Re: Terrell's response to D. Maynard's 'America under siege' [Village News, Letter, 1/26/23]

Dave Maynard's letter on the topic of 'America under siege' was evidently quite triggering to John H. Terrell, who immediately did his best to deflect any responsibility from the hapless Joe Biden. Terrell's response has these general themes:

(1) Inflation of prices for food and fuel in the U.S. has absolutely nothing to do with Biden. That's caused by the greedy mega-corporations, providing their goods and services for profit, according to Terrell.

(2) Second reason why inflation can't be Biden's fault is because it's a global phenomenon of low-supply and high demand.

So, every nation that overreacted to the Chinese virus (the "panic" which President Trump famously sought to avoid) also ruined their economies. Side note: I doubt that Terrell will ever credit the Trump presidency for the previously much better economic situation in this country, prior to the Covid panic.

(3) The likely coming recession: can't blame the Biden group, because a recession will be experienced “globally.” This is another legacy of the global panic.

(4) Illegal immigration at the border. Terrell admits there is an "unprecedented number of people" illegally entering the U.S. The word unprecedented means more than ever before – as compared to the Trump era. He believes that trying to stop illegal immigration "physically" has not worked – and by design it can't work when Biden stops construction of a border wall, won't actually visit the most active crossing places, and falsely accuses border patrol agents of being whip-wielding racists. But Terrell believes that it is our responsibility to solve problems in the immigrant's home countries or, as he calls it, a "humanitarian solution." And rest-assured because the incompetent Biden administration – in this case Kamala Harris – "is working on it."

(5) Kari Lake. This impressive candidate for Arizona's governor angered Terrell by using the term "invasion" when describing the illegal immigration/criminal situation, and her intended response to it. Terrell asserts this is contrary to its usage in the U.S. Constitution and declares that she has no regard for any of the Constitution, and that her opinions are irrelevant. What Terrell misses is that the word “invasion” is not reserved for the U.S. Constitution. I have an invasion of ground squirrels and am not afraid of saying so, Mr. Terrell.

David Lewis