I want to thank the Lodi News-Sentinel for publishing the column by Cynthia Neely on April 24 regarding attacks on women's issues of equality. Ms. Neely was very articulate and organized, and point by point supported her assertion.
This is why I took exception to the letter by Darrell Baumbach on May 3, accusing her of using this serious issue to promote a political candidate even though she never mentioned the candidate's name. Ms. Neely cited several examples supporting her argument, and Mr. Baumbach repeated two in his letter. However, his only rebuttal was that there are several presidents who think their wives are wonderful people.
Mr. Baumbach makes the presumption that Ms. Neely was attempting to incite women voters rather than her actually speaking to those women who are already upset over the public dialogue over women's rights. Of course there are many women who won't agree with Ms. Neely for a variety of age and philosophical reasons. Mr. Baumbach criticized Ms. Neely for "evoking" Rush Limbaugh's name to further emotionalize an issue that he implies may not actually exist beyond this editorial page. But Rush Limbaugh's three-day tirade epitomizes much of the issue she presents.
After the hundreds of published letters which can be construed as "inflammatory," to raise concerns about this one of Ms. Neely's being political in the Lodi News-Sentinel's Opinion section is actually humorous, not to mention suspicious. This is especially ironic when, after criticizing Ms. Neely for political pandering, a good portion of his letter's conclusion takes the opportunity to promote his own political views. And he doesn't think inserting president Obama's name on the Opinion page where his name is often railed against by political opponents wouldn't strike an emotional chord?
I think the adage "takes one to know one" may have some application here.