Letters: Marleau’s legacy | Missing for Mahan | No on Arenas | Return to democracy | A mother’s words

Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor.

Marleau left fans with
a classy body of work

As a Bay Area sports fan for 60-plus years, I have had the pleasure of rooting for an impressive group of athletes and coaches who exude humility and integrity, including, but not limited to Joe Montana, Steph Curry, Steve Kerr, Bruce Bochy, Tara VanDerveer, Buster Posey and the list goes on and on.

That being said the retirement of Sharks icon Patrick Marleau stands out as his long and illustrious NHL career comes to a close. Thank you, Patrick Marleau, “Mr. Shark,” for your brilliant 23-year career, most of which was spent in teal. I will be there when they hoist your No. 12 jersey into the SAP rafters to thank you for always being an incomparable role model, and most of all, a class act. You will be missed by the bleeders of teal.

Barry Goldman-Hall
San Jose

Endorsement Mahan
didn’t get tells the story

Re. “Mahan offers accountability as S.J. mayor,” Page A6, May 4:

It was not surprising to see The Mercury News endorse Matt Mahan for San Jose mayor; it is, however, a disservice to the voting public.

The Mercury completely ignores the elephant in the room: Why did Carl Guardino (hardly a “labor guy”) endorse Cindy Chavez for mayor? Guardino helped Mahan win his council seat, he worked alongside Mahan when Mahan served on SVLG’s board.

One has to ask why someone who has worked so closely with Mahan did not endorse his run for mayor.

The job of the next San Jose mayor will be to work with business, labor, other local governmental bodies, the community. Only one candidate has the track record to do so: Cindy Chavez.

Guardino knows how critical it is to have the right person serve our city as mayor, and that is why he is backing that person: Cindy Chavez.

Jacquie Heffner
San Jose

Arenas lacks character
and accomplishments

San Jose City Councilmember Sylvia Arenas is running for District 1 county supervisor. This after only two years since she was re-elected.

I keep reading she has been “fighting for Santa Clara County families,” but on the whole, I don’t see that the district she represents, or the city for that matter, are better than when she took office six years ago.

Of even more importance to me is the character of those who represent our city. She never came out and denounced the smear campaign against her opponent, Jim Zito, in the 2020 election. I’d have a higher opinion of her if she’d done so, even though I can’t list any significant accomplishments by her as a council member.

Now she doesn’t even want to honor finishing out her term as council member. As a lifelong San Josean and resident in District 8 since 1995 I can’t vote for her.

Mark Milioto Sr.
San Jose

Overturning Roe is return,
not usurping, democracy

So, which side of the Roe argument is really anti-democratic?

The law, and issue, before the Supreme Court is Mississippi’s ban on abortion after 15 weeks. Fundamental rights promised by the Constitution aren’t subject to popular rule, but Justice Samuel Alito’s point in his draft opinion is that abortion isn’t one of them, and until Roe, nobody imagined it might be.

The actual threat to democratic norms is the left’s onslaught on the legitimacy of the Supreme Court. An independent judiciary is the guarantor of the freedoms in the Constitution. Democrats should reflect on how Donald Trump-appointed judges turned back his bogus claims of a stolen 2020 election. The Supreme Court’s job is to say what the law is, not to be a body of philosopher-kings to impose progressive outcomes.

Overturning Roe won’t usurp democracy. It will put the abortion debate back where it belongs in a democracy – for voters to decide.

Gerald Giles
San Jose

Mother’s words could be
true again on abortion

Re. “Report: Draft opinion suggests Roe to be overturned,” Page A1, May 3:

Related Articles

Letters to the Editor |


Letters: Reelect Monroe | Threat to other rights | Court’s legitimacy | Reform high court | Democrats must focus | Stop spending

Letters to the Editor |


Letters: Tax myth | We must pay | Vote Kumagai | Emulating dictators | Codify abortion

Letters to the Editor |


Letters: BART’s cost | 49ers’ gift | Playing catch-up | Abortion rights

Letters to the Editor |


Letters: Common sense | Supporting abuse victims | Radical action | Student guidance | SCOTUS leaker

Letters to the Editor |


Letters: Protect abortion | Sharing burden | Vote on plan | San Mateo County sheriff | DMV ill-suited | Conflicting policies

When I was growing up in the ’50s and ’60s, my mother had a rule for my sister and me. Before she would consider us adults, we had to open a bank account in our own names and earn enough money for a trip to Sweden if we ever needed to have a safe and legal abortion.

When Roe vs Wade became the law of the land, we believed we would no longer need that safeguard against the threat of an unwanted or dangerous pregnancy. Now it appears both my daughters and my granddaughter will have to follow my mother’s sage advice.

Mom knew, as women, that my sister and I would have to fend for ourselves. She was right back then, and sadly, it appears she is right today.

Nancy Mangini
Redwood City

Published
Categorized as Popular

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.