Tag Archive for: politics

Women: Not So Mere–T.K. Thorne

/in /by

Who knew? The women’s movement to win the vote in the United States (which didn’t happen until 1920) began with book clubs!

In my life, “feminism” was a word often expressed with a sneer, the struggle for equality seen as an effort to shed femininity and be man-like. Burn your bra at the peril of rejecting your womanhood!

But my role model, my mother, was as feminine as they come and yet stood toe to toe with men in power. She never finished college, having to quit to care for her ill father, but she continued to learn and read and surround herself with other women who used ideas and knowledge to challenge the status quo, a legacy that began long ago.

Despite the pressure on women to focus on family and household matters, women throughout history have organized to read and talk about serious ideas, even in the early colonial days of American history. Anne Hutchinson founded such a group on a ship headed for the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1634. Reading circles or societies spread throughout the 1800s, including the African-American Female Intelligence Society organized in Boston and the New York Colored Ladies Literary Society. The first known American club sponsored by a bookstore began in 1840 in a store owned by a woman, Margaret Fuller. In 1866 Sarah Atwater Denman began Friends in Council, the oldest continuous literary club in America. In the South, blacks slaves were punished, sometimes with their lives for learning to read or if they were found carrying a book, although some surely passed books and abolitionist tracts in secret, despite the terrible risk.

Mandy Shunnarah wrote about research she did on this subject in college, sharing how the turn-of-the-century women began with classical ancient history and gradually became informed about political and policy issues of the day. The clubs created opportunities for connection and community and provided a conduit for organization and action. Undoubtedly, progressive organizations like the League of Women Voters, which formed in 1920, were an outgrowth of those clubs.

My mother, Jane L. Katz, was a longtime member and a lobbyist for the Alabama state League of Women Voters. I have memories of her sitting at her electric Smith-Corona and typing away at tedious lists that tracked status and votes on legislative bills of interest to the League—education, the environment, constitutional reform, judicial reform, ethics reform, home rule.

I remember her taking me to a site to show me what strip mining actually looked like when a coal company was finished ravaging the land. She worked hard for the Equal Rights Amendment, which had as much chance of passing in my state (Alabama) as a law against football. I followed her to the state legislature while she talked to white male senators about why a bill was important and I will never forget how they looked down at her condescendingly. It made me angry, but she just continued to present her points with charm, wit, and irrefutable logic. The experience turned me off to politics, but gave me a deep respect for my mother. I know she would be saddened that many of the issues she fought for have yet to come about, but she would be proud of today’s many strong women’s voices speaking up for the values she so believed in and fought for. She and my grandmother began my love of reading and books. Today, it’s estimated that over 5 million book clubs exist and 70-80% of the members are women.

A special childhood memory is my parents chuckling over a New Yorker cartoon my father cut out and showed to friends—Two stuffy businessmen are talking quietly. One says, “But she is a mere woman!” The other replies, “Haven’t you heard? Women are not so mere anymore.”


I’m not a politician. I’m a writer. My mother died decades ago, and sometimes I feel guilty not following in her footsteps. But I think she would have been proud that the women in my books are not “mere.” And I am proud and excited that I might see in my lifetime an exceptional woman in the White House. I even dare to hope it might change the world.

Whether that time is here or not, it is a gift and a closing of the circle connecting me with my mother and all her predecessors to know the heritage of feminist activism—the striving for a society where women’s thoughts, ideas, and work are equally respected—began with a group of women, perhaps a cup of tea, and a book.



T.K. Thorne writes about what moves her, following a flight path of curiosity, reflection, and imagination. Check out her (fiction and nonfiction) books at TKThorne.com

 

 

Women: Not So Mere–by T.K. Thorne

/in /by

   Writer, humanist,


          dog-mom, horse servant and cat-slave,


       Lover of solitude

          and the company of good friends,
        New places, new ideas
           and old wisdom.

 

Who knew? The women’s movement to win the vote in America (which didn’t happen until 1920) began with book clubs!

In my life, “feminism” has been a word often expressed with a sneer, the struggle for equality seen as an effort to shed femininity and be man-like. Burn your bra at the peril of rejecting your womanhood. But my role model, my mother, was as feminine as they come and yet stood toe to toe with men in power. She never finished college, having to quit to care for her ill father, but she continued to learn and read and surround herself with other women who used ideas and knowledge to challenge the status quo, a legacy that began long ago.

