We have an opportunity. Let's take advantage of it. The art subcommittee of the Minnesota State Capitol Preservation Commission appropriately brought Native voices to the table for their important task. I hope we are willing to hear them.
The subcommittee has recommended that the two most offensive paintings be removed from the Governor's Reception Room to another location in the Capitol. Shelley Buck has responded with the support of several Minnesota tribes: That's not enough. ("Move offensive art out — not just around," March 17.) Our once-in-a-lifetime opportunity is greater than that.
When I began really looking at the artwork, I thought it might be appropriate to move a few pieces and add new art with Native artists involved. But I studied the artwork, photographed it and read much of the available documentation. That prompted me to pay much more attention to the fate of Minnesota's Native people at the hands of European settlers. Now I can't help agreeing with Buck's response. It is entirely appropriate to see this as an opportunity for action comparable to the removal of the Confederate flag from the capitol of South Carolina. It's an opportunity not to placate but to make clear that we grasp the legacy of the genocide some of the artwork represents and will not accept perpetuating it in our State Capitol's artwork.
Kenneth Ford, Minneapolis
IRON RANGE BOARD
Strict scrutiny that should've been inherent didn't happen
The recent report from Legislative Auditor James Noble regarding the Iron Range Resources and Rehabilitation Board ("Harsh critique for Range agency," March 19) sheds light on the importance of the Minnesota Constitution's separation-of-powers clause.
It's a clause too often disregarded by all three branches of government in Minnesota. Although all the facts are not clear, politicians in both the legislative and the executive branches of government appear to have coalesced around a political deal to spend taxpayer money to find replacement jobs for jobs lost in Minnesota's dying iron-mining industry. New jobs should not be created through subsidies at the expense of other Minnesota taxpayers, or at the expense of the environment by permitting PolyMet Mining. Yes, some families may need to move from the Iron Range to find jobs, but that is preferable to political corruption or environmental water poisoning.
John P. Mazzitelli, Hopkins
DONALD TRUMP
He tells it like it is, as long as you wrap 'like it is' in air quotes
Donald Trump's supporters repeatedly say they like him because Trump tells it like it is. Well, according to the PolitiFact data on the March 19 Opinion Exchange page, Trump is really telling it like it isn't. A whopping 77 percent of the time, his statements are either mostly false, false or pants on fire. Ted Cruz is not far behind at 65 percent. Compare that to Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, who are at 28 percent and 31 percent respectively. John Kasich is at 32 percent, so it can't be said that these are left-leaning stats. Either Trump supporters don't realize that they are being told things that are at least "mostly true" 8 percent of the time or they just want someone to tell them that their unfounded beliefs are justified and they don't care what the facts are.
Bill Bloomberg, Eden Prairie
• • •
A Trump supporter claims that Trump will not look weak dealing with unfriendly countries. My question for him: How can a country with as much air power as the U.S. has appear weak to anyone in the world? Is it not true that the U.S. could reduce North Korea or a Middle Eastern country to powder in about 30 minutes? Is that something we want to do?
As for his claims about taxes and poor business climates driving companies from Minnesota and out of the country, can I give an example? How about Northwest Airlines? It was a major employer in Minnesota. The Legislature gave it breaks to open a facility in Duluth. As a result, businessmen bought and sold the company among themselves, each taking equity with every new deal, until there was nothing left. Of course they blamed the employees for having the temerity to want raises that were long overdue as the reason for the closing of the headquarters and the hulk of the building left empty in Eagan.
What Donald Trump is selling is fear. Fear is effective for gaining power. Do we really want that from a president?
Tom Leary, Mendota Heights
• • •
Among all of the things people say about Trump, the only thing everyone seems to agree on is that he's been a very successful businessperson. He certainly asserts it every time he gets a chance.
However, according to Fortune (fortune.com/2015/08/20/donald-trump-index-funds/), if he had simply retired in 1988 and invested the money he inherited from his multimillionaire father along with his business holdings in a simple index fund like most of us "regular" folks use for our 401(k)s, he'd have at least $10 billion more in net worth than he does today.
In other words, his incredible business acumen has actually cost him $10 billion. I guess we can add this to the very long list of things Trump asserts that turn out to be untrue.
Jim McCorkell, St. Paul
• • •
We need to keep reminding people that while Donald Trump is neither Adolf Hitler nor Benito Mussolini, the ideas he expresses and the policies he promises to enact as president have their roots in both fascist and national socialist ideologies. Hitler expertly tapped into the anger and resentment of the German people over the loss of World War I and focused it on a religious minority as the source of all their problems. He also discredited and undermined the Weimar Republic government as "do-nothing" and campaigned that he was the only one who could "get things done." The German people did not elect the National Socialist Party to build gas chambers and commit genocide, but because they were tired of dysfunctional government and were willing to give up the rights of a minority in order to "make Germany great again." Perhaps the reason so many people are comparing Donald Trump to Hitler is because the comparisons are too similar to ignore?
Donald Voge, Crystal
PEDESTRIAN SAFETY
There's a role for all parties
Regarding the March 19 letter about knowing what's in the Minnesota Driver's Manual to enhance pedestrian safety, here is another common-sense Minnesota law: "Pedestrians shall be subject to traffic-control signals at intersections … ." Here is another: "No pedestrian shall suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into a path of a vehicle which is so close that it is impossible for the driver to yield." The other day, at Dale Street and University Avenue in St. Paul, I saw at least five pedestrians disobey the traffic signal and cross, impeding traffic that had a green arrow. Shortly before that, a man ran in front of four lanes of vehicles and a moving light-rail train right after the signal turned green for said traffic. At the same time, all intersections are considered crosswalks, marked or unmarked. Passing on the shoulder, ignoring signals, sprinting to make the light — all can easily result in injury or death. If in doubt, wait. Safety is a shared responsibility.
