Letters to the Editor
DurianJoe
Published Letters: 1310 Editor's Choice: 69
-
Obama for V.P.
[Read the article: Barack Obama's nouvelle vague]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]As attractive a candidate as he is, and as sorely as this country needs a black President, Barack Obama is not the right candidate for 2008. John Edwards is right: we need a fighter, not a peace-maker. We've had 27 years of corporate dominance, with a little Clintonian progress thrown in. Our country has lurched into a plutocracy. We need a new Teddy Roosevelt, not a new Jimmy Carter.
Moreover, Obama has taken suspiciously Republican stances on Social Security and health care. The last thing we need on those two issue is a President who already starts out on the wrong side.
Edwards-Obama in 2008.
-
Iowa can make or break a candidate? The system is insane.
[Read the article: John Edwards faces his day of reckoning]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If it is true that the undemocratic, unrepresentative, and totally commercial Iowa Democratic caucus can make or break the aspirations of John Edwards or any other candidate, then we should all admit that we do not live in a representative Democracy.
I am completely fed up with having the populations of two small states, mostly homegenous and rural, having such an overwhelming influence in who becomes President of our entire nation. Is there no better way?
-
This study is like much modern art.
[Read the article: Happy marriage, healthy wife]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]In other words, people paid for doing nothing special. In this case, affirming common sense.
Any relationship based on mutual respect is bound to be happier than one that is not. Anyone coming home from work and having to do more chores will be more stressed than someone who does fewer chores.
As for the key to a happy marriage, though these words of wisdom did not originate with me, I share them with all my male friends and acquaintances who are newly wed: "Yes dear, you're right."
-
Why do you folks argue with Thrasher?
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Thrasher is a nut. A racist, anti-semitic, egomaniacal nut. You'd get further arguing with a tree stump.
Anyway, as a non-fan of team sports, I do enjoy King's commentaries. They actually let me join the conversation with my team-loving friends from time to time. Still, I prefer the columns on boxing and UFC.
And now, a word from the crazy man...
-
But how many people read or watch the Village idiots?
[Read the article: Hillary and the mean kids on the bus]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The Village. The Kewl Kids. You know, the jackass elitist pundits. (Thank Kos and others for those disparaging labels).
Are we bothering ourselves too much over the inane and utterly biased "reporting" of the fools who populate cable news and major newspapers? Don't only a few million souls watch CNN, MSNBC, and GOP-TV (a.k.a. Fox)? Of those who do, how many are discerning enough to see through the crap, and how many are partisan enough one way or the other not to care and/or believe the big, bad and sleazy MSM? That leaves a tiny section of the populace which actually falls for the crumbs tumbling out of Candy Crowley & Co.'s mouths.
Same goes for newspapers, except even fewer people read those, and fewer still read the news and opinions sections.
That leaves the Internet, partisan magazines, and gossip. The latter are far more reliable than much of the MSM.
-
No Anon, marriage is a good thing.
[Read the article: Happy marriage, healthy wife]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It may not be for everyone, but I like being married. The heightened level of commitment feeds on itself and, IMHO, can make a relationship stronger and more beautiful.
You've got some issues, Anon. In your case, I definitely recommend against marriage until you get better.
-
Bethincary, get a grip.
[Read the article: Hillary and the mean kids on the bus]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Pat Robertson also won the Iowa caucus. They...don't...mean...shit.
-
@totoro
[Read the article: Hillary and the mean kids on the bus]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]No, I'm not kidding. Huckabee won because the Iowa caucus is thoroughly unrepresentative of the nation at large. His crazy Christian supporters are not the GOP. He will not win the party's nomination.
As for the Democracts, it's a toss-up.
-
Good for Obama, but here's hoping it's Edwards.
[Read the article: Barack Obama's breakthrough victory]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]New Hampshire will be much more interesting than the phony baloney Iowa Caucus. I'm glad Clinton came in third, since she was my least favorite of the Democrats running, but Obama has taken disturbingly conservative positions on health care and Social Security. Hopefully, if he wins, he'll revert to a more progressive stance.
Regardless, right now Edwards is the most viable progressive Democratic candidate running. Again, Iowa is a godawful charade of democracy, while New Hampshire -- despite being small and also unrepresentative of the country as a whole -- at least more closely resembles what passes for electoral politics in this country. Onward.
As for the Repugs: blech! They all suck.
-
Keep them free, or let them go extinct.
[Read the article: Tigers don't belong in zoos]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Tigers and other big cats, as well as elephants and most other animals, do not belong in zoos any more than innocent people belong in prisons. Zoos are for the benefit of people, mostly in the form of entertainment, and then a little in the form of "education" and, we same, for the noble cause of preventing extinction.
But is a tiger in a zoo really a tiger, or just something that looks like a tiger? After all, free tigers range far and wide, they hunt and play, and they interact with nature the way millenia of evolution have taught them to. Conversely, a tiger in a cage (glorified or otherwise) does few of these things, and then only simulations at best.
If tigers and other animals go extinct, it is because we the human species are too selfish and ignorant to allow them to cohabit with us on this planet. We take their land and kill them for sport, or unnecessarily for food, or for convenience, or through other insidious means such as pollution. In other words, if these animals go extinct, we do not deserve to have them adding their beauty and wonder to our world in the first place. We certainly do not deserve to keep a few unfortunate individuals imprisoned in zoos to assuage our guilt at having destroyed their species otherwise.
Let people share the world only with cockroaches and rats, if that's what happens. We make our bed, we sleep in it.