Issue link: https://www.epageflip.net/i/49071
4A Daily News – Thursday, December 1, 2011 Opinion D NEWSAILY RED BLUFF TEHAMACOUNTY T H E V O I C E O F T E H A M A C O U N T Y S I N C E 1 8 8 5 Curriculum Editor: Greg Stevens, Publisher gstevens@redbluffdailynews.com Chip Thompson, Editor editor@redbluffdailynews.com Editorial policy The Daily News opinion is expressed in the editorial. The opinions expressed in columns, letters and cartoons are those of the authors and artists. Letter policy The Daily News welcomes let- ters from its readers on timely topics of public interest. All let- ters must be signed and pro- vide the writer's home street address and home phone num- ber. Anonymous letters, open letters to others, pen names and petition-style letters will not be allowed. Letters should be typed and cannot exceed two double-spaced pages or 500 words. When several letters address the same issue, a cross section of those submit- ted will be considered for publi- cation. Letters will be edited. Letters are published at the discretion of the editor. Mission Statement We believe that a strong com- munity newspaper is essential to a strong community, creating citizens who are better informed and more involved. The Daily News will be the indispensible guide to life and living in Tehama County. We will be the premier provider of local news, information and advertising through our daily newspaper, online edition and other print and Internet vehi- cles. The Daily News will reflect and support the unique identities of Tehama County and its cities; record the history of its com- munities and their people and make a positive difference in the quality of life for the resi- dents and businesses of Tehama County. How to reach us Main office: 527-2151 Classified: 527-2151 Circulation: 527-2151 News tips: 527-2153 Sports: 527-2153 Obituaries: 527-2151 Photo: 527-2153 On the Web www.redbluffdailynews.com Fax Newsroom: 527-9251 Classified: 527-5774 Retail Adv.: 527-5774 Legal Adv.: 527-5774 Business Office: 527-3719 Address 545 Diamond Ave. Red Bluff, CA 96080, or P.O. Box 220 Red Bluff, CA 96080 The Red Bluff Union Ele- mentary school board, with the recommendation of Superinten- dent William McCoy, just adopted a brand new language arts curriculum. This curricu- lum will cost the district about $360,000. In a time of severe budget cuts, where schools are losing programs and laying off teach- ers, how could a board and superintendent justify spending such a large amount of money on fancy new textbooks? The money being spent is unrestrict- ed and therefore available to be used for other purposes such as teacher salaries. Our board and superinten- dent have clearly chosen to buy books over employing teachers or staff. The $360,000 could reduce classroom size, keep our librarians employed for more than just this year or even be used to bring back P.E., music and arts programs. As a parent, I can assure you I would rather have more teach- ers in my children's school or an instructional aide in their class- rooms as opposed to fancy new textbooks. A human educator is far more valuable to my child than any book. It is simple, common sense to not spend money on brand new resources before bringing back the resources we have lost as well as just trying to keep the programs and staff we have right now. Pretty soon we'll have 40- plus kids in our classrooms and no librarians or ELD programs. However, we'll have great, new, wonderful textbooks, just very few teachers left to use them. Carey Koeberer, Red Bluff Blinking light Editor There is a problem on Ante- lope Boulevard with the blink- ing light in front of Antelope School. The light comes on in the morning when children are arriving at the school and comes back on about 2 p.m. or so in the afternoon and doesn't go off until late at night. On our first day of rain this year about 6 p.m. a car next to me slammed on their breaks and the car behind them slid into the oncoming lane to avoid rear ending the car in front of them. Thank God there was no one coming west at that time or there would have been a head- on collision. I called the Red Bluff Police Department and they referred me to the CHP. I called the CHP and they said they would attempt to contact the responsi- ble party about the light. After a couple of weeks nothing changed. About two weeks later I was almost rear ended around 6 p.m. because I slowed down for the blinking light. I called the prin- cipal of Antelope School and talked to him about the problem. He told me it was CalTrans that controlled the light and he was going to talk to them about the problem. That was over a month ago and there still hasn't been any change. There are two problems: The timer needs to be changed to a reasonable time; the sign going east is posted too far down Antelope Boulevard. At this time hardly anyone is paying attention to the light after 4 p.m. Is it going to take a horrific accident to make a change? John Gumm, Red Bluff Nielsen vs. Bird Editor: One of the best things about long holiday weekends is the opportunity to catch up on one's reading. I found it amusing to read the spin from Don Bird and Pat Johnston, claiming that the court decision to place a restraining order against Bird was some kind of victory for Don Bird. Really? Facts usual- ly get in the way of a good story and this case is no exception. I read the article in the paper that said Jim Nielsen won a restraining order against Bird for harassing him and his fam- ily, including driving by their home more than a hundred times, sending threatening handwritten notes and threat- ening a citizen's arrest on Assemblyman Nielsen. Pretty strange behavior if you ask me. Even though he admitted these actions in court, Bird claims he's not a stalker. Really? The court records, available to the public, state the Your Turn Restraining Order against Bird was enforced under section 1708 of the California Civil Code. That code