text: Letters: Intelligence test?; Preservation code; Defends Hogan; Donald Trump - Capital Gazette
  MADISON, AL - FEBRUARY 28: Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump greets guests following a campaign rally at the Madison City Schools Stadium on February 28, 2016 in Madison, Alabama. Trump is in Alabama ahead of the Super Tuesday primaries March 1. (Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images) ** OUTS - ELSENT, FPG, CM - OUTS * NM, PH, VA if sourced by CT, LA or MoD ** (Scott Olson / Getty Images)
  Charles Reid (The Capital, Feb. 16) opines that people's financial solvency should be the basis of their right to vote. Here's a counter-proposal based on interviews with enthusiastic attendees at a Trump rally.
  One sign-waving supporter said, "He's the only Republican candidate who's going to build a wall." When asked who would pay for the wall, the guy said, "We're going to make China pay for it. They say we can't make China pay for it, but it's pretty easy to make China pay for it."
  Responses from other supporters went downhill from there. One said Trump would cause the "defea-tion of ISIS."
  When another was asked how Trump would defeat ISIS, he said, "Probably by bombing in the Israel area. Not necessarily Israel, but around that area." (Hey, at least he knew Israel was in the general vicinity of the trouble.)
  A couple of women said Trump would "help with the ISIS." When asked how he would do that, one of the women said "He can't tell anyone, because somebody else will copy his idea."
  So in the same vein as Jonathan Swift's satirical "modest proposal," and Reid's presumably serious one, maybe people should be required to pass an intelligence test before they can vote. That would thin the ranks considerably.
  As a former homeowner in the Historic District, an article on potential Historic District code changes caught my attention.
  I certainly salute the intent of the rules, the Historic Preservation Commission and the good people, some of whom would like to have every brick, window, nut and bolt with a pedigree that traces back hundreds of years, etc.
  But I think even today there is frequent overreach in interpretation of the existing code, let alone opening the door for a city employee to march into a home to prevent "demolition by neglect." (I had to look up the meaning of this phrase, and wonder just how frequently it occurs in Annapolis).
  The HPC and my understanding of this proposed code change deserve a real look in the bright light of day, 2016, and not to be whizzed through under the radar.
  Oh, but the HPC chairwoman says the code's language was written and reviewed by lawyers. This gives me great comfort.
  Hah. So much for Rachael Lemberg's letter (The Capital, Feb. 23). She is giving one person's opinion, supposedly speaking for many Marylanders.
  She is defending the General Assembly, led by Michael Busch and Thomas V. Mike Miller -- men who are career politicians; who never had business careers; who spend other people's money to serve their jurisdictions; who helped drive Maryland to the financial deficits our new governor was facing. They cry every time they don't get their way. Why would I respect their decisions?
  Thank goodness we have a law that requires a balanced state budget every year and a new governor with a macro perspective to take Maryland forward regarding state development and controlled spending.
  Furthermore, why should we allow convicted felons to vote? What part of the word "felon" don't you understand?
  And yes, even professional, well-schooled men should lose this privilege when they lose their judiciary and fiduciary abilities and stray from law. Serve your time, wise up and regain respectability.
  I am truly wondering if "The Donald" is working for the opposition to create verbal pandemonium in the Republican debates! His disgraceful alley cat attacks on the other candidates gave them no choice but to respond in self-defense, resulting in loud, obnoxious brawls , permitted, after the bell , by the moderators, who seemed to relish the excitement.
  And the Democrats are loving the public brawling, which tarnishes the image of every candidate. How could anyone with a teaspoon of intelligence support this angry, rude little man, with little to no knowledge of firm but polite negotiations, so critical to our position in today's world?