Matt Grocott

Sometimes after writing a column and reading some of the responses, it can be difficult to let certain statements go unchallenged. So it is after reading a number of letters to the editor and online comments to my last piece, “Our US Constitution.” Originally, I had planned to write a follow-up piece to bolster some of the points I had made. Instead, what follows is a rebuttal to points made by others. Meanwhile, the draft of what was planned will have to wait for another day.

The first comment I wish to address was made by an anonymous person. Online, they go by the handle, “Tafhdyd.” Responding to my observation that the Trump administration doubled the number of questions on the citizenship test, this person wrote, “Do you really believe that the purpose of increasing the citizenship test questions from 10 to 20 was to make new citizens better informed our country? Anyone who has followed the actions of Trump before and during his presidency can see that the sole purpose is to further restrict the ability of non-English speaking immigrants to become citizens.”

Recommended for you

Recommended for you

(7) comments

Tafhdyd

Mr. Grocott,

I appreciate the fact that you are a dyed in the wool Trump fan and I am not. What I stated is my opinion and I will stick with it.

I cited an example in the next sentence after the quote you mentioned. I said that many people feel that the wording was changed slightly on some questions to make it more subjective rather than objective. I didn’t mention it in my comments at the time but the Trump administration also changed the answers on some questions to an actual wrong answer. Example: Who does a U.S. Senator represent? Answer, all the people of their state or the people of their state. Trump’s answer, the citizens of their state. Senators represent all the people of their state not just the citizens. If that were the case people legally here and children would not be represented. I concluded by offering a suggestion of doing a better job of educating our own citizens before we make things more difficult for others. There are some studies that show up to 30% of our own citizens can’t pass the test as it was.

It wasn’t mentioned in my previous comment but Trump’s dislike for minorities and some immigrants is well known. The purpose of trying to include a citizenship question on the 2020 Census form, which was stopped by the SCOTUS, was to intimidate minorities and non-citizens so they may not fill in the forms and be counted. The obvious reason is that most of the minorities are in Democratic states and that would reduce the number of congressmen when the allocations on number of people are made. Don’t forget in his own words he said he did not want people coming into the US from S##t H*%e countries.

Dirk van Ulden

Taffy - tell me again why non-citizens should be represented by a Congressman/woman or a Senator? I was on a 'green card' here for several years and because of that inability to vote, own firearms or become represented, I became a citizen. There is no country in the world that believes that non-citizens should have a voice in their government. And also, how would the census have intimidated minorities? I was a door knocker during the last census, and believe me, no minority person was overlooked on my routes unless they simply refused to participate. Many non-minorities refused as well. Even those with limited English proficiency were more than happy to answer all questions. Please don't repeat innuendo from the Left as there is no factual basis for your statements.

Tafhdyd

Dirk,

Perhaps you read my comments too fast. Tell me again where I said non-citizens should have a voice in the government? Tell me again where I said that the Census would intimidate minorities? I did say that a Senator represents all people of their state. Are you saying that persons legally residing is the US, be it by green card, visa or some other condition, can't send a letter to a representative and offer a suggestion on how to improve a situation, a law, a National or State Park? I did say that Trump's citizenship question on the Census would intimidate minorities. From what I remember of the creation of the Census, there job is to count all the people, not count only citizens, for the purpose of determining the number of representatives for each state. Being as more minorities typically live in blue states than red states, it is an obvious political ploy to reduce the blue states number of reps. If they can intimidate minorities so they don't respond and be counted it will help balance the numbers of representatives without actually increasing the the reps in the red states.

Jorg

Dirk: Correction: you don't need to be a US citizen to own firearms. Why would you?

Tafhdyd

I have a clarification on one thought in my comment. In the sentence "If that were the case people legally here...." should be "If you go the next step and say that only citizens can legally vote, they would only represent people eligible to vote. If that were the case people legally here and children would not be represented." It originally sounded like I didn't consider children citizens. Obviously children born here are citizens but they can't vote. Now that I have thoroughly muddied the water, have a nice day.

Ray Fowler

Matt

Thanks for taking the time to rebut some remarks that oppose your point of view. This is truly what is meant by freedom of expression in the marketplace of ideas.

I enjoy your columns, and I enjoy hearing other points of view even when I disagree with them.

While the gentlemen mentioned in today's column were reacting to your earlier opinion piece on the Constitution in a reasonable manner, too often, we see comments offering rants instead of rationale. Yes... ranting is permitted and protected by the First Amendment, however, ranting can distract from the truth and clarity we would like to see when examining both sides of an issue. Ranting also lacks civility. Perhaps we (myself included) can ratchet down our exchange in the marketplace of ideas and try to bring more value to the daily discourse. There is no harm in trying...

Terence Y

Mr. Grocott - thank you for using your forum to rebut questionable assertions and criticisms. Your column today is comparable to watching the WWE Friday Night SmackDown. A Tuesday Morning SmackDown, if you will. Looking forward to your next columns.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.

Thank you for visiting the Daily Journal.

Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading. To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.

We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.

A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!

Want to join the discussion?

Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.

Already a subscriber? Login Here