Letters to the editor: Idaho Freedom Foundation, Raúl Labrador, BSU chaplain
IFF and PPP
On Wayne Hoffman’s defense of what he refers to as “my organization.” The PPP loans can be forgiven if the recipient applies for forgiveness within 8 or 24 months after disbursement of the funds. Wayne does not tell us if he has applied for this forgiveness or if he will.
The fact that it is carried on his balance sheet is an accounting requirement, not something he voluntarily elected to do.
The PPP funds were to be lent to businesses. IFF proclaims to be a 501(C) 3 nonprofit. So does Hoffman’s organization qualify for a loan?
A nonprofit is an organization that furthers a social cause and provides a public benefit. Local nonprofits provide scholarships, sheltering for homeless, free food, rental assistance, etc. What public benefit does a staff of seven at IFF provide?
Nonprofits can lobby but with strict restrictions on the amount. For example a small nonprofit can spend 20% of its annual purpose expenditures to lobby. How does IFF expend 80% of its funds and for what “public benefit”?
If we are not experiencing a “so-called pandemic,” what do we call 300,000 deaths from a virus?
Bob Fritsch, Boise
BSU chaplain
I compliment President Marlene Tromp on her reasoned and fair response to the request from the Freedom From Religion Foundation, that Boise State University terminate the football chaplaincy. I would hate for any readers, however, to believe the argument made by the Freedom From Religion Foundation. They asserted that the football chaplaincy is a constitutional violation of the “separation of church and state.” However, their claim is clearly not true, since the U.S. Constitution never designates a separation between church and state. The phrase “separation between church and state” became popularized after Thomas Jefferson used it in an 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut. The actual words in the Constitution regarding religion are found in the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .”
G. Dawn Craner, Boise
Labrador
Lawyers get paid handsomely to convince judges/juries that their lawyer perspective on the facts/truth is more accurate than the opposing litigant’s. Lawyers get paid to manufacture narratives that disregard pertinent facts that don’t support their verbal maneuvering and conclusions. Example: a response by Idaho lawyer and former congressman Raúl Labrador castigated the Statesman for “disingenuously” comparing the COVID-19 pandemic to the worldwide carnage suffered during World War II (over 80 million killed worldwide). Raul conveniently “overlooked” the fact that in less than a year, COVID-19 has already claimed almost as many American lives (350,000) as the total American casualties suffered after four years of World War II (407,000). Lawyers are famous for opportunistically “juggling” numbers. Raúl then proceeds to blame the Statesman/media for encouraging patriotic Americans to wear face masks to help limit the spread of COVID-19, when in fact it’s doctors (nearly 100% of them worldwide) who most strongly advocate wearing face masks to combat spreading COVID-19.
Wear the mask.
Michael F. Howard, Boise
Labrador’s nonsense
I don’t have the public standing that Mr. Labrador has to write a quarter page political ad for free, so I must be brief.
You, by your own choice, decided to be a public figure. You — sitting, standing, walking — without a mask in a mask-required environment is news. Your belief that the use of masks is overrated just shows your lack of belief in science and medicine. You, a public figure, decided to thumb your nose at the rules. Implying that rules do not apply to you! You could have gone anywhere in Canyon County and shopped.
You continue with more nonsense saying that “This cheap political attack” comes one day after an opinion piece regarding the sacrifices that people made during WWII and somehow weave the number of deaths as a result of the war into your rant. The op-ed was about the sacrifices made compared to what we are being asked to sacrifice today. Your dismissal of the sacrifices that my parents’ generation made in the war effort are offensive to me. And their parents had the unique experience of dealing with World War I, Spanish Flu and a worldwide depression. Now that was sacrifice.
Guyle Carver, Boise