Readers Write: Fourth of July heroes, presidential power, motorcycles

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

When the Fourth of July rolls around, my dad is always on my mind. He was one of President Donald Trump’s “suckers” and “losers.” Suffice it to say, a textbook coward has no business saying anything about a man who was one of the first medics to land on Utah Beach, froze his fingers and toes in the Battle of the Bulge and helped to liberate two concentration camps.

What’s more, my dad displayed his courage and a presence of mind under duress from an early age. He never bragged — or even shared this particular story — but when he was about 12 and one of his little brothers was about 5, they were out exploring one day around their home in Eau Claire, Wis. They were happily walking along a railroad track and had ventured out on a trestle when a train suddenly came into view and was bearing down on them. Since they did not have time to exit either end of the trestle, my dad proceeded to do the unthinkable. He told his little brother to lie down on the tracks and, as big brother, he lay down on top of him. Amazingly enough, the trained passed over them, leaving them shaken but unharmed. In addition to his obvious qualities of character, my dad went on to be a wonderful father and grandfather.

As for my uncle, who told this story at a family reunion when my dad was about 80 years old, he went on to serve as a superintendent of schools in the same Michigan school district for over 40 years, positively touching countless lives. I’d never heard this story until my uncle shared it with our family. Now, I ask you, if Trump was actually capable of such selfless courage, displayed without pause in the spur of the moment, how many hundreds of times would he have told that story in his narcissistic, self-aggrandizing and ponderous tone? Going forward, as we honor and celebrate the Fourth of July, let’s keep the true heroes — Trump’s “suckers” and “losers” — front of mind and, of course, in our hearts.

Dan Haugen, Plymouth

•••

This Fourth of July, I want to be a patriotic American, but I struggle to understand how that’s possible. These are fractious times for our country, and I’m filled with sadness, anger, confusion and shame. How can I be a patriot when the future of our country seems so bleak?

Decades ago, at the height of the Vietnam controversy and civil rights unrest, the late theologian William Sloane Coffin attempted to provide an answer: “There are three kinds of patriots, two bad, one good. The bad ones are the uncritical lovers and the loveless critics. Good patriots carry on a lover’s quarrel with their country, a reflection of God’s lover’s quarrel with the world.”

I think Coffin is right. Now’s not the time to give up hope. Let us “carry on.” Let us see ourselves as a nation of quarrelsome lovers who, despite our differences, readily join hands and pray as one, “God bless America!”

The Rev. Alan Bray, St. Peter, Minn.

The writer is a retired pastor of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.

•••

It is time to start abolishing noisy fireworks around the Fourth of July. With “bombs bursting in air,” there are many sorts of casualties: Companion animals are terrified, injured or lost; frightened birds abandon their nests; other wildlife is stressed out; toxic chemicals are released into air and water; and symptoms of PTSD are aggravated, to mention some effects.

Celebrations can take place with due consideration of the potentially harmful impact on humans, nonhumans and the environment.

Kai Laybourn, Bloomington

The Roberts court may be the worst Supreme Court since the 1857 Roger B. Taney court that found the rights in the U.S. Constitution did not apply to a Black man by the name of Dred Scott. The Roberts court seems bent on ruling that the laws in the U.S. Constitution do not apply to President Donald Trump. It has ruled the 14th Amendment did not apply in banning him from office as an insurrectionist. It ruled that he has a level of immunity never even implied in the Constitution. Now it overturns precedent in not allowing federal judges to issue injunctions against his anti-constitutional executive orders (in this case denying birthright citizenship) nationwide. The Roberts court seems determined to aid and abet Trump’s claim to imperial powers. We expect our highest court to be steadfast in defending the principles of our Constitution and so far, this court is falling well short.

Robert Veitch, Richfield

•••

Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison’s comment that “the U.S. Supreme Court made a mistake of monumental proportions” is reminiscent of President Barack Obama’s statement that the Supreme Court got it wrong (“Minnesota AG calls Supreme Court decision on injunctions a ‘monumental’ mistake,” StarTribune.com, June 27). If the highest court in the land makes a decision, I question how one can say that they got it wrong. Certainly one could say “I would have decided it differently,” as the court is divided more than half of the time. But the law of the land is defined by the decisions of the Supreme Court. To say that it is wrong undermines our rule of law. It is quite a narcissistic statement to think that one knows better than our ultimate authority on the law.

Paul Arnesen, White Bear Lake

•••

The six Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices have decided to give the president power like never before. The president is immune from prosecutions. The president can’t be slowed down by federal court injunctions. The president may not have to follow court orders. Well, I’m a Democrat, so I figure they are doing this because they like this president. But what will happen in the long run? Does the court want the next president, maybe former Vice President Kamala Harris, maybe California Gov. Gavin Newsom, whoever, to have all this power? Historically the mission of the court has been to keep the powers of the parts of our government in balance. This is their long-range job, and they are not doing it. Today the Republicans on the court may be happy as clams, but after the next election, who knows?

John Stuart, Minneapolis

Regarding the July 2 letter to the editor “Lengthening my list of driving worries,” which recounts a story of another driver not knowing what to do in a roundabout: The data shows that traffic circles dramatically reduce accidents, reduce congestion and have lower maintenance costs. They are really not terribly difficult to figure out.

Lane splitting data for motorcycles shows that it improves the safety of riders as it reduces rear-end accidents. Yes, it requires that drivers pay a little more attention.

When driving, your No. 1 job should be paying attention, lane splitting or not!

Kevin Burge, Ham Lake

•••

So now motorcyclists can use lane splitting between cars for traveling. As a former motorcyclist, I think this is a double dangerous idea — especially when Minnesota has no mandatory helmet law for riders over 18.

Mark D. Luther, Minnetonka