VIEWPOINTS
Saturday, March 4, 2017
East Oregonian
Page 5A
The greatest generation legacy
I
n recent weeks, I have had numerous
reasons to ponder and reflect upon the
impact the Greatest Generation has had
on my life and, quite frankly, our entire
country and even global community.
Specifically, I attended the funeral service
for a lady who had the style and beauty of
a Hollywood starlet but lived essentially all
of her life in Pendleton.
I also learned of the
passing of a friend of
mine who once helped
recover the bodies of
servicemen killed in a
B-17 crash in the Blue
Mountains. On a more
pleasant note, I spent a
couple of hours visiting
with one of my favorite
neighbors who just
turned 91. When he
was a younger man, he
crossed the Rhine River
into Germany with
Allied forces at the end
of World War II.
The term applied to
this group of people who were born roughly
in the Teens and Twenties, of course, comes
from Tom Brokaw’s book of the same name
and is a simple and spot-on description of the
folks who grew up in the Great Depression
and then fought and won the Second World
War. In the farming community where I
reside, growing up in this era probably
meant that you shared duties milking the
family cow, studied the Palmer method of
handwriting and the toilet facilities were
likely located in a little shack out back of the
house.
I was lucky to have been born at a time
(man walked on the moon and the Mets won
the World Series in the year of my birth)
when the Greatest Generation was in charge
and available for advice in my formative
years.
My favorite uncle was on a minesweeper
in the Pacific for three years and later
became the most influential mentor in
my life. He set an
example of how to be
a productive farmer, a
skilled carpenter and
most importantly a
responsible citizen and
a good man. Five years
after his passing, I still
miss him and wish I
could better emulate
him.
Both of my
grandmothers survived
well into my adult years
and I was fortunate
enough to also be a
neighbor and friend
to one for over twenty
years. She had a heart
far bigger than her diminutive stature and,
like so many others her age, was a foremost
practitioner of the aforementioned Palmer
method.
My other grandmother was a real-life
Rosie the Riveter who worked in the
Portland shipyards during the war and
was tough as nails. She raised two sons
as a single mom before such a thing was
common. My grandfather was born during
Woodrow Wilson’s first term as president
and started farming when horsepower was a
literal term. He got me into farming and told
me a lifetime worth of stories and connected
I was lucky to have
been born at a time
when the Greatest
Generation was
in charge and
available for advice
in my formative
years.
me with a great deal of family and local
history.
Perhaps most significantly, my
grandfather introduced me to a cast
of characters in our area that almost
defies belief. I gleaned advice about
farm equipment repair from a neighbor
who was part of the D-Day invasion at
Normandy. I have become friends with an
unassuming fellow who left high school
before graduation and within months was
fighting in the Battle of the Bulge. I have
been privileged to belong to a dinner group
that includes men who were bomber crew
members shot down and taken as prisoners
of war as well as a survivor of the Battle
of Iwo Jima. Also in the group is a bomber
pilot who flew more than 70 missions in the
Mediterranean area. My former next door
neighbor helped build landing strips on the
islands and atolls in the Pacific campaign.
Too often, in my opinion, we refer to
people as “heroes” for something they
have done or said. The guys mentioned in
the previous paragraph are the real deal —
nothing most of us will ever do can measure
up to their deeds and actions.
This brings me to my final thoughts, for
now, concerning the Greatest Generation
and why I admire their characteristics.
These folks are certainly not without flaw
or imperfection but their collective work
ethic, perseverance, civility and humility are
eminently laudable.
They survived the Depression, war-time
rationing and rescued the world from
tyranny. Many folks in my generation
complain if they don’t have cell service or air
conditioning. The generation prior generally
just went about the business of building the
greatest nation that has ever been without a
M att W ood
FROM THE TRACTOR
lot of fanfare or self-adulation.
Finally, while political disagreements
have always been a part of our culture,
it seems that lately vitriolic rhetoric and
acrimonious behavior enjoys near universal
appeal. In the spirit of political adversaries
Ronald Reagan and Tip O’Neill (who were
“friends after 6 p.m.”), I suggest we all raise
a toast to the Greatest Generation.
