Luckovich right about Republican Party
One of my least favorite editorial cartoonists is Mike Luckovich of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. I believe he is very unpatriotic, unethical and will do anything for the liberal Democrats. But I will say this to the Republican Party: He hit you right between the eyes this past Sunday with his “lame duck” cartoon. He is perfectly correct that you haven’t done a single thing to stop President Barack Obama since your “great” victory last November.
GIL LEINES, ALPHARETTA
Southern history not all pretty
Truly honoring Southern history requires acknowledging ugly realities. Southern leaders spoke openly about seceding to protect the South’s billion-dollar investment in slavery. Through debt peonage, slave labor persisted into the 1940s. From the 1870s to 1950s, at least 3,900 African Americans were lynched in the south, almost 600 in Georgia. Lynchings were often preceded by torture, attended by large crowds, and commemorated by postcards and distribution of body parts. Southern senators blocked federal legislation to outlaw lynching. When the Democratic Party backed off its traditional racism and supported civil rights, Republican politicians wooed the “Wallace vote” using thinly veiled “law and order” rhetoric. Ronald Reagan gave a speech lauding “states’ rights” outside Philadelphia, Miss., where three civil rights workers were killed. Today, thousands of African-American men are disenfranchised because of criminal records, many states are impeding African-American voting and African-Americans are disproportionately likely to receive the death penalty.
STEVE BABB, LAWRENCEVILLE
Concerns about Iran inspections
I’ve heard much discussion about the 24-day notice President Barack Obama agreed to for inspections of Iranian sites. But I have a concern about the notice which I haven’t heard addressed. Obama defends the 24-day notice by saying installations which are developing nuclear bombs can’t be dismantled or relocated that quickly and, even if they could, the radiation would still be evident and would constitute proof of Iranian violations. If Obama’s contention were true, and the 24-day notice provides Iran with no advantage over the “anytime anywhere” requirement he originally insisted on, then why did Iran require the extension in the agreement? I’m thinking that it must benefit them somehow or they wouldn’t have demanded it. If it does provide a benefit, I’d like to see the administration acknowledge that and explain the nature of the benefit to Iran.
MARK RIVKIN, DECATUR
About the Author
