Letters to the Editor
MVPOnline
Published Letters: 33 Editor's Choice: 3
-
Well ...
[Read the article: TV Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I thought it was on par with the previous season. I mean it's basically a soap opera set to nuclear war/fallout backdrop - what more can one expect?
They have to balance the town's post-nuclear survival with the conspiracy plot. The former tends to contain most of the soap opera melodrama. I find when they focus more on the latter (why the attack happened and who's behind it) along with the two leads (Jake and Hawkins), it's more compelling.
Still, this show remains more interesting than any of the other TV programs CBS. All those CSI and investigation-type shows are really terrible.
I'm not too worried the town skirmishes going away. New Bern (and Constantino) are still around; they can be brought back to cause trouble at a moment's notice.
-
No - let the super delegates resolve this.
[Read the article: Should Florida and Michigan vote again? ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]There are two problems I see with Florida and Michigan voting -
1. Didn't all parties agree not to campaign in these two states in accordance with the Party request (i.e these two states being punished for pushing their primaries ahead of the agreed schedule? While we can all debate the pros/cons of the primary system, isn't an agreement an agreement regardless)?
Doesn't allowing them to now vote fly in the face of that agreement? What was the point of it then? If it were to happen, and I were Howard Dean, I'd be pissed.
2. Given that Obama's name wasn't on the ballots, calling this 'voting again', 'do-over', or 're-vote' seems rather absurd.
By having her name on the ballot previously where Senator Obama didn't, I wonder if that will present Senator Clinton with an unfair advantage? I also find it suspicious that the Florida Governor (Crist-R) is also pulling for a Florida re-vote.
Granted these two states contain a lot of delegates and voters, and will be important in the general election. But that's a problem for the prospective candidate to solve via campaigning in those states.
I think if neither candidate acquires the required delegates for nominiation, it's better to let the super delegates work this out, either before or during the convention.
-
@Jim H ...
[Read the article: Should Florida and Michigan vote again? ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I concede your point about Senator Obama being on the Flordia ballot. However, given that the agreement made was that there would be not campaigning there because they broke the Party rules and moved their primary ahead, I think my point still stands.
Now we are learning that the Michican Governor is advocating that her state's delegates be seated. Don't even bother with 're-voting', just seat them as they are, basically. I would expect such a thing from the right-wing, not a member of the Democratic Party (you know, like that Governor from Florida).
I agree that it's unfortunate that the DNC has penalized their delegates for the state leadership's actions. But who chose to move the primaries up? I think it's far more unfair to everyone else in the entire process if Florida's and Michign's delegates are seated (or a 're-vote' were to happen). It would basically tell everyone that certain states due to their size and influence are allowed to flaunt the rules everyone agreed to; and get away with it.
Do people honestly think it's fair to those agreed to certain Party conditions (and essentially stuck with them), only to change the rules mid-way through where it's clear that one candidate will benefit more than another?
Again, we can debate all we want about the merits of the system, and try and figure out what can be changed for the better. But not while it's in motion. Senators Clinton and Obama should each do the right thing - continue their campaigns for delegates in the remaining states, and let the Super Delegates work out what they don't during the convention. Both candidates have a realistic chance - what could be more fair?
The biggest problem I think the Democratic Party has (on whole) is that we allow our leadership to waffle on just about everything, and consequently don't stand for anything - let alone our own principals. One could argue that this issue is a very good test for the kinds of principals each candidate will bring to the White House, if elected.
-
It will be interesting to see how ...
[Read the article: Life and death and bicycling]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]... governments - and specifically legislatures - resolve some of the issues on how bicyclists and automobile drivers share the road.
One of the big problems I see is in the historical overall road design in the US. Most road systems in this country were designed primarily for two different sets of users of different breath usage -
1) Users with motorized vehichles that can carry multiple users, and be travelling distances that can span the country (i.e. drivers of cars, trucks, buses, etc) - on roads
2) Individual users travelling relatively short distances (i.e. pedestrians) - on sidewalks
But bicyclists were not taken into account. As a result, what's been seen over the last few years is an attempt to resolve this oversight.
Consquently what I've seen over the last few years are attempts to re-engineer the current system by enacting items like bike lanes, bike stops ahead of drivers at traffic lights, etc.
The problem is that many of these solutions to-date are really only reactionary bandages that attempt to mask a bigger problem.
Because of the design limitations, many of the safety aspects bicyclists need to survive on the road are simply not there. It will be hard to enact legislation to ensure real safety without compromising the system for the largest set of users ( 1) ). Further it would be very costly to re-design the system in its entirety.
What won't also help is the high level of polarization and zealousness that exists. Having lived in both the Seattle and Portland areas, I've observed lots of acrimony, much of it coming from organizations representing bicyclists. Granted road safety is a thorny issue, but it doesn't help when you have folks like Critical Mass whose actions do nothing to help the overall cause of road safety for all.