Letters to the Editor

By NEMS Daily Journal

Saltillo resident supports appointive police chief
I am writing about the decision to change the Saltillo Police Chief position to an appointed position, but in support of the decision.
I have lived in or just outside the Saltillo city limits for the past 27 years and have known and worked with all five Police Chiefs during this period. Since the elected position has been used, the only requirements to hold this title has been to be 18 years of age, a Saltillo resident and have $25 to register. Thank God our current chief meets and exceeds all those qualifications and has the experience after working under different sheriffs and as chief deputy to run this important office.
What if Chief Brooks decided to retire or his health failed? Who would get the job then? Maybe the 18-year-old Saltillo resident with $25, or would we advertise for someone experienced in law enforcement or with a degree in criminal justice and a knowledge of budgets, scheduling man hours and running an office.
Chief Brooks is my close personal friend and I hope he never leaves Saltillo as police chief, but just as my time came to retire, so will his, and under the appointed system he would have great input into who would replace him and carry on his programs.
One other thought was that some of the ones who protested this move voted for the same move under the previous administration. Sort of puzzles me that it was good under that administration but not under this one.
True, I lost my vote on this position, but at least I know that when Chief Brooks retires, he will be replaced with someone who is capable of running this office.
Donald Cullum
Saltillo

Appointive chief invites politics into the position
Saltillo appointed chief of police?
Doesn’t make sense. It puts too much politics into the job.
Why not elect the police chief and appoint the mayor and aldermen? Make more sense?
Ann M. Johnston
Corinth

‘Vulture’ picture applies to tax-picking Tupelo
I would like to respond to the article by Emily Le Coz in the Sunday, April 18, Journal which concerned the annexation. I was not sure if an “analysis” article is supposed to be journalistic or opinion. Regardless, it was an excellent example of the ability to convey an idea by choice of words, without explicitly stating the opinion.
The “vulture” statement effectively skewered all the opponents of the Tupelo annexation without actually making the statement. Although she did state some of the opposition’s points, she did not give any negative implication at all for the Tupelo initiative. Personally, I would think that the “vulture implication” would apply equally to a city seeking to pick the taxes from unwilling annexation victims’ bones.
Speaking of words, Bill Clinton recently implied that any future violence against the administration or the government might be the fault of those involved in the tea party movement, without explicitly stating the fact. It was just a “warning to be careful,” but such statements by those in authority or in celebrity status is essentially intimidation, intended to dampen the enthusiasm of those in opposition to the authoritarian policy.
It is clear that we are witnessing active efforts by our government and media to discourage the free speech of honest, law-abiding citizens. Whenever we, as law-abiding citizens, start to have to be that careful of what we say, there is already a problem in our nation. Many of the tea party poster examples which have been shown as examples of “hate” simply denounce administration policies as socialism or anti-American. I am sure that there have been a few questionable ones, but for the most part none more demeaning than the false accusations against the tea party participants. Bill Clinton is correct in that words mean things and have consequences.
Citizens in America (particularly conservatives) are being warned from all levels to “be careful.” The example has already been set at national level, that the will of the people is falling on deaf ears and is not to interfere with the “government authorities” who “know best for us.” This is all the more reason to be sure of our citizenship in Heaven, by faith and acceptance of Jesus as our Savior. Earthly citizenship doesn’t cut it for eternal security, not even in America.
Short version: The government is in charge. Citizens don’t count or are suppressed. We better look up.
Sammy Peach
Saltillo

