Letters to the editor for June 4.
Why have a mom serve to attack his opponent?
I was surprised to read the op-ed signed by Freddy Hershberger in your May 14th issue. It is very unusual for a campaign to bring in a candidate’s mother to serve as a surrogate for a candidate’s attack, yet that is exactly what Pete Hershberger’s campaign did.
I surmise that Pete wanted Al Melvin to defend himself against these attacks personally, at which point Pete could accuse him of “attacking a sweet old lady.” But Pete’s idea of a clever political trick is in fact nothing more than a dishonest and unseemly attack on a good man.
You need go no further than Hershberger’s opening sentence, wherein she labels Al Melvin as “extremist Senate candidate Al Melvin.” There is nothing extreme about Al Melvin, as his family, friends, and the more than 35,000 voters who voted for him in 2006 would attest. So why get ugly to start the column? Why attack when you could simply debate and contrast Al’s positions with Pete’s?
Hershberger’s column continues on with several unkind words and even more untruths. There is not the time or space here to point out every one of them, and frankly, debating Freddy Hershberger serves no real purpose. It is the man behind her skirts that should come out and debate.
We will need a strong Republican party to win seats in 2008. Differences in ideas and ideology are fine and they should be debated properly. Labels, attacks, and untruths are uncalled for.
I am not critical of Freddy Hershberger for stepping in and playing this role for her son. She is a loving mother who would do whatever her son asked of her. But it is fair to think less of a man who would send his mother out into the public to play such a role for him.
Signs weren’t in mayor’s yard; he’s excited for future
I think it’s time to set the record straight.
I’m excited to start a new council session with two new council members and our returning members on June 4. Bill and Salette have been fully engaged since their election. New councils offer the opportunity for new perspectives, ideas and priorities. I’ve been part of six different councils in the last 10 years and in my opinion, each has contributed to Oro Valley’s excellence.
I would like to correct a statement made by Kathy Pastryk in the May 28th Explorer about political signs in my yard. The signs that she stated were “prominently displayed for many months on his front fence,” were in fact in a neighbor’s yard, across the street.
Since I was first elected, it has been my policy to not endorse any candidate running for office, and the only political signs at the Loomis residence have been my own or propositions I have supported. I have done this because the mayor has to work with whoever is elected. Candidates have understood this if they asked for my support. I have tried to provide advice to all that have asked.
Oro Valley has been fortunate to have had excellent candidates and excellent elected officials. I want to thank and congratulate all of them for volunteering to help our town grow, learn and prosper.
Mayor, Town of Oro Valley
Shame on all the OV people who didn’t even vote
Shame, shame, shame.
The most recent election is over and the 8,810 people that voted in this election have spoken! My congrats to the new city council, and now it is time to roll up your sleeves and get to work for the people of Oro Valley.
In the past I have shot off my big mouth in print, being very critical of this mayor and the city council for the lousy way they are running this town and the lack of respect they have for the people they work for.
However, this time I am going to turn my written barbs to the other 17,400 registered voters in Oro Valley that for whatever reason decided not to get involved and let their voice be heard. Shame on you.
When the framers of the constitution spoke of “forming a more perfect union,” that meant the involvement of all the people to let their voice be heard in deciding who we will place our trust in to make decisions that will affect we the people.
There is no more precious right that we as Americans have than to be able to decide our own destiny, and the fact that 8,800 people decided the fate of 26,000 people is very upsetting and frankly disgraceful.
We are fortunate to live in a progressive state like Arizona that has, in my opinion, gone out of its way under the fine leadership of F. Ann Rodriguez to make voting easier than any other state in this country, and there is simply no excuse for such a pitiful turnout in every election we have had lately.
In closing, I thank the 8,800 people that did vote and let their voice be heard and would sincerely hope the other 17,400 registered voters in Oro Valley will do better next time around. Please get involved.
David M. Berry