Despite the pressure on women to focus on family and household matters, women throughout history have organized to read and talk about serious ideas, even in the early colonial days of American history. Anne Hutchinson founded such a group on a ship headed for the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1634. Reading circles or societies spread throughout the 1800s, including the African-American Female Intelligence Society organized in Boston and the New York Colored Ladies Literary Society. The first known American club sponsored by a bookstore began in 1840 in a store owned by a woman, Margaret Fuller. In 1866 Sarah Atwater Denman began Friends in Council, the oldest continuous literary club in America. In the South, blacks slaves were punished if they were found even carrying a book, although some surely passed books and abolitionist tracts in secret, despite the terrible risk.

Mandy Shunnarah recently wrote about research she did on this subject in college, sharing how the turn-of-the-century women began with classical ancient history and gradually became informed about political and policy issues of the day. The clubs created opportunities for connection and community and provided a conduit for organization and action. Undoubtedly, progressive organizations like the League of Women Voters, which formed in 1920, were an outgrowth of those clubs.

My mother, Jane Katz, was a longtime League member and a lobbyist for the state League. I have memories of her sitting at her electric Smith-Corona and typing away at tedious lists that tracked status and votes on legislative bills of interest to the League—education, the environment, constitutional reform, judicial reform, ethics reform, home rule.

I remember her taking me to a site to show me what strip mining actually looked like when a coal company was finished ravaging the land. She worked hard for the Equal Rights Amendment, which had as much chance of passing in my state (Alabama) as a law against football. I followed her to the state legislature while she talked to white male senators about why a bill was important and I will never forget how they looked down at her condescendingly. It made me angry, but she just continued to present her points with charm, wit, and irrefutable logic. The experience turned me off to politics, but gave me a deep respect for my mother. I know she would be saddened that many of the issues she fought for have yet to come about, but she would be proud of today’s many strong women’s voices speaking up for the values she so believed in and fought for. She and my grandmother began my love of reading and books. Today, it’s estimated that over 5 million book clubs exist and 70-80% of the members are women.

A special childhood memory of my parents chuckling over a New Yorker cartoon my father cut out and showed to friends—Two stuffy businessmen are talking quietly. One says, “But she is a mere woman!” The other replies, “Haven’t you heard? Women are not so mere anymore.”

I’m not a politician. I’m a writer. My mother died decades ago, and sometimes I feel guilty not following in her footsteps. But I think she would have been proud that the women in my books are not “mere.”

It is a gift and a closing of the circle connecting me with my mother and all her predecessors to know the heritage of feminist activism—the striving for a society where women’s thoughts, ideas, and work are equally respected—began with a group of women, perhaps a cup of tea, and a book.

T.K. Thorne’s childhood passion for storytelling deepened when she became a police officer in Birmingham, Alabama.  “It was a crash course in life and what motivated and mattered to people.” In her newest novel, HOUSE OF ROSE, murder and mayhem mix with a little magic when a police officer discovers she’s a witch. 

Both her award-winning debut historical novels, NOAH’S WIFE and ANGELS AT THE GATE, tell the stories of unknown women in famous biblical tales—the wife of Noah and the wife of Lot. Her first non-fiction book, LAST CHANCE FOR JUSTICE,
the inside story of the investigation and trials of the 1963 Birmingham
church bombing, was featured on the New York Post’s “Books You Should
Be Reading” list. 

T.K.
loves traveling and speaking about her books and life lessons. She
writes at her mountaintop home near Birmingham, often with a dogs and a
cat vying for her lap. 

 More info at TKThorne.com. Join her private newsletter email list and receive a two free short stories at “TK’s Korner.”

Politics As Usual Or Is Scandal A Thing Of The Past?

/in /by

Teapot Dome 
By Cathy Perkins
This day in history – “Teapot Dome” became synonymous with outrage, political scandal and a disgraceful event.

You remember history, that thing we’re destined to repeat if we don’t remember it? 

What happened, you ask?

https://millercenter.org/sites/default/files/%5Bdate%3Acustom%3AY%5D-%5Bdate%3Acustom%3Am%5D/Teapot_Rock_postcard.jpg
Teapot Dome
In 1920,  Warren G. Harding, a senator and  Ohio newspaper publisher, won a long-shot bid for the White House with the financial backing of oilmen who were promised oil-friendly cabinet picks in return.