White-coated visitor also known to a Tupelo man
I wish to express my empathy to the survivors of the earthquake in Haiti.
There is one survivor in particular named Evan Muncie who caught my immediate attention. He remained buried under debris for almost a month before finally being rescued. He reported that he was fed and kept alive by a man wearing a white uniform. I was moved by his report because I also was visited by a man wearing a white uniform (not a nurse nor doctor) some years ago when I suffered an accident that almost claimed my life.
On a Thursday of August 1975 I was working with some timber when a tree suddenly fell on me and I suffered from broken bones in my back, a crushed chest and a dislocated neck. A man found me and carried me to Water Valley Hospital. However, once I arrived at Water Valley Hospital, it was said that there was nothing that they could do for me. That Sunday night, I heard a voice tell me to raise my hands up to the sides of my head. Confused, I thought, “Who is speaking to me and besides, I can’t move.” The voice told me again to raise my hands up to the sides of my head and to my own surprise, I was able to do exactly as the voice instructed.
Then all of a sudden, I felt a hand reach down and under my back and the hand propped me up in my bed. That’s when a man wearing a white uniform appeared, pulled up a seat, sat next to my bed, and began to speak to me about my injuries. The last thing he said to me before he disappeared was “You can get up whenever you are ready.” That following Monday morning through Wednesday afternoon the doctors took X-rays and did other tests. They were unable to find anything wrong with me. They did not understand that I was healed that Sunday.
I am unsure of the identify of this person in the white uniform. Thank you so much for allowing me to share and may God bless the people of Haiti in a most mighty way.
George O. Pritchard
Tupelo

Old name suggested for Ole Miss mascot
I would like to give my personal opinion about doing away with Col. Rebel as mascot at Ole Miss.
This is an obvious attempt to kowtow to the racists in this country. When I first started going to Ole Miss back in the 1950s, there was an honorable old black man named Blind Jim. He had been blind for years and he would get up on the platform to speak and he would always say he had been going to Ole Miss football games for 30 years and he had never seen them lose a game.
I would suggest that the new chancellor name the new mascot Blind Jim.
Bill White
Booneville

‘Chocolate gravy’ article revived sweet memories
What great memories the article about chocolate gravy brought back!
It was always a very special treat my daddy made on Sunday mornings before church. His homemade biscuits and the hot creamy chocolate gravy with a tall glass of cold milk was the perfect send off for a day in worship. And, now that I am older, I realize what pleasure he had preparing it for us and how much he loved us.
Our mom and dad both were raised in Tennessee and they knew something about Southern cooking. Mom’s fried chicken and Daddy’s gravy were always something.
We are a family of three girls, and Daddy always treated each of us as someone special. And we were, in his eyes.
Sibyl Overstreet
Edmond, Okla.

Tupelo’s annexation seen as gaining developed land
On March 31, the Daily Journal reported on the illogical logic used to justify Tupelo’s proposed annexation.
The city wants to annex 16.15 square miles of what I consider totally developed land with the supposed intent to improve its developmental land ratio of developed to undeveloped real estate. Planner Pat Falkner said the city’s development land is at 18 percent and needs to be at 20 percent to 40 percent. By annexing already developed land to their existing developed land, the ratio of undeveloped land will be reduced to approximately 14 percent, which will necessitate the necessity to annex additional land to attain the desired ratio of 20 percent to 40 percent.
This is illogical. The only way the city can achieve its goal of 20 percent to 40 percent undeveloped land is to acquire undeveloped land, not developed land. If the city is really interested in developing the city’s resources, it should work within the limits they already have. Drive around the city and you will see vacant business buildings everywhere. These business buildings are unkempt and are a disgrace to the city’s management and governing policies that they are currently responsible for. To annex additional land is only going to increase the mismanagement and governing of additional land. Most of the people moved out of the city to escape the city’s governing control.
The reason this land in the United States was settled was to escape the governing dictatorship of the oppressive government. It appears as though we are heading back to where we came from. The Bill of Rights is all about “we the people” instead of the overpowering and suppressing government. How does the Bill of Rights play in all of this? Do “we the people” have any value and human rights in this whole process? I guess not.
David L. Leatherman
Lee County

‘Payday’ lenders criticized for ‘heartless’ rates
There are men and women for whom a good name is worth more than riches. Payday lenders are not among them. To earn money by taking advantage of unfortunate people is dishonorable. Everybody looks down on this practice except the people who do it. Dave Ramsey called them scum. Arkansas’s attorney general put a stop to it a few years ago and now, Arizona and other states are examining the practice.
I am aware that some people can’t get loans from a bank but to charge them 400 percent interest is heartless. It would be less cruel if the lenders limited their interest rates to a reasonable amount, maybe the amount they would appreciate being charged if the shoe were on the other foot. They probably won’t. Greed trumps all.
Maybe our attorney general will do as Arkansas’s AG did and call a stop to the entire usurious practice.
Ann Ballard
Tupelo