Sounding off: Founding Fathers may have anticipated turmoil of political parties

There must be a reason the Founding Fathers did not place any mention of political parties in the Constitution.

Perhaps it was just something that never came up in their discussions. Perhaps in their wisdom, they anticipated that something like a political party might grow too powerful and become a great national “divider”? They probably assumed that righteous men, with an innate intention to do good for the country, would step forward for a short time, to serve in the best interests of all.

They never could have anticipated a monolithic, overbearing, Frankenstein monster that would develop over time. Otherwise I’m certain they would have put in safeguards against this, and even added term limits as well. Sadly, their naivete has had disastrous consequences for America.

Who could have anticipated that a lifetime political class would emerge and Americans 233 years later would flock to one side or the other like flies to a light? Loyalty is now to party first, and country second. Common sense has been neutralized. What’s good doesn’t matter, it’s which side tells you what’s good.

Every issue is politicized. Covid, statues, sporting events, team names, mascots, masks, etc.

Create an issue, assemble your armies and corrupted media teams, fight for your D or R, and stay distracted. Works like a charm! If you’re a D and an R favors something, it’s your sworn duty to immediately fight against it, and vice versa.

Gee, who could be benefiting from all of this division? It couldn’t be the political elites pulling these strings. Nah.

Tim Kaczmarek, Natrona Heights

More to pro-life than just abortion

The pro-life movement focuses on the unborn, which is a good cause. However, there seems to be an anti-life movement when it comes to gun control laws, vaccines and mask mandates and climate change. All of these issues also affect human life.

Marilyn Dvorsky, Elizabethtown

Impeachment reserved for crimes

I am amazed at how many right-wing politicians and voters completely misunderstand, and how casually they bring up, the somber issue of presidential impeachment.

The United States impeaches our presidents for committing crimes. There is no other reason that justifies impeachment.

We can vote a president out in national elections for policies with which we disagree or failures for which we blame the president, or for any reason we may have. But impeachment is only used when our president has engaged in criminal activity.

President Nixon was impeached (or would have been had he not resigned first) for obstruction of justice. President Clinton was impeached for perjury. President Trump was impeached (twice) for illegal election interference.

We don’t impeach a president merely because he is of the other party, or because we are sore losers about the election outcome, or because we disagree with his policies.

Sadly, many elected representatives seem to have lost their perspective on this grave matter. A lunatic fringe Republican representative actually attempted to file articles of impeachment against President Biden on Jan. 21, 2021, even though Biden had not had a chance to commit an impeachable offense.

Has impeachment simply become a tool of political revenge?

Impeachment is too serious an issue to be treated in such a cavalier and capricious manner. The Constitution protects our democracy from the ignorant and irrational behavior of politicians and citizens who would advocate impeachment for less than criminal behavior.

Mary Bruce Serene, State College

Bradshaw, not Roethlisberger, was the greatest quarterback

I do not like when Ben Roethlisberger is portrayed as our greatest quarterback. Terry Bradshaw has been through more battles than Roethlisberger ever saw, and people keep forgetting he won four Super Bowls.

Roethlisberger had great defenses the same as Bradshaw, but he survived before all of the rule changes. To be mad at Bradshaw is one thing, but to disrespect him by not dubbing him as greatest QB in Steelers history and one of best that there ever was is just wrong.

Keith Madison, Spring, Texas

The writer is a Homestead native.

Jonah Goldberg is off base on ‘coup attempt’

Jonah Goldberg’s op-ed “RNC’s idea of ‘legitimate political discourse’ shows how far gone it is” was one of the most vicious, descriptively unpleasant and emotionally raw points of view I have ever read. However, Goldberg’s rage keeps him from seeing certain relevant facts.

When the Jan. 6 committee was being formed, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi rejected the first two Republican nominees submitted by Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, and it was obvious she would reject anyone who would be impartial. McCarthy pulled the remaining Republican nominees, and Pelosi selected Reps. Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, probably because of their hatred of President Trump and to make the committee appear bipartisan. The committee was arranged to reach a desired outcome.

Goldberg incorrectly states that all actions against Jan. 6 defendants have been legitimate. They have not been, with some charged with only trespassing being held in solitary confinement for months awaiting trial. Many defendants being held claim harassment and abuse by D.C. Department of Corrections officers. Several claim they were beaten.

Just as the impeachment of Trump was based mainly on suspect information, it is obvious that the Democrats’ goal is to vilify Trump and nullify any political influence he could have in the future. Those who have been subpoenaed but refused to testify before the committee have seen this type of Democrat sham before.

Perhaps there’s a safe space Goldberg can use to allow his derangement to dissipate and realize that although some of the actions of Jan. 6 were reprehensible, they were far from a coup attempt.

A.J. Abate, Elizabeth

Killing contests must be banned in Pa.

Many Pennsylvanians will be appalled to learn that wildlife killing contests — a bloodsport comparable to dogfighting — occur right here in our state. In fact, Pennsylvania has more contests than almost any other state, with January and February being peak season.

In these detestable spectacles, participants kill native wild animals for cash, prizes or simply entertainment. This is unethical. It is also unsporting. “Competitors” often use high-tech equipment, including powerful guns and electronic calling devices. Readers identifying as hunters will likely agree that this violates the principles of a fair chase.

Those passionate about conservation and our native wildlife may already know that the contests do not align with scientifically based population control or wildlife management, but may even throw native ecosystems off balance by removing vital species from their habitats.

These horrific events have attracted significant negative media attention, including social media posts of participants grinning next to piles of dead animals. Many Pennsylvanians are outraged by this, prompting county and city governments — among them Pittsburgh, Carlisle, Bellevue, Sharpsburg, Braddock and Wilkinsburg — to pass resolutions or proclamations calling for a statewide ban.

The Pennsylvania Game Commission must follow suit and ensure that these contests no longer happen on Pennsylvania soil.

Christina Hoenig, Fox Chapel

Bridge collapse is a wake-up call to government

The recent collapse of the Fern Hollow Bridge in Pittsburgh’s Frick Park is a wake-up call to correct misguided government spending priorities.

Pennsylvania’s 2021-22 budget is $39.8 billion. Allegheny County approved an operating budget of $942.5 million and $182.5 million in a capital improvement budget. The City of Pittsburgh is spending $613 million in its operating budget and $158.2 million in the capital budget. Included in all these budgets are parts of the $2.6 billion in federal covid relief grants.

You’d think with all this funding at their disposal, our leaders would make road and bridge safety a top priority since a major task of local government is public safety and infrastructure.

A significant portion of the funding from gas taxes originally earmarked for road and bridge maintenance and construction is siphoned to help support mass transit and the general budget.

In addition, state and local governments spend considerably on so-called sustainable projects such as expensive electric vehicles and bicycle lanes that are lightly used.

Unfortunately, many of our progressive elected officials have squandered this government largesse over the years on trendy initiatives that have robbed needed funding from infrastructure. And they have done this mostly against the will of the majority.

It’s time to stop the insanity and get our priorities straight!

Dave Majernik, Plum