In his 12/20 opinion piece, responding to mine of 12/6, Bob Prener complains about my title (Obama Should Let Republicans Jump Off The Fiscal Cliff) and my closing metaphor, which he finds "disgraceful" to his apparently over-delicate sensibilities and "race-tinged"— which is flat-out absurd — and then sanctimoniously asserts that all this is an example of "the ugly partisanship that is wracking our nation" and goes on to blame Democratic strategy for being "an example of just what has become wrong with our political system." But if he's truly interested in what is disgraceful and partisan, he need look no farther than the inflammatory prose of the right-wing ideologues from the party with which his sympathies apparently lie: from Sen. Mitch McConnell's lofty announcement two years ago that "the single most important thing we want to achieve is for Obama to be a one-term president," to Grover Norquist's desire to eviscerate our government till "we can drown it in the bathtub," to the misogynist mouthings of Republican Senators Mourdock and Akin ("legitimate rape, pregnancy etc.) and the xenophobia evidenced during the Republican primary season, to the Sarah Palin "death panel" hysteria and on and on, going all the way back to the multitudinous deleted expletives of the Nixon tapes. And if he truly wants to explore the dysfunctions of our recent politics, he might consider the Hastert Rule in the House (the "majority of the majority" test for allowing bills to even be brought forward for discussion) and the intransigence of those who have been happy to hold anything and everything hostage to their anti-tax fundamentalism and sacred partisan oaths. Several points require comment:

• I, for one, never characterized Obama's electoral victory as a "mandate." But considering the Herculean Republican attempts at voter suppression, and the more systemic voter suppression resulting from our massive incarceration rates, his victory is far from insignificant.

• Obsessing about deficits and national debt is what Republicans do whenever a Democrat is in the White House. As for "debas[ing] the currency": with low inflation and historically low interest rates on government debt (an indication of investor confidence), deficits are not the most urgent problem of the moment. But heck, I'm all for reducing them. We could begin by paring down our obscene military budget and ending taxpayer subsidies to huge corporations. I didn't hear many on the right worrying about deficits and debt when Reagan was busy squandering huge amounts on toys for the military or when Bush began planning the destruction of Iraq or his tax cuts for the rich.

• Regarding taxes, the revenue to be gained by letting the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy expire is anything but "tiny" (Mr. Prener's assertion) — although I'm the first to acknowledge (and did so in my piece) that this would be only a small step in rectifying the massive redistribution of wealth into the pockets of the rich that has taken place over the past 30+ years. As for all his ruminations about tax policy and prosperity, he is reinventing voodoo economics; what history really demonstrates is that a strong, educated and prosperous middle class, reduction in poverty and a far less extreme spread between rich and poor are what create a vibrant economy. This has been accomplished when taxes are low and government services robust for those in the middle and below. Continued gifts to the wealthy decimate the public resources that help the vast majority, from environmental and consumer protection to funding for health and education. Why do so many Republicans celebrate when federal, state and local governments are forced to slash decent, family-supporting jobs because of budget cuts?

And of course very few people paid the highest tax rates (80-90 percent) of 50 and 60 years ago — it applied only to the top earnings of the top earners — in fact, many in business reinvested those earnings in their businesses to avoid paying those high rates. That helped create jobs. As for Prener's suggestion that a consumption tax (read sales tax) might be preferable to taxing "acquisition," he is simply trotting out a well-worn regressive taxation scheme that disproportionately punishes the poor and middle class (who inherently need spend a greater percentage of their income, and save a smaller percentage, than the wealthy).

Prener waxes philosophical about the whole notion of "fairness." Actually, he is right that fairness is essentially a subjective concept. But this hardly makes it a "ploy," or unworthy of serious analysis. On the contrary, our ideas about fairness tell a lot about a person's, or a society's, values, compassion, even morality. Right now, the richest one percent in the US possess more wealth than the "bottom" 90 percent. The minimum wage reached a high in real dollars over 40 years ago and is now nearly a third lower. The poverty rate is now the fourth highest of any year since the progressive reforms of the Johnson presidency kicked in. And a host of tax shelters and off-shore havens (and the low capital gains tax rate) result in many millionaires like Romney paying a lower effective rate than the middle- and working-class. None of this happened by accident. It may be Mr. Prener's idea of fairness, but it is not mine.

