Letters posted here are associated with the following Salon Premium Member:

greenholdt

Published Letters: 434
Editor's Choice: 7

Friday, June 8, 2007 04:08 PM

HUH?

For instance, we don't call a single person married, because marriage is actually a relationship between a man and a woman, by definition. And there are other ways we raise kids, and that's fine -- single moms, grandparents raising kids, gay couples raising kids. That's the American way to have people have their freedom of choice

Am I missing something here?

Is single good or not? And what about divorce? Is that an honest separate category or is the divorced person a single person? Also, what if the grandparents, or single moms (the ones who are divorced...or, perhaps, never married) or some other relative just happens to be gay and not interested in any relationship but is interested in creating a home for a child. Or the single fathers (divorced or never married) who raise children themselves? What if Aunt Jane, who takes in the kids of her drug-addled sister to raise is a lesbian? Or, heaven forbid, grandpa who long ago thought his child-raising days were over and finally comes out of the closet as a gay man, finds himself raising grandchildren?

Am I making sense? Of course not. And neither is Romney! He seems to tout all of the examples described as the "American Way" so I'm confused. Obviously, Gov. Romney is, too.

Friday, June 8, 2007 04:23 PM

Huh, again?

After reading through all of the letters, I'm reminded of a Catholic priest during a "pro life" sermon years ago who derided the fact that he had just worked with a couple planning marriage who said they didn't intend to have children. They told him they had a dog and were perfectly happy with it.

The stupid, naive priest then said "I was so angry, I wanted to go out and kill that dog."

True story folks! Needless to say, he shocked a whole ton of the people sitting there in church---not because of his anger at the couple but at the fact that he actualy said he wanted to kill their pet!

Tuesday, June 12, 2007 06:02 PM

WHAT'S NEW?

Having read the book THE MEN WHO STARE AT GOATS a couple of years ago, the idea that they'd try anything -- and get us to pay for it -- is entirely believable. The jacket of the book says "This story is about what happened when a small group of men--highly placed within the United States military, the government and the intelligence services--began believing in very strange things." It included the idea of making oneself invisible just by thinking hard enough or staring small animals to death.

Most of their experiments were laughed at and deep-sixed by saner individuals. But some made their way into modern warfare like the practice of blasting loud offensive music into enemy camps and cells of prisoners.

Weird as the book's contents may have been, even it didn't mention a "gay bomb" -- and idea which is undoubtedly up there in the top five of some of the most off-the-wall stuff yet.

By the way, the suggestions put forth in the book came from Vietnam-era career military. Could it be any clearer that the LDS discharge another writer cited DID affect our military, too?

Thursday, June 14, 2007 10:32 AM
Original article: September song

Looks like Tony Snow....

...has been reading his bullshit dictionary again!

Granularity stumped me so I went to Wikipedia for a definition.

Granularity is a measure of the size of the components, or descriptions of components, that make up a system. Systems of, or description in terms of, large components are called coarse-grained, and systems of small components are called fine-grained; here coarse and fine are descriptions of the granularity of the system, or the granularity of description of the system.

An example of increasingly fine granularity: a list of nations in the United Nations, a list of all states/provinces in those nations, a list of all counties in those states, etc.

Ah, now it's clear....as mud...or perhaps wet sand with very fine granules made up of many, many, many, many parts. And then you take these parts and break them down even further and create a "metric" to develop a "pivotal assessment" and then, poof! you have your answer. The answer being "Stop asking these questions. We're building a billion dollar embassy compound there and we intend to stay FOREVER...or until the oil runs out."

Tuesday, June 19, 2007 11:18 AM

What a hoot!

It's even better than George Bush "serving" his time -- on occasion -- in a "champagne" unit of the Texas Guard, and taking time off from that to work on a political campaign in another state, during the Vietnam War. I almost wish Romney would win the Republican nomination and then try to explain away the fact that his five sons' records of service in the Mormon church have gone missing.

Most Active Letters Threads

740

The commendably missing element from Obama's speech

There was no pretense that human rights is our goal, or the likely outcome, in escalating the war
408

Do Obama officials know what his Afghanistan plan is?

What explains the completely contradictory statements from key aides on a central plank of the war strategy?
406

America's regression

It's almost impossible to find a nation with as many torture advocates as the U.S. has.
320

Palin: Birthers have "fair question" about Obama

Of Obama birth, the ex-governor says, "the public is still, rightfully, making it an issue" (Updated)
211

The poster boy for progressive self-delusion

Read Hayden's 2008 Obama endorsement to remember the way the left sold our centrist president to itself

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon