Netlets for Thursday, June 26

Although new to Minnesota I feel compelled to defend the Merlot-sipping stay-at-home moms of Edina. Katherine Kersten's rant (column, June 22) managed to offend me on so many levels.

After more than a decade of quietly trying to do my part -- recycling, composting (yes I even had a worm bin for a while) and avoiding overpackaging in my purchases -- I felt like many others I'm sure, that I was trying to put out a wildfire by spitting into the wind.

It would have been nice to have had some support from a group like the EcoMoms. It's great to see them teaching their children to "reduce, recycle, re-use and rot." Heck, it sounds like common-sense advice those grandmothers Kersten mentioned would have used.

Moms are hardwired to protect their children; whether the threat is polio and dysentery or carcinogenic pesticides and lead-tainted toys.

When enough of those upscale moms demand safer, more sustainable products and choices, they will become more affordable and accessible to all mothers. And won't that be a win-win for everyone?

RHONDA FLEMING HAYES, WAYZATA

So Katherine Kersten's latest target is EcoMoms. I guess she thinks that moms who share ideas and take action to make the lives of children healthier and the earth cleaner is worth mocking. It looks like we have a curly, dark-haired Ann Coulter wannabe here in Minnesota.

Having rules and obeying them makes us a civilized people. There are some schoolchildren who decided they don't want to obey a rule, so some adults on the Dilworth-Glyndon-Felton school board decided to change the rule (Star Tribune, June 20). What is wrong with this picture? All I can say is brace yourselves for the other rules children don't want to obey.

MARY KASPER, CEDAR, MINN.

I am an avid fan of Barack Obama. As a black female who is in law school and wants to become mayor of my home city one day, Obama is also my mentor. However, I am disappointed in Obama's turning his back on his earlier promise to accept public funds to finance his campaign for president.

I deplore the amount of money spent on elections. Indeed I understand that as long as one candidate spends more, the other feels compelled to keep up -- or so we think. I think there are creative and more meaningful ways of communicating with people and "getting out the vote" than obnoxiously expensive TV commercials. At any rate, the rare opportunity to actually get two candidates to limit their spending and pause the upward shooting campaign financing bar (keeping candidacies possible for regular people), presented itself with Obama and John McCain. However, in this instance, by Obama rejecting public financing, he pushes McCain (or allows McCain to justify opting out of the system also) into the outspending flurry. Obama's campaign can frame this change of heart as the rejection of a "broken system" or any revolutionary way it wants to, but the reality is elections did not used to cost this much, getting people to believe and trust in you and be mobilized to get out and vote should not and does not cost what these candidates will spend on it. It never has in the past and does not right now.

Obama's choice amounts to a shortsighted about-face. It is a vain way to show you can raise money, simply because you can, thinly veiled as challenging the system or entrapment by the wealth of the Republican Party. An entire city could create transit systems, finance the college education of a community's children, build low income housing and/or stabilize several neighborhoods, from what these men will waste on this election. Don't get me wrong, McCain is a political chameleon and the evolution of our country, history-in-the-making, will be stopped directly in its tracks with his presidency. I will vote proudly, lovingly, with great hope for this amazing, inspiring, intelligent, resourceful, qualified black man for president, but nonetheless, I am truly disappointed.

John McCain's gas tax holiday proposal is both unnecessary and reckless. First, it's unnecessary because we all have the ability to save ourselves money by driving more efficiently.

Recently, I've begun to accelerate slowly, drive the speed limit (I'm virtually the only one who does), coast when able and stop accelerating when I see a stoplight. By taking these steps, I've increased fuel efficiency 30 percent for my 2000 Volkswagen Jetta with a V6 engine. This equates to a savings of $50 per month. Because McCain's plan would only save me $10 per month ($30 during the summer), my own painless efforts have saved me five times as much as McCain's proposal.

Second, it's reckless because the gas tax funds the Highway Trust Fund. This fund, already severely underfunded, pays for roads and bridges, among other things. Given the 35W bridge collapse last year, do we really want to undercut the fund further to save the average driver $10? Instead, let's all pull ourselves up by our own bootstraps to save money instead of relying on government to do it for us.

CHRIS CAGLE, FRIDLEY

I just wanted to be among the many people to say congratulations to Kevin Garnett and the Boston Celtics. I am so happy that KG got his championship! It was sure fun to see that huge smile on his face and the pure emotion he expressed upon winning.