We give preference to letters containing fewer than 150 words. Please include name, phone number and city of residence.

Return Hsu-linked donations

The Examiner’s coverage of Democratic fundraiser Norman Hsu hasn’t probed deeply enough (“The curious case of Norman Hsu,” Sep. 5).

Blogger Flip Pidot (SuitablyFlip.com) questions whether Hsu used his extended associates, including the Paw family of Daly City, to illegally funnel donations to candidates to sidestep campaign contribution limits. In San Francisco, Hsu and his associates donated not just to Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Assemblywoman Fiona Ma, District Attorney Kamala Harris and Mayor Gavin Newsom, but also to Supervisors Michela Alioto-Pier and Bevan Dufty, Assessor Philip Ting, Lillian Sing and supervisorial candidate Jaynry Mak.

These nine San Francisco politicians received at least $40,062 from Hsu and his associates. Curiously, Newsom received $7,950, not just Hsu’s $750. Twelve other California politicians accepted $71,250 from Hsu and his associates, bringing the state total to $111,312.

All 21 California Democrats should immediately return all of the dirty money from Hsu and his associates, not just Hsu’s part of it.

Patrick Monette-Shaw

The City

Crime cameras questioned

I question the continued use and effectiveness of surveillance cameras. First of all, I feel that we should all be paid for our video images just like we should all be paid when our personal information is sold.

Second of all, how long will it be before these surveillance cameras start talking back to us and start forcing us to watch their version of the news. Remember the series “The Prisoner”? It looks as though we may be becoming prisoners of our own technology and our need “for protection.” I guess that’s how fascism started: out of a need for protection.

Rousseau stated in his “Social Contract” that “people give up freedom in order for protection.” How much freedom will we give up until we’re merely numbers on a huge computer program mainframe with chips in our bodies? And why are immigrants being given ID cards? How long will it be before we’re all give international ID cards? Does that happen right before the implantation of microchips?

I’m sorry, I’m not a progressive — I’m just terribly old-fashioned and still believe in privacy rights. I find it amusing that progressives are pushing for the “new world order” as much as extremist conservatives. American Civil Liberties Union, help us before “Brave New World” becomes fact and before our money becomes digital on implanted microchips. We are the future and we need to start taking responsibility for it now.

Denise Jameson

The City

Shock over fest perplexing

I write in response to Jane O’Donnell of San Francisco, who wrote to express her shock and horror to find hordes of aging pot-smoking hippies at the Summer of Love Celebration (Letters, Sept. 7). It must make life interesting to be so easily surprised. Is she embarrassed to find scantily dressed people when she goes to the beach? Is she shocked to discover people drinking beer and eating hot dogs at a baseball game?

Perhaps O’Donnell will favor us with letters from her travels, when she can report on an excess of elderly people in Florida and be shocked by the drinking and gambling in Las Vegas.

Bob Thomson

Burlingame

Confounding proposal

Was I hallucinating when I read that Mayor Gavin Newsom supports the latest ridiculous proposal by the Board of Supervisors to issue ID cards to illegal immigrants? I have come to expect such absurdities from many of the illustrious members of the “Board of Stupifiers.” But to hear that the mayor endorses this confounding proposal was disappointing, to say the least.

It seems pretty straightforward to me. People who are in this country illegally should be required to apply for entry through existing legal channels just like the thousands of others who are already doing so. Once here legally, they are welcome to become members of our community. Until then, they should not be granted rights to participate in civic life or to enjoy the benefits of living in any community within these United States.

It is time for the board and the mayor to wake up from their fog and stop subverting federal immigration laws.

Larry S. Liederman

The City

Lawmakers and marriage

I thought the members of the state Legislature were supposed to represent the people. It has not been that long since Proposition 22 passed by a 61.4 percent vote, and it specified that a legitimate marriage in California consisted of one man and one woman.

The Democrats in the Legislature — the Republicans voted against it — passed AB43 to specify than “two persons” may become legally married. Let gays and lesbians be what the want to be in their personal lives, but let us not destroy the sacred institution of marriage.

Lyle Topham

Saratoga

To add your voice-

By e-mail: letters@examiner.com

By mail:

Editorial Page Editor

The Examiner, 450 Mission St.

San Francisco, CA 94105

By fax: (415) 359-2766