Letters to the Editor
Tyler_Mason
Published Letters: 488 Editor's Choice: 41
-
sigh
[Read the article: The peak oil culture wars]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Andrew, I expect better from you. If I wanted to read a bitchy myopic screed, I'd read greenwald. Perhaps you're trying a little emulation to get your comment count up? Well, if you want sycophants and fan boys slapping your back, have at it. Otherwise, how about a return to quality?
For example, what does the second amendment have to do with peak oil? That is, unless you're busily erecting a straw man to represent your personal view of what a conservative is. A lot of us right-to-bear-arms types have been conservationists since long before it was trendy and still will be when it is considered old and tired. I guess that is one of the things that makes us conservative - we won't flit away to the next trend.
Don't forget that it was a conservative that created the EPA. (Sadly, it is a shit head in conservative clothing that is dismantling it.)
As for the SUV driving - I see a lot of them with Obama and Hillary stickers. Just take a break near the entrance of a gated community and you'll see them stream through.
-
confused
[Read the article: Racism on the trail]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Lots of folks have pointed out to me that pollong indicates that black America is heavily pro-Obama. This appears race based. They then ask why they shouldn't vote for a white person based on race. I don't know how to answer except by nodding and saying "Vote your conscience then".
-
incomplete data
[Read the article: Where are all the women going?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I wish that the data for men was also presented. Do 52% of men also drop out?
I am a former engineer/scientist turned patent attorney. The reason is that the various employers I had depended on but didn't appreciate scientists or engineers.
The most glaring example was when my team and I worked in excess of 60 hours/wk for 6 months, including over the Christmas holidays. We met our deadlines and the company made millions delivering the new product.
Our reward was free pizza at a meeting in which we were congratulated and given another project with similar demands. The dumb ass VP thought the pizza was special while not realizing I had been invoicing carryout for anyone still working at around 7PM.
Meanwhile, the executives, sales, and marketing guys all made a fortune. As a reward, the VP of engineering also got a company car (a jaguar) for his wife.
My team shredded over the next year. About a quarter of them left engineering altogether. Of the folks who remained affiliated with engineering, many shifted over to technical sales with an eye towards shifting completely over to non-technical jobs.
Very few of the techies I've worked with in decades past are still techies and most of them are telling their kids not to go into engineering.
-
@josie6
[Read the article: Racism on the trail]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The reason you can't tell what side of the issue I'm on is because I don't know it myself.
I think the right response is that two wrongs don't make a right. It isn't OK to be racist regardless of your race. It doesn't matter if many blacks vote for Obama because of his skin color. It is about how/why YOU vote and not about how -they- vote.
-
Fine with me
[Read the article: Mississippi turning]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'd vote for a democrat like Childers way before I'd vote for any republican. As I see it, Childers distanced himself from both the neocons and the liberal democrats. I guess that makes him a conservative democrat. Kinda shows how far afield the republican party has wandered when someone can say/write "conservative democrat" with a straight face.
Sadly, come November, the senate candidates I have to choose from are a liberal democrat and a conservative republican who has carried water for bush. Very difficult choice.
-
@melthough
[Read the article: Mississippi turning]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm confused. What is the difference between a progressive and a democrat? I thought "progressive" was a label the dems had grabbed because "liberal" carried too much of a toxic payload in some areas of the country.
-
@bernbart
[Read the article: Mississippi turning]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]By your statement you imply that all progressives are democrats but not all democrats are progressive. That is what I had believed until I read Melthough's statement: "Like many progressives, I am taking a leap of faith here and supporting Dems for a while."
Hence the confussion.
-
also @bernbart
[Read the article: Mississippi turning]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I can't agree that Roe v. Wade is progressive. That decision came out in 1973 - 25 years ago. Medical technology has changed a lot since then and the reasoning behind the balancing of rights in the majority opinion is no longer applicable. The reason that is a second trimester fetus can be born, survive, and grow into adulthood.
I suppose that a 25 year old supreme court decision is new compared to millennia old religious dogma, but medical science has rushed past the point where it rings true.
Perhaps the more progressive stance is to find a new balance.
-
mea culpa
[Read the article: Mississippi turning]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I did the math in my head while someone was talking toward me and I was trying to appear attentive. The real answer is 35. Yes, it is a 35 year old SC decision.
Then I had to actually be attentive and couldn't admit the mistake before anyone else called me on it.
sigh
-
@ljwalker53
[Read the article: Mississippi turning]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]So Roe v. Wade is more important as a symbol than as a judicial determination wherein facts led to a balancing of rights?
That's a little to bible-thumpy for me. I don't believe in worshiping symbols.
It also brings highlights a prime weakness in the pro-choice movement. Too many people with blinders. It opens them up for attack from the side. Even a liberal court would not, actually could not, deliver the same opinion as in 1973. They might end up at the same place in regards to balancing the rights of women against those of the state, but the reasoning would have to be different.
If people really want to protect access to abortion, they need to come up with the arguments that make sense now and for the next 20 years. Reclining on the 35 year old arguments will lead to failure.