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

heddache1

Published Letters: 63
Editor's Choice: 19

Saturday, May 13, 2006 05:49 AM
Original article: Maverick -- or panderer?

C'mon folks...

Don't fall for the McCain hype. Bush and McCain are peas in the same pod-- McCain's "maverick, straight-shooter" image is a carefully crafted one, but the fact is it's little different than Bush's "cowboy" image. But don't take my word for it, look no further than his voting record, the man is not a moderate Republican, he is one of the *most* conservative people in the senate. Yes, you might personally like him, think he has intergrity on a few issues, however if you remove his opposition to torture (which would be INSANE if he didn't oppose it, he was tortured himself!) and the few other instances where he made a scene of standing up against the GOP, he's a right-winger. It doesn't mean McCain didn't have integrity at some point, but his cozying up to Falwell should give everyone who has liked him up to this point a very serious pause. In 2000 he openly didn't like Falwell, called him an "agent of intolerance," but now he likes and respects him? How much integrity is that? This is Falwell we're talking about, the man who blamed 'pagains, feminism, gays and lesbians, ACLU' for causing 9/11.

A few things to remember-- McCain is stridently anti-abortion, his spokesman said he supports South Dakota's controversial abortion ban. He voted against the Unintended Pregnancy bill that would have dedicated funds to preventing unintended pregnancies through health care and education, including equitable presecription coverage for contraception under health plans.

McCain's flip-flopping on the Federal Marriage Amendment is another way in which he is showing his true colors. If he changes his mind about the Federal Marriage Amendment it isn't about gay rights (which we already know he doesn't support) it's about McCain's lack of fortitude, that he can't be counted on to take a stance and stand his ground when it comes to difficult issues. In a nutshell, McCain is a true flip-flopper and can't be counted on.

I agree that at this point the Dems don't have any good stand-out candidates for 2008, but if you want to support a truly moderate GOP candidate support Rudy Giuliani. He's pro-choice, pro-gay and is certainly not a right-winger in moderate clothing.

Tuesday, May 23, 2006 09:16 AM
Original article: Bring your infant to work?

My godson...

went to work with his mom everyday until he was 7 months old. (He's 5 now.) It was a great arrangement and worked very well for everyone. Similar to the story, it was for a company that that had offices in a big, old building that at one time was a residence. Also, the baby sort of had the same effect on the office as offices that are dog-friendly, everyone stopped in to coo at him, her co-workers talked a lot about how having him there made them smile. Their office culture noticably benefited from his presence.

The thing is that most babies sleep far more than they are awake until they are 6 or 7 months. It also makes for a very happy mom who wasn't always pining to be with her newborn. I know as a new mother I would find leaving my child 40+ hours a week would be very difficult emotionally, especially if you add hormones, so I doubt my concentration at work would be that great anyways. This is an especially good arrangement for women who breastfeed.

I know the anti-baby, anti-child people are going to chime in here before too long, but this arrangement obviously wouldn't work for colicky babies or babies that cry a lot and are hard to comfort. But it is one way to approach the issue of how hard it is to balance work with being a new parent.

The next best thing is having a daycare on the premises.

Thursday, May 25, 2006 11:54 AM
Original article: The Lysistratas of stubble

The whole point...

of the campaign seems to be to imply that a man who isn't cleanshaven should be viewed to be just as "frightful" as an unshaven woman. They're trying to take the sexist, bullshit beauty standards placed on women and trying to applying them to men.

It's ridiculous. It just goes to show how women-- almost any woman-- must present herself a certain way or be deemed "repulsive" based on the fact that she doesn't embrace stupid, meaningless standards of beauty. It doesn't matter if the people looking at her aren't her lover and will never touch her or go to bed with her-- if she doesn't abide by the rules then she is deemed disgusting. The issue of hair/shaving is the most obvious, the most visible sexist standard of beauty in American culture. Women with leg or underarm hair aren't just considered unattractive-- by both men and women alike-- they're considered revolting.

Talk about some serious brainwashing...

Most Active Letters Threads

543

The crazy, irrational beliefs of Muslims

Tom Friedman explains the real problem: stupid Muslims think the U.S. is about war and aggression.
517

Obama's exceedingly familiar justifications for escalation

The "new" approach to Afghanistan touted by White House officials seems quite old
434

The face of rotted Washington

Evan Bayh demands more debt-financed war - fought by others - while boasting that he's a stern "deficit hawk."
202

Bigotry wins in Switzerland

By voting to ban the construction of minarets, Switzerland apes the most extreme intolerance in the Muslim world
144

Mike Huckabee's fatally bad judgment

Brutality by another Huck-pardoned criminal suggests the 2012 GOP hopeful listened more to pastors than prosecutors

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon