Crutchfield endorsement

I am writing to express my appreciation and support for Rep. Kevin Crutchfield. In the work he has done in his first year in office, he has consistently demonstrated his unwavering support for local businesses, making him an exemplary representative for District 82 in the North Carolina House of Representatives.

As a small family-owned business in Cabarrus County, I know first had the difficulties in dealing with the bureaucratic process. After meeting Rep. Crutchfield, he took the time to come out to our business and meet with my staff and me to learn more about our business and understand the industry-specific challenges we face. He truly goes above and beyond to serve the people of Cabarrus County.

His commitment to family values underscores the genuine connection the Crutchfields have with our community. It is evident that family is a central motivator for Kevin’s political aspirations, and his desire to represent District 82 is rooted in a genuine concern for the well-being of the people he calls neighbors.

Kevin Crutchfield is the ideal candidate to represent District 82 in the North Carolina House of Representatives. His track record of success in business, coupled with his deep roots in the community and commitment to family values, positions him as a leader who genuinely understands and cares for the needs of our district. I encourage our community members to support Kevin Crutchfield in his political aspirations and look forward to witnessing the positive impact he can bring to our beloved District 82.

— Mike Coleman
Concord

Don’t interpret MLK’s words

Around the middle of January, people who would roll back the gains of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s movement do so by couching their agendas behind carefully edited snippets of his words. They prefer “interpreting” his dream to examining the race-based realities he decried and endured. Whitney Peckman takes a different tack. In “Response to Dr. King and DEI,” Salisbury Post 1/18/2024, she suggests we read “Why America May Go to Hell,” the speech that Dr. King was to deliver in Memphis on April 5, but for his assassination the day before.

I hope Dan Larson, of the conservative think-tank John Locke Society, will read it. He may rethink his errant claim that Dr. King would never support “using the power of major institutions, including government to undo the evils of the past.” (“DEI twists MLK’s dream of equality, unity and forgiveness,” Salisbury Post 1/18/2024)

Dr. King lived nearly five years after sharing his dream on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in August 1963. During those five years, Dr. King pressed us to question our nation’s priorities. As the movement grew and segregation began to be dismantled, he widened the focus of his efforts. He spoke out against expending people’s lives and billions of dollars on the Vietnam War, urging instead to invest them in ending poverty and establishing equality here at home. He critiqued the inherent injustice of capitalism. In reading “Why America May Go To Hell,” the message of encouragement Dr. King intended to bring to the striking trash collectors of Memphis, his refocused vision is clear and direct. He supported workers’ rights to take collective action to bring about equality in service of justice. He pointed out the emptiness of equality without the promise of opportunity.

Dr. King’s words are not in need of interpretation. No need to hide agendas behind them, claiming what he “really meant.” We can study them and learn for ourselves.

What matters is what you do in your life. Do you support diversity, recognizing the strength of our differences? Do you support equity affirming its roots in justice? Do you support inclusion, reflecting our shared humanity? Everyone will know where you stand by what you do.

— Jeffrey Sharp
Salisbury

Keep pets from running loose

Apparently being an elected official in Spencer endows a person with immunity from Rowan County laws. I regularly observe my neighbor’s cat using my property as its playground and litter box. Then one night a couple weeks ago, while walking my own small dog on a leash in my front yard, I was rushed by that same neighbor’s much larger dog which was running loose. I have Ring videos as proof. Rowan County Ordinance Sec. 5-36 (b) says “It shall be unlawful for any person to keep any animal…” which would include cats, “… unless it is restrained, whether on or off the owner or keeper’s property” while Section 5-36 (a) says in part “Sufficient restraint shall include, but is not limited to, restraint by a leash attached to a harness or collar or similar effective or humane device that is physically capable of restraining an animal, or confinement indoors or within a cage, fence, or vehicle or similar secure enclosure…” Shouldn’t a civic “leader” set a better example for their fellow community members?

— Thomas Strini
Spencer