"The media's silly Fort Hood coverage"

When I awaken to NPR news at 7 AM, open and read the replies to Salon and other "information" sources, the general insanity that surrounds this nation-state oozes up.

The minority of respondents to this, and similar articles, who comprehend what a writer is communicating, versus the majority who ride the silly bomb into the cosmos is sadly appalling.

I'd like to eliminate "news" from my schedule, not because the "news" is depressing, but because it is often wrong, inane and unintelligent. I don't, because I want/need to know what happened during the day. (If only I could get that "news" accurately.)

Most of all, the majority who read/view/hear "news" and commentary have no informed bases from which to assess and respond to what they read/view/hear.

Reactionaries who respond with fear-filled, hateful fantasies have no understanding of what is, has, or will happen in this society: at Fort Hood, the District of Columbia, Wall Street or Wal-Mart. This is the nightmare--the horror-show, the actual terrorism.

Reactors do not have context. They spew like the political party that bragged they "know nothing." Ho hum, nothing changes; the tunnel is dug deeper.

My initial and continuing concern is that the crazies do not take this horrible tragedy, that I think I can comprehend the why and what, to initiate a vendetta against Muslims.

GY, do you consider "There's five of them" to be "gross vulgarity," or "prehistoric grunts?"

How about "ignorance" on the road to "post-historic oblivion" for this era that is preceding the next dark-age? (Even astronomically)

I read nearly all the posted letters in response to the article, "Memo to grammar cops: Back off!"--delaying my lunch. I have enjoyed these response more than usual. It gives me hope that there are readers who respect, love and know the value of appropriate language usage as a hallmark of mindful citizenry. Thank you.

Despite "sour grapes" analysis by anti-grammarians, the purpose of language is to communicate. When it doesn't there is a problem. A simple matter such as "one" means singular and more than "one" means plural is worrisome--mental "dumbing-down.".

Saying "there's" (there is)a pimple on my forehead versus "there're" (there are) a dozen pimples on my forehead determines whether or not I enjoy my date, or even accept the date. Gosh, is he staring at my forehead--and will he kiss me when he leaves?

The plural has been lost by almost everyone. I accept the oneness of the cosmos, but some things are simply ignorance. I caught myself saying "there's" inaccurately a few days ago. I corrected myself, as I did at age three when I responded to a question with, "No, he hasn't came--I mean--he hasn't come yet." My toddler son corrected his language, automatically, a generation later.

One has to hear the forms early in life. I'm not a snob. I do love beautiful language, spoken, written and sung. Language changes, yes. Must it be to gross vulgarity and pre-historic grunts?

If nuclear weapons are the vehicle of "weak nations" how to explain that the US developed the nuclear bomb, first, is the only nation-state to have deployed it, twice, and maintains hegemony among all nations on the planet in numbers, sophistication of technology and deployment capability?

She only voted the bill out of committee. she, probably, will NOT sign the final bill, where real reforms may be included.

The effort is not worth the result.

Unless and until the mass of people in this nation realize that a nation is a village, just more massive, and that historically, villages survive because everyone contributes, pulls their weight, so to speak, we are in free-fall.

The cries of socialism, without seeing the root of the word--"social," meaning society, meaning people, meaning us, result in ignorance, fear and paranoia driving the "ship of state" and our lives.

Evolution is not just the driving force for plants and lower animals We are animals as well, supposedly, with functioning brains. Not!

Fear of "government control" displays total ignorance of what government is supposed to be and do--and, yes, it does not. But whose responsibility is that? Governance is the mode for village-tribe-nation survival that has been lost in the fear of words, e.g. socialism. communism (root-common) mean the same. You know, people, us.

As the kid in the pest control commercial says, "We're doomed." Why? Because, we're too scared to discern our own best interest. We either pool resources and work together or the end of Roman rule was a piker. That's the only way. But who listens to their fear and moves beyond?

I agree with Richard, below. When has any such project benefited anyone except the "Big Shots?" They shoot right through the majority of citizens while amassing glory and wealth for themselves. I laughed at the words, "real estate and tourism."

Heard of a local artist, yesterday, who made a modest living selling his original art at nearby festivals for 25 years. 2009 was a total lose. Who has money to spend? It's all paper derivatives (non-existent) anyway.

I love Chicago, because it was home. I learned of its corruption early. Can anyone find an American town, city, county, state or nation that isn't a disaster for ordinary people over time? (I do not live in any other country, so there's no need for comparison.) Greed and Control are the first and last names of the "bosses."

I've found it impossible to be an optimist in this insane world, no matter how much I try.

I voted for Obama with a gut concern as to his ability to facilitate significant change--meaning the quantum change needed in a sick society. From his first appointment of Geithner "downward" I lost "hope" that this administration of "Ivy walled," youthful faces and minds has the knowledge, acumen, chutzpah and will to do what is needed. As I watch the next "Great Compromiser" and cadre in action I consign "hope" back to Pandora's fantasy box.