Harding’s campaign slogan for the election was “Return to normalcy,” a return to the way of life before World War I. His promise was to return the United States to its prewar greatness after the hardships of World War I (1914-1918). (Hmm,
Make America Great?) As president, Harding favored pro-business policies, diminished conservation, and
limited immigration. 

Even though it lasted only from 1921 to 1923 (Harding died in 1923), Harding’s administration became the
most scandal-ridden to date, thanks to his political friends. Attorney General
Harry Daugherty was accused of profiting from the sale of government alcohol
supplies during Prohibition, as well as selling pardons. Harding’s head of the
Veterans Bureau, Charles Forbes, was sentenced to two years in prison for
bribery and corruption. Other scandals involved appointees in the Shipping
Bureau and Alien Property Custodians office. And, Harding’s Secretary of the
Interior, Albert B. Fall, announced his resignation in the midst of an
unfolding scandal that would become known as Teapot Dome.

Now I’d heard of the Teapot Dome scandal, but didn’t really know what was involved, so on a whim, I did a
little research. (It’s what authors do, usually when they’re procrastinating.)

The Teapot Dome Scandal of the 1920s shocked Americans by revealing an unprecedented level of greed and
corruption within the federal government. The scandal involved ornery oil
tycoons, poker-playing politicians, illegal liquor sales, a murder-suicide, a
womanizing president and a bagful of bribery cash.

https://millercenter.org/sites/default/files/%5Bdate%3Acustom%3AY%5D-%5Bdate%3Acustom%3Am%5D/AlbertFall_0.jpg
Albert Fall

During the Teapot Dome scandal, Albert B. Fall was found guilty of accepting a bribe while in office. (Fall claimed it was a loan from Doheny worth about $5 million in today’s dollars. He was unable to justify the ~$15 million in cash and bonds he received from Sinclair. Some sources say it was “only” $10 million.) Fall was the first individual to be convicted of a crime committed while a presidential cabinet member.

Fall attempted to transfer control of the Forest Service from the Department of Agriculture. He wanted the natural resources of the Alaska Territory (apparently for his own use), but was no match for the Agriculture Secretary–and future Vice President–Henry Wallace. He was more “successful” with the US Naval oil-reserves. As the Navy converted from coal-powered to oil-fueled ships, the reserves insured there was sufficient oil in the event of another war.

Fall convinced Warren G. Harding to transfer supervision of the land from the Navy to the Department of
the Interior in May 1921 (which Harding did by Executive Order). Fall then secretly
granted exclusive rights to the Teapot Dome(Wyoming) reserves to Harry F. Sinclair of the Mammoth Oil Company (April 7, 1922). (He also made similar rights grants to Edward L. Doheny of Pan American Petroleum Company for the Elk Hills and Buena Vista Hills reserves in California (1921–22).)

What brought Fall down was a Congress that actually investigated instead of staging
political shows and a Justice Department that “followed the money.” Fall’s
personal financial position improved dramatically following the lease grants,
attracting the attention of Senate investigators. Special prosecutors were
appointed and the investigation unraveled the crime.

In 1929, Fall became the first former Cabinet officer ever convicted of a felony committed while in
office. He was fined $100,000, which he never paid, and served only nine months
of a one-year prison sentence. “My version of the matter is simply that I
was not guilty,” he told the parole board. (Ironically enough, after
resigning, Fall took part in lucrative oil deals in Russia and Mexico with both Doheny and Sinclair.)

Doherty was never charged, but Sinclair refused to answer some of the Senate team’s questions, claiming that Congress had no right to probe his private affairs. That refusal was challenged and eventually reached
the Supreme Court. In the 1929, Sinclair vs. United States ruling,
the court said that Congress did have the power to fully investigate cases
where the country’s laws may have been violated. Sinclair would later serve six
months in prison for contempt of Congress and jury tampering.





An award-winning author of financial mysteries, Cathy Perkins writes twisting dark suspense and light amateur sleuth stories.  When not writing, she battles with the beavers over the pond height or heads out on another travel adventure. She lives in Washington with her husband, children, several dogs and the resident deer herd. 

Visit her at http://cperkinswrites.com or on Facebook

Sign up for her new release announcement newsletter in either place. 

She’s hard at work on the next book in the Holly Price series,  In It For The Money which releases this summer.

Untitled Post

/in /by

Clicking Our Heels – Should Sex, Politics, and Scandals be dramatized
or even factually incorporated into our writing?

