [including matter] is constant in the universe and cannot be created or destroyed by natural processes - it can only be converted from one form to another.
In short, nothing can create itself, nothing can destroy itself. The first law unequivocally rules out a convenient, one-time exception for the Big Bang or similar theory.
This does not prove that creation is true. That still requires some faith. However, it does mean that the first law of thermodynamics and a universe evolved from natural processes - created by it, no less - are mutually exclusive.
Which do you believe in: a theory or the law?
In my eyes, the baby-boom generation, with the exception of a few, will only be remembered for creating such things as status quo, massive debt, willingness to divorce at the first sight of a challenge, and never having a goal of being debt free with all of their excesses. It will take Generation X and Generation Y to fix what they messed up.
America is going in the wrong direction, and the only thing our government and our presidential candidates do is talk but never deliver.
James J. Holmes