■
Matt Wood is his son’s hired man and his
daughter’s biggest fan. He lives on a farm
near Helix, where he collects antiques and
friends.
Stop banning Muslims, and stop banning guns
By RODERICK LONG
The Center for a Stateless Society
The debate over President
Trump’s travel ban and the debate
over gun control look surprisingly
similar — except for who’s on
which side.
In each case, supporters of the
policy argue that it’s necessary in
order to prevent incidents of lethal
violence, while opponents argue,
first, that the policy’s likely impact
on such incidents is overstated, and
second, that it’s unjust to restrict
the freedom of a vast group, most
members of which are peaceful and
innocent, merely on the grounds that
a small percentage of that group’s
members might turn violent.
When the vast group in question
is Muslim immigrants and would-be
immigrants, those defending
restrictive policies tend to be
Republicans, and those in opposition
tend to be Democrats.
On the other hand, when the vast
group in question is gun owners
and would-be gun owners, those
defending restrictive policies tend
to be Democrats, and those in
opposition tend to be Republicans.
Yet it’s hard to see how the
two cases differ in fundamental
principle. Either the state is justified
in disrupting, micromanaging,
and in many cases endangering
large numbers of innocent lives for
the sake of a speculative chance
of blocking a small number of
criminals, or it isn’t. The rights
and wrongs of such a case can’t
magically reverse themselves
depending on whether it’s gun
owners or Muslim immigrants who
are being targeted.
Notice, too, how similar are
the rhetorical appeals made by
proponents of restrictive policies
in both cases. “Look into the
eyes of families impacted by gun
violence,” many Democrats urge,
Quick takes
— Brenda Cannon Daggett
Secret Umatilla strip club?
Same way the strip club looks here in
Milton: window coverings, red rope light.
And if he gets caught he will just bring his
girls over here to dance after hours ... he’s
pretty dedicated to having girls strip.
— Kimber Orozco
Hermiston council considers
replacing EOTEC board
This is probably why the Farm-City Pro
Rodeo board have not signed yet. There is a
lot involved, you have to consider the NFR
and many other issues.
— Rod Osborne
One of the great lessons of the Twitter age is
that much can be summed up in just a few words.
Here are some of this week’s takes. Tweet yours
@Tim_Trainor or email editor@eastoregonian.
com, and keep them to 140 characters.
violence is questionable, given the
existence of a thriving black market
in guns (and given gun ownership’s
role as a deterrent to crime). In
both cases, the cost of government
action is a curtailing of freedom for
millions of harmless people, while
the benefits appear scanty.
Liberals and conservatives both
display inconsistency; each group
employs arguments in connection
with one issue, that they forcefully
reject in connection with the other
issue.
When Donald Trump’s son
compared the risks of letting in
Syrian refugees to eating Skittles
from a bowl in which a small
number of Skittles were poisonous,
liberals were properly outraged,
pointing out that such a comparison
was not only insulting but also
grossly exaggerated the risks
involved. Yet liberal support for
gun control is based on the same
logic as the Skittles comparison
— sacrificing the freedom of
the many in order to ward off a
potential threat from the few — and
likewise ignores evidence of gross
exaggeration of risks.
Liberals who rightly oppose
Trump’s travel ban should consider
looking at their own support for gun
control through the same analytic
lens. And conservatives who
rightly oppose gun control should
likewise consider looking at their
own support for Trump’s travel ban
through that same analytic lens.
Travel bans use the violent
actions of a few as a pretext to
victimize millions of peaceful
Muslims. Gun control laws use the
violent actions of a few as a pretext
to victimize millions of peaceful gun
owners. Neither policy has any place
in a free society.
■
Roderick Long writes for the
Center for a Stateless Society, an
anarchist think tank.
Press is free, and audience free to double-check
Fed. agency kills wolf
Fine them big time and jail them, just
like the guy in Baker County that acciden-
tally shot one. Fine the federal agency and
put the money to the ranches that have lost
livestock.
