I was amused to read in the July 2 front-page article “Red states try to make blue cities toe the line” that Republican state leaders want to rein in cities committed to maintaining tree-lined communities, bestowing dignity on transgender neighbors and ensuring trust with immigrant residents. Yet at the national level, Republicans argue for giving states “flexibility” to reduce health-insurance benefits and restrict Medicaid eligibility.
It would seem Republicans are quite selective in holding to the principle of subsidiarity — making decisions at the lowest possible level of government. On second thought, for anyone concerned about the people who will be impacted by all of these policies, it’s not amusing; it’s infuriating.
Marianne Comfort, Takoma Park
The article the letter links to is worth a read.
Then, on a related note:
In his July 3 op-ed, “Everybody’s mad at somebody,” Robert J. Samuelson seemed dismayed that so many Americans are angry, but he didn’t seem to care about the reasons for this. That’s a morally vacuous position.
Sometimes anger is justified.
Democrats are angry with Republicans because they’re slashing lifesaving programs to fund tax cuts for the wealthy, because they’re rolling back civil rights and because they don’t seem to care about Russia working to install a B-list celebrity in the White House.
Republicans, on the other hand, are angry with Democrats because we get in their way.
Rose Kelleher, Gaithersburg
Samuelson's op/ ed is, as usual, not worth the time to read -- you'll never get those moments back, as they say. It's also instructive that right- wingers like him have only "noticed" the anger abroad in the land now that Republicans are fully in charge and the righteous anger is directed at them. Curious.
Anyway, well said, Ms. Comfort and Ms. Kelleher.
