Viewers need political fact-checking in real-time
I agree with Josh Levs’ comments in his June 25 AJC essay, “Debates must be ‘arson for truth,’” about the need for truth in presidential debates. But I disagree with his personal recommendation “that people who care about truth skip the debates and instead consume fact-checked work in the following days.”
I instead challenge the networks and ask: Why, in this day and age of artificial intelligence and instant response to computer-generated questions, can we not fact-check during the debate on screen in real-time, so viewers can distinguish truth from lies as soon as they are spoken?
WILLIAM BAER, MARIETTA
Duncan’s anti-Trump campaign harms his political future
Geoff Duncan’s repetitive “anti-Trump/vote for Biden” opinion pieces are like the ever-present Citizens’ Climate Lobby’s letters, where any significant weather or environmental event unleashes a torrent touting the climate activists’ cause. For Duncan, any political event — such as the June 27 debate — propels another plea for other Republican turncoats to vote for President Joe Biden.
As Duncan digs a deeper and deeper Trump Derangement Syndrome hole, he appears shallower and shallower. His crusade to turn voters against former President Donald Trump and toward Biden might play well on CNN and in the leftward corners of AJC readership, but his political future is dead unless it’s as a Democrat. “Not that there’s anything wrong with that,” as Seinfeld might allow.
Considering that Democrats — especially those in the Biden administration — are as far from the conservative positions Duncan claims to have as Democrats have ever been, Duncan’s repetitive rants make him appear closer to a political fool than a conservative leader.
GREGORY MARSHALL, MARIETTA
Court system unfairly holding inmates in limbo over appeals
Regarding the June 23 front-page article “His case was neglected for over 20 years,” about Leslie Singleton, an inmate at Coffee Correctional Facility:
Imagine living in a cell after 20 years of applying for an appeal. The hope is that your case might be reviewed one day, but nothing has moved. Our court system has been holding inmates in limbo, but how does it affect them? Everyone has a right to appeal.
This article showed how inmates can be forgotten after conviction. Each one waiting for an appeal response needs to be contacted. Although an apology cannot fix the situation, it shows that they are not animals in a cell but people who deserve to be heard.
A better system for tracking the progress of an appeal should be implemented. As mentioned in the article, 20% (70) of 350 cases have been waiting for an appeal for more than 10 years. A new system would give some hope to people who are waiting.
Thanks to Mr. Singleton, there is hope for the inmates, and, thankfully, it is being acknowledged.
ANGELICA CASTOLO, GRADUATE STUDENT, UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA SCHOOL OF SOCIAL WORK
Relaxed housing restrictions could open doors for families
With a little flexibility, the NIMBYs (”not in my backyard”) could help make our city a better place and benefit, too.
Just allow the city to relax single-family zoning restrictions a little. Keep the main portion of a home at 60% to 70%, but allow the elderly, even an elderly NIMBY, to rent a basement, upstairs or garage apartment to a young nurse or other caring type. Allow the never-at-home to rent to a young police officer (A NIMBY might like a patrol car in the driveway). Allow the financially strapped to stay in their home, and maybe a NIMBY could enjoy having a young family around.
These allowances could produce thousands of housing opportunities overnight, making the local zoning board the hero.
TERRENCE L. LOVE, PH.D., SANDY SPRINGS