Cathy Perkins – A craft book I’m studying discusses the importance
of incorporating what you’re passionate about into your stories to bring them
to life and serve as a driving force. If you’re excited by an issue or topic,
that intensity will transfer to the page. Family, for example, is always
central to my stories, although it may not always be a traditional family. Other
issues which are important to me – and to my readers – bring depth and focus. The
challenge is adding tose elements without preaching and instead making them a
natural part of your character’s reality.

Kimberly Jayne – I think anything is game. We write about all aspects
of life anyway, including imaginary aspects. So yes, sex, politics, and
scandals can be part of my writing. There’s a market out there for readers of
everything, so if I’m interested in a controversial topic or if that topic
would enhance or elevate my story, then I’ll use it and put my spin on it. As
long as readers enjoy the concepts within the stories, controversial or not,
then it’s all good.

Sparkle Abbey – Our books are very much escape reading. We have no
problem at all with books that incorporate real life politics or scandals but
you probably will never find that in a Sparkle Abbey book. We get emails from
readers who share that they’ve read our books while going through difficult
times, (sitting at the bedside of a loved one, after a particularly tough day
at work, or simply as a get-away when they couldn’t actually get away) and this
trills us. There is nothing better than hearing that your work brightened
someone’s day!

Bethany Maines – Yes. A book with no sex, politics, or scandals
would be pretty dang boring. I write fiction, so I don’t think those elements
have to be 100% factual, but I do think they need to be present in someway.

Linda Rodriguez – I believe quite firmly in dealing with the issues
of the day in the society about which I’m writing, whether I’m writing poetry,
mystery, literary fiction, or fantasy. Writing that doesn’t deal in some way
with these issues seems to be to be unrooted and simply lying shallowly on the
surface of things, but I’m aware that other viewpoints on that matter are
equally valid.

Debra H. Goldstein – Even if a book is meant to be fun, social
issues can be incorporated in a manner that don’t hit people over the head.
Ignoring the truth of sex, politics and scandals potentially leaves a dimension
out of one’s writing.

Jennae Phillippe – Sure. I personally think that all writing is
political in some way because it is asking us to relate to the ideas and theme
presented. Some writing is more political than others, either by design or
because it captured something the public wanted to politicize. But these things
are a part of real life. However fantastical the tale, it will have elements of
all of them.

Paula Gail Benson – I love how Law
and Order has taken a current news story and given it a different spin by
considering other ramifications. I think it’s a matter that needs to be
approached carefully and with dignity, both in dramas and parodies or comedy
sketches.

Kay Kendall – I have seen successful books incorporate all three of
those elements – sex, politics, scandals. If other writers can do it well and
you think you can too, then why not? In my first two published mysteries, I use
the politics of the late 1960s as the milieu against which my amateur sleuth
operates. I used the anti-war movement and second stage feminism for,
respectively, Desolation Row and Rainy Day Women. Those were dramatic
ties and as such they lend themselves to heightened feelings—even murderous
ones.

Talking Politics and Memorial Day

/in /by

Talking Politics and Memorial Day by Debra H. Goldstein


I love politics and politicians. In studying historical trends and how people react to different stimuli, I’ve taken classes, read books, and listened to the pundits. As you can imagine, the last few months have provided sensory overload and given me much to think and comment on, but this isn’t the platform I choose to share my views on the current election race or the issues that face our country. Hopefully, if we sit down in a living room and talk, we can find a way to listen to each other and respect what each of us thinks – even if our opinions differ.  In the meantime, I pray, as this Memorial Day approaches, we can agree on one thing:

Art and the Political

/in /by

There is some pretty good advice that floats around the Internet that says that fiction writers should refrain from engaging in political debates, and certainly refrain from posting blogs about their own political beliefs. The idea is that writers should strive to remain neutral so as not to take away from the fictional worlds they create (and also not to deter readers who might not agree with them from buying their books). And yet, there is an equal idea that art is inherently political, that our own politics and beliefs are not only reflected in the art we create, but should be, because we owe it to readers to speak our own truths.

In the United States, it is an election year. Politics are everywhere these days — in the news, on social media, at holiday dinners with family members you are not actually convinced you are related to, and in random conversations between eclectically dressed strangers at the store. Everyone has an opinion. Actually, they have lots of opinions, and links, and memes, and sound bites, and graphs, and polls, and when will this election be over already?

