February 28, 2020
Letters Latest News | Big White Perch | Bangor Metro | ICE Facility | Today's Paper

Thursday, Jan. 23, 2020: What would Margaret Chase Smith do, an apology for Alex Gray, hear from witnesses

What would Sen. Smith do?

Why is Sen. Susan Collins apparently having such trouble deciding what to do during the impeachment process? She only needs to ask: What would Sen. Margaret Chase Smith do?

Robert Winship Johnston

Gouldsboro

An apology for Alex Gray

Nina Mahaleris wrote a nice Jan. 16 article about Alex Gray and how he is opening a new music and food venue in his home town of Old Town.

I thought it was lovely about a young man, supporting his hometown, rah rah rah, and then she had to add the sentence about his past. It was his past — the charge was dismissed.

I felt that it was very mean spirited and made the whole article null and void. I think the BDN owes him a public apology. I see no reason why a nice uplifting article should turn nasty.

Linda Dougherty

Orono

Hear from witnesses in impeachment trial

I hope, and I hope I do not do so in vain, that Sen. Susan Collins will respect my right to know what happened to give rise to this impeachment trial.

I expect my senators to fight for all the relevant and pertinent witnesses that are needed. Failure to allow relevant witnesses is, in effect, lying by omission. It is “bearing false witness.” It is deceiving people who have a right to know, like the voters. Lying is not something we should tolerate in a nation that likes to claim that it is “Under God.” Lying by omission also undercuts our obligation and right to be an informed voter, which is necessary for a strong and free America.

I want to know, I have a right to know and I will accept nothing less than full disclosure of information, whichever way it goes. Respect yourself, respect your neighbor, your country and the God that this country says that it is under. Demand that we hear from all relevant witnesses in this impeachment trial.

Joyce Polyniak

Damariscotta

Research and the fight against cancer

In the contemporary world of advanced medical technologies, cancer still stands as one of the biggest health threats to humanity. Despite the difficulties, scientists are searching for solutions tirelessly. The Jackson Laboratory on Mount Desert Island is one of those organizations devoted to saving humanity.

In December 2019, Jackson Lab received $2.5 million from The Mark Foundation of Cancer Research to study the effect of host genetics on responses to immunotherapy (stimulating or strengthening the body’s own immune system to fight cancer) by experimenting on mice.

Such funding was deemed crucial as the laboratory both gained resources and recognition for its past contributions to science as well as future plans for research.

In today’s age where cancer is a major concern of human health, more funding is needed to labs and institutions like Jackson Lab, while rising public awareness on cancer research is also crucial in order to gain such support. To achieve this, the government should give a portion of taxes from pharmaceutical industries to research centers such as Jackson Lab for funding.

As fellow readers, we need to give attention toward such an issue. By doing so, more people will get to know institutions like Jackson Lab and prospective scientists will be able to contribute their intelligence at the right place.

Jerry Huang

Bangor

The will of the American people

Counter to claims by certain lawmakers, this impeachment may actually affirm the will of the American people in the last election. I disagree with objections to this impeachment as something that would reprehensibly “overturn the will of the American people” as demonstrated in the last election.

First, the function of impeachment is by definition an overturning of the results of an election. Nothing to be taken aback about there.

Second, according to the popular vote, the will of the American people was arguably that Hilary Clinton would become president. Nearly 3 million more people voted for Clinton than voted for Trump. It seems that the will of the American people in November of 2016 was overturned by the Electoral College. I accept that is the system in place for now. Still, it negates the argument about impeachment overturning the will of the American people in the last election.

Third, it is an accepted fact by our national intelligence agencies and the Senate Intelligence Committee that Russia sought to influence the will of the American people in the last election through deceptive social media tactics. And that this tampering is ongoing.

If these lawmakers are concerned with upholding the will of the American people, why have they been so negligent about combating election interference?

Let’s hope that the will of the majority of American people prevails in this impeachment trial and in our next election, as our Founding Fathers intended.

Laura Lander

Harpswell

 


Have feedback? Want to know more? Send us ideas for follow-up stories.

You may also like