We welcome your comments. Send them to firstname.lastname@example.org, or post them on our website, rochestercitynewspaper.com, our Facebook page, or our Twitter feed, @roccitynews. Comments of fewer than 350 words have a greater chance of being published, and we do edit selections for publication in print. We don't publish comments sent to other media.
Feedback on feedback
As for Harold Jewell criticizing the Hamilton cast for criticizing Pence (Feedback, November 30): The play is about politics, so political comments seem very appropriate.
As for PK White being skeptical of the wage gap (same): "If it's really happening, sue," seems fair enough. Yet discrimination is often hard to legally prove, and people with plausible legal claims sometimes can't afford lawyers. With women taught to be polite, they sometimes aren't aggressive enough with legal claims (or salary negotiation), and they receive unfair criticism if they are.
Men going into higher-paying fields on average isn't the wage gap per se, but can be a different sexism problem.
Readers responded to Mayor Lovely Warren's intention to eliminate red-light cameras in the City of Rochester (News, December 1):
How about instead of targeting minorities, we instead stick the camera on EVERY single light. I have noticed how the richer/whiter sections of town don't seem to have them as often.
Also, some of the ones with cameras on them have the quickest green to red I have ever seen. I'm on a bike and can't be ticketed by them, but it's ridiculous. So if you want red-light cameras, either make them everywhere or nowhere.
I see the "poor people are targeted victims!" crowd is at it again.
Which makes more sense, that a study was done before these cameras were installed that discovered trouble intersections, or someone said, "Hey, let's stick these in poor neighborhoods!" "Yeah, that's a great idea! We'll target the people who are least likely to pay their fines!" Dummies.
How does this even remotely fix anything? Instead, it says, "Hey, go ahead and run the lights since we no longer have anything to stop us." Maybe what they should do is learn to drive, and if they have more than two unpaid tickets they should have their license revoked.
Should Rachel run?
Former WROC journalist Rachel Barnhart is considering a run for mayor (News, December 5):
I haven't seen too many people more fiercely protective of the city than Rachel, or more proud to be from here. She'd be a good advocate.
She already is hated among the GLBT community for her friendly visits to gay-bashing radio hosts Kimberly and Beck and Lonsberry, and for trying to say that Harry Bronson was out of touch when he certainly is not. She appears to want elected office so bad she is willing to trample over anyone to do it.
I can tell you as part of her campaign, Bronson's sexuality was never mentioned because it wasn't in question. Rachel, of all people, wanted a race on the issues and not identity. And it was never brought up because she's in full support of Bronson and the LGBTQ community.