Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Constant Reader
Published Letters: 17
Thanks for writing the article. It was exactly how I felt about them, too.
They seemed like a terrific couple. I hate it that they apparently were unhappy when they looked so genuinely fond of each other.
Maybe he or she will read the article and post a letter here. Maybe one of them will give us the inside scoop and tell us they'll patch things up and get back together.
It really must be nice for Mary Elizabeth Williams to be able to sit back, take many cheap shots at Rachel Ray, and say "As much as I say 'barf-o' to her perky 'yum-os....'"
But then, who is writing for salon.com and who has her own TV show?
It seems to me that Patrick Smith failed to mention another possibility in his "perfect-stormishness" list.
It may be Kenya Airway's policy, totally unwritten of course, that, when in doubt, the pilots/airplane should take off. The weather be damned. Connecting flights are most important. Being on time is most important.
In this article we read, "On the same day, Townhall published this article claiming that today's young women are much more conservative than their slutty feminist mothers:"
I object to the use of the word slut to slur women. I especially object to it in salon.com. We no longer use similar words to denigrate minorities, Italians, etc. Why does salon.com allow this kind of writing?
Poor old welcomerain, who writes, "If you can't distinguish between socialized medicine and a free-market system where the government provides insurance to its employees like any other company, then you are officially too short to get on this ride."
If health care is free, paid by either the government or a company, then it *is* socialized medicine because someone else is picking up the medical bill. We are not talking rocket science here.
For example, when someone working for the government needs medical care, I pay for it via taxes. When someone working for Microsoft needs medical care, I pay for it via the increased price of a Microsoft product.
Patrick Smith writes, "Working a trip from Gatwick, I was forced to remove my shoes and put my liquids into a Ziploc bag. This is routine for passengers, but I was in full uniform at a crew-only checkpoint."
Why is it that those who fly airplanes do not need to be checked as carefully as passengers? What makes them less nefarious than we in steerage? And please do not respond with, "Well, we are the first to hit the mountain." The issue here is larger than a flip response
If pilots had to go through what paying passengers have to endure (wow!!, removing one's shoes, for example), then maybe the rules for us would be relaxed.
Sooooo, in case my point is lost, why does Mr Smith not have to remove his shoes *and* I do?
I fear that "Debt-Free and Loving It" is not seeing the elephant. It is not the nearby young couple which should concern them at this time. It is their parents who are described as "approaching retirement with basically nothing."
It is the future of the parents that this couple will have to deal with. Small potatoes compared to anything else.
And, one has to ask, did this couple dare venture into real dangerous turf and point out the financial foibles of their parents?????
I have to laugh every time I see Mukasey's American flag lapel pin. For a guy who got to sit out the war in Vietnam, that is sooooooo, sooooooo brazen.
What a waste of time. Women may rant, at least this one, but men shoot women and children. And yet poor Sarah Hepola takes on a woman.
Come on, salon.com, keep things in perspective.
We must have zoned out by the time Keith Olbermann made his room comment, but it was very obvious from early on that his show was a one-sided attack on the Clinton campaign. We kept wondering if he would have the nerve to take on the Obama campaign the same way.
I guess that Olbermann is a liberal, as along as the liberal candidate is *not* a woman. It's too bad, because we had so come to admire Olbermann. Not anymore.
***Editor's note: This story has been updated since it was originally published.***
The story appears to be the same. The date of the story remains the same. How do we know what part of the story has been updated?
It would be nice for the editors to put in bold, in color, or even Italics, the updated portion. Or even pay Mr. Smith more money to write an actual, separate update.
"Hilton, in a video blog on his site, decided once more to forgo that lofty high road, calling Prejean a 'dumb bitch' and claiming it was the "worst answer in pageant history," which has prompted at least one staunch gay marriage opponent -- that is, Michelle Malkin -- to demand he issue an apology."
I hope that Malkin was upset over Hilton's use of the word "bitch" to describe a woman. Probably not.
Wow!! What a beautiful piece of writing.
Thank you.
"And HIPAA does apply to deceased individuals. 'It doesn't matter whether a patient is dead or alive -- the HIPAA and state privacy law protections still apply,' Stephen K. Phillips, a healthcare attorney in San Francisco, told me. 'A deceased patient's rights accrue to his/her legal representative for enforcement and redress purposes.' "
It might be nice if the good doctor/author had gone to more than just a single attorney for a legal opinion on this matter.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
