My fellow readers:
I’ve attended every Town Meeting I could since turning 10, probably nearly 40 of them in total. I enjoy the process and the idea of participating in my local government. Back in the day, in the “old gym” at TA, I think attendance was in the 600-700 range. Regardless of the size of the crowd, it is usually a handful of people that actually get up to speak. It is one of the only places where most of us ever speak in front of that many people and participation should be encouraged. I firmly believe that a diversity of opinion makes for a better product in the end. But that doesn’t mean that we must agree, bend, or adjust our opinion to serve a common good. Too often, anybody that doesn’t agree, bend, adjust to the crowd is set aside or at the worst, ridiculed, called names, shunned, and otherwise ostracized for voicing their opinion. I have personally received messages from Thetford residents that told me to “shut up” and “move out of town.” I am routinely linked in with whatever national Republican figure is now being demonized and just within the last month I have been called a “threat to democracy.” Is it any wonder no one wants to get up and publicly voice an opinion?
There is a real threat to democracy these days but it doesn’t stem from someone with a different opinion than yours. The threat is from trying to silence that opinion. I have actually seen a Thetford Town moderator take a vote whether or not to allow a citizen to speak. He had been to the mike before and wanted to speak again. There was no one ahead of him that had not had a chance to speak yet. I was appalled that the group went along with the vote and decided that he was no longer welcome to voice his opinion.
Our constitution is written to protect the rights of an individual. Building togetherness and mutual commitment is about respect for every individual, “thin skinned” or not. You have a right to your opinion and constitutional protection to voice it and so don’t I. If we disagree with decisions that are made, our republic of representative government allows us all to alter the course of future decisions by voting. Our system of a “secret ballot” allows us to vote without undue influence or pressure from an outside source. It is a cornerstone of our democracy and yet I have been pressured as a Thetford board chair to avoid its use.
Despite the above, I look forward to another Town meeting and hope others will join me by voicing your opinion, as I speak mine.
-Bill Huff, Thetford
I don’t get it:
How Donald Trump could possibly get insurance deals by inflating the value of his properties? It has always been my experience that the more something was worth, the more it cost to insure it. Do the wealthy get insurance deals???
Why a member of the South Carolina National Guard (Nikki Haley’s husband) should be deployed to Africa. What are we cooking up in Africa now? Another Libya? Or has he perhaps been sent to the horn of Africa in support of the genocide unfolding in Gaza?
How it benefitted Putin to murder Navalny the day before a huge victory in Ukraine; the day before the opening of the Munich Security Conference, where Navalny’s wife showed up to weep on cue; at the same time that most of Europe is panicking that the US may not hurl any more money into the black hole that is Ukraine; and shortly after the interview with Tucker Carlson that millions of people have at least clicked on. And likely watched.
Why, if Alexander Smirnov is facing criminal charges for allegedly fabricating something about Biden, Hillary Clinton did not face criminal charges for the Russia-gate fabrication. (People may not know that both the DNC and the Clinton campaign were fined for “misreporting the money that funded the [infamous Steele] dossier,” according to CNN.)
Why we should never have enjoyed the benefits of oil for at least the last century, as many in Montpelier are currently insisting. According to The Orientalist (by Tom Reiss): “since ancient times Azerbaijian’s abundance of oil and natural gas, which led whole hillsides to naturally explode into flame, made it the center of Zoroastrianism, Persia’s ancient pre-Muslim religion.” Should we have all just made pilgrimages to some place like Baku, by sailing vessel and on foot, to stare and bow and worship the eruptions of oil and the flaming hillsides for centuries, instead?
Finally, why everyone currently running for President apparently supports the genocide of the Palestinian people. Not only am I finding it hard this year to engage in the charade of filing a tax return (to a government that just incessantly prints money anyway), but it’s going to be damned hard to vote for anyone who is currently running, this November.
-Jacqueline Brook, Putney
These days it’s a constant game of whack-a-mole with trapping and hounding lobbyists spreading misinformation left and right. While we appreciate the importance of debating issues, it can go off the rails when one side obfuscates issues and confuses the public by not sharing the full story. What’s even worse is when folks can’t debate the facts and instead resort to defamation in an effort to pull attention away from the issues at hand, as evidenced with lobbyist Mike Covey, who represents trappers and hounders. Covey has now been served with two cease and desist letters by POW’s attorneys for lying about our organization. We urge the public to do their own research to sort out fact from fiction.
Some homegrown hoopla has been spawned by a few paid lobbyists about the Court’s recent ruling on Protect Our Wildlife’s motion for a preliminary injunction (PI) that sought to maintain the moratorium on coyote hounding until the Court rules on the merits of the lawsuit. This PI would have protected the public and our property from packs of uncontrolled hounds running at large in pursuit of coyotes in the interim.
It seems like Mr. Bradley is celebrating a perceived major victory a little too soon. The Court’s ruling was specific to the PI only. This is far from a final ruling – it’s an opinion by a lower court judge based on an incomplete administrative record on the narrow issue of whether coyote hounding should be stayed until the Department of Fish & Wildlife complies with the intent of the legislature to enact meaningful rules that will actually result in hounders having control over their dogs.. We look forward to presenting all our evidence to the Court and, if necessary, to the Appellate Court, and we are confident that we will prevail.What was left out of Mr. Bradley’s commentary is that the judge doesn’t have the full record, as evidenced by some of the judge’s statements that were based on an incomplete understanding of issues (e.g. belief that hounds outfitted with GPS and shock collars are a change to the status quo, which is not the case).
What’s clearer than ever to us is there is a need for S.258 more now than ever because it’s obvious that Fish and Wildlife cannot and will not respond to the concerns of the legislature and the public they serve.
-Brenna Galdenzi, President, Protect Our Wildlife POW