We're sorry, but the page you were seeking does not exist. It may have been moved or expired. Perhaps our search engine can help.
On June 1, you printed the "Outside editorial" (Patriot Act: First task is to review it) from the Philadelphia Inquirer. Apparently, by printing it, you support its assertions.
Two quotes from the editorial - "In a democracy, citizens need to insist upon laws that closely limit any fraying of the basic liberties that make this nation worth defending," and "Their patriotic duty is not only to safeguard the nation. They must preserve key freedoms" - appear to imply that you question the government for limiting civil liberties. Great. You are against government restricting the personal freedoms of legitimate businesses and private citizens.
But wait. You have repeatedly written that the local Assembly should step in and limit the civil liberties of the citizens of Juneau. You have taken an editorial stance to extend the smoking ban to the bars of Juneau. From this, it appears you are for government restricting the personal freedoms of legitimate businesses and private citizens.
It doesn't matter which side of the different issues you are on. If you are for protecting personal freedoms, you can't pick and choose which ones you want to keep and which ones you want to give up. Does this then mean that the Juneau Empire is hypocritical in its stance on personal freedoms? You bet it does.
Neil L. Atkinson