“and consider how you can dare to
support the rights of gun owners in
the face of these victims’ suffering.”
Or again: “Look into the eyes of
families impacted by domestic
terrorism,” many Republicans urge,
“and consider how you can dare
to support the rights of Muslim
immigrants in the face of these
victims’ suffering.” Each side
finds such emotional blackmail
convincing in one case, while rightly
remaining unmoved by it in the
other. For such appeals invariably
blur the distinction between an
innocent many and a criminal few.
The pragmatic aspects of the two
policies are similar also. A travel
ban’s likely impact on terrorist acts
is questionable, given that most
recent acts of terrorism within the
United States have been homegrown
(and given that many of those
blocked from entry are potential
allies against terrorism). Similarly,
gun control’s likely impact on gun
By LLOYD PIERCY
Farmer Lloyd
T
he press has never been more free
than it is right now. The only thing
under attack is big media’s ability to
monopolize a narrative and guide the viewer
to a conclusion of its liking.
The proof: I sit in my kitchen in rural
Eastern Oregon at 5 a.m. on a Sunday
reading an article from the Dallas Tribune. I
just finished one from the Arizona Star and
am checking them against articles in my
Wall Street Journal. I just want to see if the
morning network television news is accurate.
I look up Mexican immigration law and
practice and follow the legal changes from
1910 until now. I am able to get reputable
reports on the makeup of Mexican border
crossings from both the U.S. and Mexican
government sites. I read actual deportation
numbers with details.
Television network news reported
Mexican U.S. border crossings are at net
neutral, and it turns out that is basically
correct, but what they left out changes the
narrative completely. Most of the border
crossings are by Central Americans not
Mexicans (close to 90 percent) and also
lots of other nationals cross that way.
They are able to buy a 20-day transit pass
when entering Mexico from Guatemala
giving them time to cross into the U.S.
with Mexican help without fear of police
interference. They cannot stay or work and
must be able to afford the transit so they bring
cash.
The U.S. president was made to look
foolish and treated with contempt by TV
news that omitted these very relevant facts.
A lot of the immigration into Mexico is
by U.S. pensioners or by Mexicans who
are now eligible for U.S. social security.
A U.S. pensioner is not allowed to work,
own property and must have $74.95 per day
for every day they will stay in Mexico. So
Mexico is making bank on its immigration.
The next story I followed was the
president’s inclusion of Sweden as one of the
countries under attack by Islamic immigrants.
TV news reported one Swedish government
official as asking “What is Mr. Trump
smoking?” TV news wallowed in their
disdain for Mr. Trump’s lack of intelligence.
Having recently traveled to Sweden I
thought there was more to this story. Of more
than 275,000 refugees from the Middle East
given sanctuary in Sweden, officials are now
worried about more than 300 returning from
fighting for ISIS. Swedish law allows them
back. The party chairman of the Swedish
Democratic Party said in a Wall Street
Journal article that riots and civil unrest are
now part of everyday life in Sweden.
Despite the strictest gun laws in
Scandinavian countries, the immigrant
communities have a level of gun violence
five times more than any other Scandinavian
city. Artists and writers now live under death
fatwas issued by Islamic clerics for creating
in a way perfectly legal in Sweden but an
offense to Islam. Islam is now Sweden’s
second largest religion. Sweden had its first
suicide bomber in 2010.
I don’t know what the answer is, but
apparently suggesting a problem exists is
grounds for ridicule by the keepers of the
free press. You might conclude that I am a
Trump guy or anti-immigration or just nuts
if you need to. You would be wrong (except
perhaps the nuts part.) I don’t have solutions,
I just know that we are not served well by
half truth.
I am frightened by what is happening
now as big media proves it cannot be trusted.
Every media story I debunked turned out to
be guided more by intended outcome than
truth.
The fair is August 12 in Umatilla County,
so fairness still exists. I savor a free press; it is
what makes America. John McCain’s civics
lesson was nice but he targeted the wrong
folks — no one gets to claim truth. Freedom
of the press works, but it also requires work.
■
Lloyd Piercy is a farmer in Echo.