Drug testing a bad idea; Is Rush right? A healthy work force

Drug testing a bad idea

Three cheers for the School Board's rejection of the proposal to drug test Ashland High School football players just because two players were found using drugs off campus.

Such a proposal, to broadly invade students' right of privacy, would have been one more step to indoctrinate our youngsters to accept a surveillance society. A recent study showed that drug testing was ineffective in deterring drug use by athletes. The disciplinary mindset of a football coach may be a sound source for mobilizing a winning team, but not for creating a school culture that values civil liberties.

A similar authoritarian proposal has come from City Councilmember Greg Lemhouse. One old geezer wandered nude around town for a week, one child cried, and Lemhouse's knee jerk response is to propose a new law to clamp down on nudity — as if two nudes in two years were an epidemic.

We need more mature and measured leadership to set examples for our young if we want to keep alive our great heritage of liberty. This is Ashland, Ore., not Crawford, Texas. Let's hope the City Council dismisses the badly conceived Lemhouse proposal as quickly as the School Board disposed of the useless and bad idea of drug testing.

Ralph Temple

Ashland

Is Rush right?

I heard Rush Limbaugh speaking about the war after the election. He was saying that we will hear no more anti-war talk from the left now. Wow, I thought, he wasn't listening to President Obama. He had promised us we would get out of these crazy wars, and as usual Rush is a idiot. Now it's been about eight months and we are deeper than ever into both wars, with more troops proposed by the Obama administration. My question is this, Mr. Cavanaugh and Mr. Honoré, Women in Black and all the rest of you: Your silence is screaming "Rush is right."

Rod Monroe

Talent

A healthy work force

How come our labor pool is not considered part of our infrastructure? An educated and healthy work force is vital to our economic recovery. Why give hundreds of billions of dollars to Wall Street? The money needs to be spent quickly; the government has to prod them to do it. Money for the working poor (and Social Security) is spent almost immediately. The best bang for the buck is to pay the ones hurt the most by the mistakes of the greedy. Fair and effective.

Paul Grimsrud

Ashland