Dear Editor, Over the years I’ve mostly enjoyed reading your paper. I always found your opinion page, especially the Red vs Blue columns stimulating. However, that has changed over the last few years, especially since you eliminated the Red column. Mr. Flannery has turned nasty and personal, not to mention misleading, and I use that term kindly. But his column in your last edition, titled “Republicans War on the Right to Vote” was the proverbial “straw that broke the camel’s back”. Either he is totally ignorant, ignorant of history, or is just an out and out liar; take your pick. On the off chance he is ignorant of history, allow me to school him. The Dred Scott decision was a 7-2 decision. Of the seven in the majority six had southern sympathies, read Democrats. In my opinion the Dred Scott decision hasten the Civil War, A Republican war. There is little doubt that if the Democrats had won in 1860 there would not have been a Civil War and slavery would have continued. He is disingenuous as he tries to paint the Republicans with the crimes of his party. For his information, it was the Democrats that favored slavery, it was the Democrats that enacted Jim Crow laws, it was the Democrats that founded the Klu Klux Clan, and it was the Democrats that opposed the Civil Rights bills of the 1960’s. Maybe he isn’t familiar with the term the “solid south” that was used to describe the Democrat controlled southern states. If it hadn’t been for Everitt Dirksen and the Republicans the Civil rights bills of the 1960’s would not have passed because President Johnson could not count on the southern Democratic Senators to end the ongoing filibuster, which they had started. The Democratic Party was the party of slavery and remained as such into the 1960’s, just another form of slavery. In my opinion it was the passage of the Civil Rights acts of the 1960’s that finally “broke” the solid Democratic south. In fact if you are going to be factual, all the voter suppression laws Mr. Flannery mentions, poll tax, literacy test, not allowed to sit on a jury, etc. were all laws originated by Democrats after reconstruction and during the days of the “solid South”. He then commences to mislead everyone, about the Georgia recently passed voting bills. He mischaracterized so much of it that it would take a thesis to undue his sophomoric attempt to mis-lead, but let’s just tackle one of them. He says the law will prohibit distributing food and drinks to those waiting in line. He insinuates that this is a form of voter suppression. That is a complete misrepresentation and he should know that. It prohibits third parties from distributing anything within 150’ of a voting place and within 25 feet of a voter. However, what he doesn’t say is that voters are allowed to bring their own food and/or water, that polling workers are allowed to set up non-attended water dispenses, and that anyone can provide food and/or water outside the 150 ‘and 25’ rule. I guess he hides behind his wording ...to voters waiting in line”. Another thing, it’s interesting that there are numerous peer reviewed studies that affirm that unregulated mail in voting and no voter ID are ripe conditions for voting fraud. Georgia will provide a Georgian with a voter ID card, free of charge which will satisfy the requirement for voter ID. I have a hard time understanding the left’s rant about voter ID. My God, we need a photo ID to do just about anything today but we shouldn’t have one to protect one of the basic corner stones of democracy, voting? I thought Mr. Flannery was all for protecting democracy. I also read the column from Kathryn Kadilak about encouraging Virginians to vote Democratic because of their stand on abortion. I assume Ms. Kadilak is pro-choice and subscribes to the mantra “my body my choice”. I wonder if she is pro vaccine mandate or anti-vaccine mandate. Shouldn’t “my body, my choice” apply across the spectrum or should it only apply when you are killing babies? I would hope that in the future you would do a better job of providing more well-rounded and factual discussions and less wild and unsubstantiated rants, especially from Mr. Flannery.