The thing is, as a writer, I also have opinions. Lots of opinions, actually. Tons and tons of opinions I would like to share with people in lovely (and hopefully well written) paragraphs and blogs.
I am trying to resist the urge. For one thing, engaging in political conversations on the Internet has never actually led anyone I have argued with to actually agree with me. Humans are hard wired to actually actively ignore information that doesn’t match what they already think thanks to confirmation bias:
And while there is also a valid argument in the fact that not only is arguing on the Internet a waste of time but is also yet another way of avoiding the kind of writing I should be doing, I do think there is some value in engaging in online discussions to some degree. But online discussions have a way of devolving into drawn out battles where each side is more determined to win than to actually consider another opinion. 
Over the past few days, I have been finding myself posting more and more political things and engaging more and more with other people about the things they have been posting. All it ever really gets me is a rise in my blood pressure and an uneasy feeling that Somebody is wrong  (and the even more unsettling feeling that that Somebody could very well be me). There is also this feeling that maybe I am putting too much of my political self out there, that this goes against what I should be doing to brand myself as a mostly-likeable-and-non-controversial author. Is that a standard I should even be striving for? How much politics is too much? 
And in the end, if art really is political, should I be saving my political views for my fiction (however subtly or overtly they come across)?
What do other’s think? How do you handle art and politics?

Disruptive Forces: Politics and Publishing

/in /by

Disruptive Forces: Politics and Publishing by Debra H. Goldstein

I should be writing my blog, but instead I’m glued to my television set. The New Hampshire results are coming in. This is anything but the end of the political campaign, but a commentator just used a phrase to describe one candidate that I think probably could be used for the entire process. He called the candidate “a disruptive force.”

During the past few weeks, I’ve been concerned about many issues: health care, terrorism, poverty, international relations, immigration, cultural diversity and criminal justice to name a few. Although no candidate and I could ever agree on solutions for all of these issues, my hope has been that I could identify one that either holds most of my views or has rational proposals I’ve never considered.

The fact is the rhetoric is different every day. Muddled, middle, disruptive, and changing are all words being used by the pundits to describe the campaigns and how the process will whittle down the number of candidates in the race. These same words can be applied to the writing arena.

During the past few years, the multitude of large publishing houses shrunk, as has the subsidiary banners these houses published under. Recently, the mystery world was hit by announcements that Berkley Prime and Cengage, the biggest textbook publisher, will be discontinuing mystery series/lines. For writers and readers in the cozy and traditional mystery world, these announcements translate to at least one hundred books a year that will probably never be published. Some authors may find homes for their works or derivatives of their series with smaller houses or may choose to self-publish, but unless they already have established followings, most will find their works reaching far less readers than they would have “the way things were.”

I’m not sure which candidate will become president, but I am certain this streamlining of the publishing world will mean corporate profits rising to the detriment of readers and writers. The “disruptive forces” at work here will result in readers having less books to choose from while writers, having less alternatives, will discover their earning and negotiation abilities compromised at the same time they are having to work harder to find homes for their works.

Do you think we could add the state of the publishing world to the next debate?

The Other POV

/in /by

by Bethany Maines

Tis the season again. 
The political season that is. 
And Washington State being Washington State we’re facing a couple of
contentious issues, including gay marriage, marijuana legalization for everyone
over 21, and that old chestnut, the Presidential race.  Although, it should be noted that since
we are Washington State the REAL hippies are against the marijuana legalization
initiative because it doesn’t go far enough.

I strongly believe in our democracy and I do my best to
learn what I can about the issues and cast my vote accordingly. But I have to say it’s a bit of childhood dream dashed to
discover that frequently both sides of an issue have points in their favor.
What happened to absolute certainty and knowing which way to go?
Who wants to grow up and see the other guy’s point of view?  It makes me want to curl up on the
couch and watch Rio Bravo (or Eldorado, really doesn’t matter which) because
you know where you’re at with a John Wayne movie.
Although, it has recently come to my attention through this great blog entry by Anne Kreamer for the Harvard Business Review that my mother
may have ruined my ability to see the world in black and white. By encouraging
me to read fiction my heartless mother was teaching me to how to be empathetic
and how to build a “theory of mind” (the ability to interpret and respond to
those different from us).  What was
she thinking?  Oh wait, I can
totally understand what she was thinking because I have the skill to see the
world from her perspective.  Why,
Mom, why??!!!
While being able to think from another point of view may
have ruined my black hat/white hat theory of politics, it has served me well in
writing.  One the tricks I find
most useful for teasing out a plot tangle is to write out a synopsis of the
story from the Villains point of view. With all my attention being focused on
the hero or heroine sometimes I’ll make the error of simply moving my Bad Guy
off stage.  For all intents and
purposes he’s just out there in the wings, twiddling his thumbs, and waiting
for his cue to come in and twirl his moustache and chew a bit of scenery.  But when I write the story from his POV
I realize that those plot holes have been holes because I haven’t been giving
the Villain a chance to actually be a person. Real people have goals and
motivations beyond moustache twirling and the story only gets better when I let
my Baddy show there’s more to him than an awesome moustache.  And although moustaches are great, I
think we can all agree that no one will ever really be able to compete with Sam Elliot, and my Villains probably shouldn’t even try.