Prener complains that "get the rich guys" (not my words) is "a hateful vindictive strategy." And here he reveals what really fires up his sense of moral outrage: it's not poverty and childhood hunger. It's not some 45,000 Americans dying each year from lack of health insurance. It's not the devastation of the American economy due to repeal of Glass-Steagall and the machinations of Wall Street bankers. It's not the fossil fuel lobby and the specter of climate catastrophe. It is people picking on the rich guys. How much money is enough money? Does the person making $4,000,000 a year really work 100 times as hard as the one making $40,000? Are his needs 100 times as great? Is he 100 times more virtuous and deserving? Does he contribute 100 times as much of intrinsic value to society (think hedge-fund managers and corporate job-exporters)? I don't think so. But he could pay 40 percent of his income in taxes, even 90 percent, and still lead a life of pampered luxury and ostentation, if he really thinks those will make him happy. This has nothing to do with being vindictive. It has everything to do with aiding the health and well-being of our fellow human beings and the planet we live on, all of which could use some resources from those who have far more than they can possibly need.

Mark Fried
Shawangunk

Ban Ellenville guns? This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Do you think guns were allowed in the Sandy Hook Elementary School? Schools are gun-free zones. The Newtown shooting reminds us that law alone does not protect. It makes us complaisant, if anything. What Sandy Hook didn't have was anyone in the building who could fight back. In a gun-free zone, do you think violence decreases? New York City is a gun-free zone. I need not say more, but I will.

The idea of repeating what has failed to succeed borders on what is called today the definition of insanity.

Admittedly, gun violence (but not violence) would end if we got rid of all guns, but we can't get rid of all guns by banning them in Ellenville. Not even all the guns in Ellenville.

Do we really want a situation where none of the law-abiding citizens have guns, and all the civilians who have guns are criminals?

Some people may wish to trade rights for safety but that's an individual decision. If we're taking away rights for safety, why stop with the second amendment? Let's get rid of free speech, and this newspaper that allows even me to speak. Let's do door to door searches throughout the village without warrants — we'll have to, in order to enforce the gun ban and, you know, drugs, they too can kill kids. But, remember, it's never clever to trade anything for the illusion of safety. That's downright dangerous.

Yes, Mr. Mayor, it is the obligation of government to protect law-abiding citizens. This is not accomplished by disarming them.

It's dangerous to leave your sidewalks and shops without individual protection — thieves will come from miles around. I'm sure the mayor doesn't plan to have the cops going around with only billy-clubs, but the cops will be the first to tell you they can't be everywhere, and they can rarely be anywhere on time. It's the nature of crime.

If the mayor has his way, not cops, not criminals, but only ordinary, law-abiding citizens will be stripped of their rights.

Hank Harwood
Montela

When I was young my parents told me to never tell only half the truth as it will come back to haunt you. I have been reading the negative articles on the driving school that TCJ Enterprises is proposing. I then checked with TCJ and I found two completely different schools [of thought].

The school that the opposition paints is a loud group of 4x4 vehicles that will rev their engines and cause havoc and destruction to the area. They will bring in the monster trucks on huge cargo haulers. The noise that they talk about would be heard by all of its neighbors — even the ones on Rte. 209. I have heard this from many of my closest friends because they heard it from someone else. Now mind you, they did not check into the facts — only reiterated what was told to them. This is how the avalanche gets started.

The school that the new owner talks about is an entirely different breed of cat. There would be training for 4x4 owners on the proper usage of their vehicles in an off road situation. The vehicles would be state registered, street legal units that would be driven on a course set up in the woods. Before they would be allowed on the course there would be "classroom" training so that they understand the proper technique of traversing rocks, logs, etc... on the course. The vehicles would be driven approximately 1-5 miles per hour. They said that they would be happy to sit down on neutral ground and discuss their proposal with the opposition but they have been turned down repeatedly.

They will probably buy food, fuel and other sundries locally. Now mind you, local is the entire valley area. I, as a small business owner, realize the need for the money from the city to be sent in the area. My dad used to say that the city money is what makes the Catskills green! Lord knows we need all the help that we can get.

I have lived on this Route 209 south corridor my whole life and as kids growing up we would buy broken down junk cars and trucks and drive them in the woods and corn fields. We would, of course, probably knock off the exhaust systems and they would sound cool. This by far was much louder than what they propose. There are many items in today's society that make more noise on a regular basis: lawnmowers, chainsaws, weed whackers, home generators, etc... but do we complain about them? Is it wrong to let expansion and growth happen in our community? If this proposal was to employ 100-200 people and had delivery trucks all day long would this business also be wrong?

It was noted that the people who would be using the driving school would be from NYC and Westchester. Might I add that some of the people that are fighting this the hardest do not live in this area but are also from the city with acreage and second homes in this area. Some live in RV campers on property not zoned for that purpose. Should we go after them with the same vehement vengeance that they are going after the new guy on the block? After all they have only been here a few more years than the new guy. Some of the same people helped squash a proposed cell tower because it was too close to their summer place. Shame on you for not allowing the whole truth to be told. I just hope that someday you are broken down in a ditch on the Mountaindale road in dire need of help and realize that your cell phone will not do you any good because there is no cell service. As you stand on the side of the road a 4x4 person trained by TCJ will stop and help you because that is the right thing to do.