reads, in part, "A person is liable for the tort of stalking when . . . defendant engaged in a pattern of conduct the intent of which was to fol- low, alarm, or harass the plaintiff . . . As a result of that pattern of conduct, the plain- tiff reasonably feared for his or her safety, or the safety of an immediate family member." Seems pretty clear the judge is restraining Bird from stalking Assemblyman Nielsen and his family. As for the $7,500 judgment of attorney's fees that Nielsen won against Bird for his frivo- lous lawsuits, that judgment still stands according to the court. Nielsen could, at any time, enforce that judgment if Don Bird continues his threat- ening behavior in violation of the judge's restraining order. So, what is it again that Bird won? It would seem the answer is nothing unless it is some really negative publicity. Most people wouldn't be real proud to be a confessed stalker. As someone who has lived in Tehama County for 57 years, and observed Bird's erratic attacks on every elected official he could think of, from the sheriff to the Secretary of State, I'm glad someone final- ly stood up to Don Bird's bully tactics. Kevin Brunnemer, Los Molinos Your officials STATE ASSEMBLYMAN — Jim Nielsen (R) State Capitol Bldg., Room 6031 Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 319-2002; Fax (916) 319-2102 STATE SENATOR — Doug LaMalfa (R) State Capitol Bldg., Room 3070 Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 651-4004; Fax (916) 445-7750 GOVERNOR — Jerry Brown, State Capitol Bldg., Sacramento, CA 95814; (916) 445-2841; Fax (916) 558-3160; E-mail: gover- nor@governor.ca.gov. U.S. REPRESENTATIVE — Wally Herger (R), 2595 Cean- othus Ave., Ste. 182, Chico, CA 95973; 893-8363. U.S.SENATORS — Dianne Feinstein (D), One Post Street, Suite 2450, San Francisco, CA 94104; (415) 393-0707. Fax (415) 393-0710. Barbara Boxer (D), 1700 Montgomery St., Suite 240, San Francisco, CA 94111; (510) 286-8537. Fax (202) 224- 0454. We are not 'The 99 Percent' Commentary As I write, the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement's popu- larity is dropping just about as rapidly as the movement's mass- es are being kicked out of the places across the country they've all but destroyed. What was originally painted as an innocent expression of freedom of speech quickly morphed into a violent temper-tantrum against all forms of normal society generally, and banks and financial institutions specifically. Unlike the Tea Party move- ment which is largely responsi- ble for changing the nature of the debate in Washington, and in 2010, changing the face of Con- gress, OWS will most likely have zero impact on the political process due to lack of substance and provocative style. For a short season, the silent majority caught liberals by sur- prise when they rose to the occa- sion and publicly expressed their views against Obamacare and other far-left policies. They learned in short order that protests alone were useless hav- ing fallen on the deaf ears of a Democratic Party-controlled Washington. Henceforward Tea Partiers became involved in the political process. While there are whispers around Washington suggesting the Tea Party has seemingly lost its punch, it would be wise to remember who controlled the debt ceiling debate a few months back. I genuinely feel sorry for so many of the OWS protestors who still haven't a clue that they were played like pawns on a grand liberal chessboard by those who care little about finan- cial inequality. Liberals are quick to come alongside protes- tors and claim solidarity, but fail to mention they are responsible for much of the mess the protes- tors are marching against. It's all about political power -- and naïve, disenfranchised youth, brainwashed by college profes- sors, bought into the whole "99 percent" marketing ploy. The OWS movement was painted to portray protestors as representative of "the 99 per- cent" of Americans, but, evi- dently the paint was not perma- nent. After untold reports of public nudity, orgies and mas- turbating, personal property defecation, drug overdoses, rob- beries and rapes, Americans have discovered, with immense relief and much thanksgiving that these occupiers are not at all like the rest of us. I can only imagine the protes- tors originally wanted to create some sort of "American Spring" where CEOs and Wall Street Bankers across the country turned in their resignation under duress and gave in to the protestor's demands. Then what? Are the same dred- locked do-gooders going to hold a share- holder's meeting to dis- cuss the way ahead? Not likely. Likewise, during the Arab Spring protests, protestors fought for change, but when it arrived they didn't have a clue what to do with it. As I've watched the coverage of the Occupy protests, I have tried to gleam some sort of common thread binding them all together, and all I can come up with is anger. But to what end? Anger without purpose is dangerous. Susan Brown accomplish anything. There's no lasting energy. The Civil Rights movement had a singu- lar focus which captivated the nation, and as a result, the movement affected a change in national policy. Simi- larly, the Tea Party movement succeeded in changing the polit- ical focus in the country to fiscal responsibility and smaller government. The Occupy move- ment has only suc- ceeded to annoy and disrupt the lives of innocent people who happen to make a liv- ing in the vicinity of the Occupy parks, and expose the underbelly of the Left as to who they really are — agita- tors. Democrat leaders seemed to hope the OWS movement would sweep across the coun- try and not fizzle out as it has. What they fail to understand is protests absent a purpose, don't Susan Stamper Brown is an op-ed columnist, motivational speaker, military family advocate and grief counselor who writes about politics, the military, the economy and culture. she can be reached at susan@susanstamperbrown.co m.