Letters: You are wrong about Jim Jordan. He 'brings to light the inequities of conduct'

Jim Jordan has good reasons

In response to Susan B. West’s April 16 letter “Jim Jordan The Intimidator," I really must say that anyone who finds issue with the way Jim Jordan brings to light the inequities of conduct of opposing politicians simply isn’t paying attention.

Letters: Jim Jordan is Ohio's embarrassment. Frank LaRose's Householder excuse is hilarious

In a rational political environment citizens should be thankful for people like Jordan.

Yes, admittedly Jordan may appear to be defending the right side of the aisle far more often than the left, but this is out of necessity, not choice. It seems that everything the left does goes unchallenged, no matter the degree of deceit or criminality, but if a politician or the right, ( for example Donald Trump) as much as makes a simple recorded telephone call, committing no crime whatsoever, the left pursues him to the point of impeachment. Someone must point out these inequities.

New Yorker: My city is expensive, at times smelly, but Jordan is wrong to call it crime ridden

They are the unfair double standards that exist in Washington and therefore must be challenged openly and publicly.

West must surely see there is no shortage of farcical and unfounded attacks against Trump, or anyone across the aisle for any trivial reason, purely to cast doubt, divide and damage the credibility of anyone who would attempt to block their efforts to reshape America according to their agenda.

Rather than condemn Jordan we should ask “why” he feels he must always defend his party.

John Booth, Columbus

Poor Frank LaRose

Re "Corrupt mastermind's plot shows frailty of our state's constitution," April 12: Poor Secretary of State Frank LaRose, shouldn’t we pity him?

Last year he was for cutting out an August primary.

Now this year he is against that change.

He makes a boogeyman out of Larry Householder and hopes to frighten us on something that might have happened. But he says nothing about the actual specter of the Ohio Redistricting Commission, of which he was a member, defying the state supreme court with the result of gerrymandered legislative districts.

With him having such a bad case of being for it before he is against it, will he hope to change back again next year?

Who knows?

But stay tuned to see what comes next. The chase to stymie other initiatives is such an interesting story to be watching as it unfolds.

George W. Bain, Athens

More: How to submit a letter to the editor for The Columbus Dispatch

We've changed

Re "This must stop" April 16: I agree with the thrust of the editorial. However, once again we are looking for solutions in the wrong corner of the room.

Consider: the Colt revolver, the first weapon to fire multiple times without reloading, was invented in 1836; the first semiautomatic rifle in 1885; the clip-fed M1 rifle in 1942. Yet it is only in the recent past that the mass killings have proliferated. Why? What has changed?

Not the weaponry.

We — society — have changed. Our means of communication, our methods of relating to others, our sense of social conscience, our identification as a member of our community, have all changed.

Our view: 'Bullets slice through flesh and shatter bone... People die.' This must stop

So, why do we continually look to change the one constant factor, and not toanalyze and correct the factors which have changed? Because it is easier. Because it is something "they" (legislators, law enforcement) have to do, not something we, you and I, have to do.

Until we act on the true cause, any change to the means is meaningless.

John Platt, Arlington

This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: Jim Jordan defending the right 'out of necessity, not choice'