There is always someone against change but that is inevitable in today's society. I am not thrilled that it is not the way it was back then, but was it so much better then? Think of all the wonderful conveniences that have come about in the last several decades. Could you live without them? I think not. So why is it so much different to think that a person that has a 4x4 vehicle should not be allowed to learn to drive the vehicle safely to the best of their ability. Oh, that's right, NIMBY (not in my back yard) comes into effect, so you call the lawyers and start a fight before you learn all the facts.

After what has just happened in Newtown and all the conflicts worldwide isn't it time that we learn how to get along with one another? A child from Newtown was quoted "there are no strangers in our community, only friends that we have not met yet."

Earl Thornton II
Ellenville

TO: Brian Schug, Martin Lonstein, Paul Lonstein, John Constable, Douglas Hart, Michael Durso, James Dolaway, Marylou Christiana, esq, Lanc & Tully Engineering, Scott Carlsen, John Gavaris, Terry Houck, Stephen Bradley, Dan Johnson, William Collier

It is quite clear that over 200 people, whom you are "supposed" to represent, do not want and for very valid reasons, the proposed 4X4 obstacle course in Spring Glen. What could possibly be the reason you, as "our representatives", would not hear and support the wishes of these tax paying residents.

Nancy Francomano
Spring Glen

This letter was sent to Mr. Steven Kelley, CEO of the Ellenville Regional Hospital and is reprinted at the request of the writer.

Dear Mr. Kelley,

I entered the Emergency Room at the Ellenville Regional Hospital on November 7th and was later sent to the Swing Bed Unit on November 16, 2012 for therapeutic wellness treatments. I am now home and recuperating nicely.

It is with great pleasure that I write this letter to let you know what wonderful treatment I received and what a professional staff you have. They couldn't do enough to make my stay comfortable and pleasant. Everyone, I mean everyone, gave 100 percent of themselves to make me feel secure and well. The nurses, the aides, the therapists and the activities director were unbelievable... right down to the cleaners and the kitchen staff. I actually miss them. You know hospitals can be frightening and very challenging, especially to older people, and I can honestly say I felt safe and quite comfortable. The care I received was so very professional — but the big word is "CARING." The therapists were kind, pleasant and had patience with everyone... truly remarkable attributes. I believe that aided my recovery. I commend you for your choice of staff. Obviously you are the right man for the job. Incidentally, I did meet you in the therapy room while working on the bars and you were very pleasant.

I predict that the Ellenville Regional Hospital will grow and give competition to the others.

Elizabeth Kawalchuk
Wawarsing

Hello! I'm a criminal. I steal and rob from people for a living. I break into people's homes and take their money, jewelry, keepsakes, TVs and anything I can get my hands on quickly. I am very happy to learn that Ellenville's Mayor Kaplan wants to rid the community of guns. That's a great idea, and will help me a lot. I always worry when breaking into a home that someone will face me with a rifle, shotgun, or pistol. If they did, I would run as fast as possible hoping that they wouldn't shoot and kill me. But I know they would hesitate unless they caught me red handed because they would be responsible for my injuries or death and the law would be on my side. As for my illegal gun, I got that making a drug deal with a friend in Newburgh. No permit needed! I'm not afraid to use my gun if necessary to pistol whip or even shoot and kill someone.

I know just where to look for valuable items, mostly from the rich folks who live in those nice houses. But I'm not particular. Any quick theft and that's OK with me. And I know how to cut off alarm systems so the police would never know I was there robbing the folks.

I like to mug people too, like the old veteran gent in Ellenville who I mugged with a knife knowing he was probably unarmed. If he had a pistol on him and used it I wouldn't be here, I'd be in a morgue somewhere.

Wow! Mayor Kaplan you are wonderful to disarm the people in the village. This will encourage me and my associates to really get going and rip off the folks without hesitation. Now if you decided to encourage folks to be armed instead, we would disappear like the down of a thistle and find some other place to ply our trade. We don't want to face an armed populace. It's as simple as that.

You know, I wonder about you whether you really know the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Second Amendment is not for guys like us, it's for the folks so that they can arm themselves for protection, and if the government goes berserk and turns on us we can defend ourselves as best we can. In that regard, I don't think the government would like to face millions of small rifles (including those you call assault rifles loaded with 30 round magazines) peering from behind trees and walls like you see in Iraq or Afghanistan.

So, Mr. Kaplan, keep up the good work. It will really help us maintain our life style. Thanks again!

Submitted by... a criminal!

Paul Henderson
Napanoch