Bethany Maines
is the author of Bulletproof Mascara, Compact With the Devil and
Supporting the Girls.  Catch up with her at www.bethanymaines.com or check out the new Carrie
Mae youtube
video.

Oh My, Election Day

/in /by

I hope everyone is planning to vote and that this will be the end to all the ads and phone calls.

I always vote absentee ballot and did so much earlier. I can’t stand the way the politicians act no matter the party. My gut feeling is that politics corrupts. The nicest person with only the best motives for being in office will eventually be corrupted by the system. It worked a lot better back when being a politician was a volunteer job and people did it because they truly wanted to help run the country the best way possible.

Oh, well, we can’t turn back the clock.

I won’t talk politics to hardly anyone. I don’t like to see the stuff on Facebook about politics. I don’t like being called stupid because I don’t belong to the same party as the one saying I am.

One of my publishers, who also has become my friend, and I have totally opposite views on politics and religion. Right from the start we agreed to never discuss either. Works well and we’ve remained friends because of this pledge.

Anyway, hopefully the worst will be over at the end of the day and we can get on with more pleasant things to talk about and things we can agree upon.

My wish to everyone is that you each will do what you can to make each day pleasant for yourself and others.

Marilyn

Can’t We All Just Get Along?

/in /by

We are approaching that time of year when we elect two new trustees and a new mayor in our little Village. And like in years past, I find again that people who I thought I knew and liked become vicious and petty, all in support of their candidates and their personal agendas. You thought national politics was bad? You ain’t seen nothing until you’ve witnessed what goes on here.

On the one side, you’ve got a mayor who is technically a Democrat but who ran, and won, on the Republican ticket. On the other, you have a former trustee, a registered Democrat, who is vying for that position. Both men—with whom I both agree and disagree on a number of different issues—are to be commended for their willingness to throw their individual hats into this mudfest we call a “campaign.” At issue is the rezoning (according to the Democrats) or development (according to the Republicans) of a part of the Village that is virtually a ghost town, most restaurants and/or businesses having fled in the past several years for greener pastures or bankruptcy—we’re actually not sure which.

Both sides have good points. On the Democratic side, are we willing to just let this part of town founder and wither? On the Republican side, where will everyone park provided that the plan goes through to attract new businesses and increase the number of rental units? I would love to see both sides debate these issues with the facts at hand and decorum in full force. But we won’t get this wish because of the inflammatory nature of each argument. So what we get are accusations, recriminations, slander and libel.

I might be wrong, but aren’t we all adults? And don’t we live in a Village of 7,500 people where it is entirely possible that the person you wrote horrible things about on the local blog might just run into you at the Post Office?

This lack of civility in local politics—and I swear it is entirely more civilized at the national level—has me feeling very sad for our Village. It also makes me feel that someone who may be interested in becoming a public servant—and a good one at that—may see what goes in our local papers, online, and at various Village meetings and decide that they just don’t have the stomach for it. I can’t say that I blame them. A recent posting by a Villager on the local blog excoriated another poster for their opinion on a political issue related to this year’s election, ending his screed with an allegation of the other poster’s “drunkenness.” We can all disagree, and we do. But do we have to bring personal attacks into the discussion?

I guess I’d like to know from our Stiletto Gang readers if this type of behavior is rampant and exists all over the country or if what I am witnessing is an anomaly. I’m hoping it’s the latter. But at this point, all I can say is that I can’t wait for this election to be over. May the thicker-skinned candidate win.

Maggie Barbieri