Letters to the Editor
AnaHadWolves
Published Letters: 477 Editor's Choice: 26
-
The "Rudy/Marriage Issue" Is A Canard!
[Read the article: Will Rudy Giuliani's marriage hurt his chances?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Ladies and gents, the Rudy/multi-marriage-cum-estrangement so-called issue is a canard; the REAL danger for Rudy is his fervent and oft-reported support for gay rights and abortion.
His foray into cross-dressing isn't a plus, either, with the core constituency of the Republican party: religious conservatives.
Trust me...I've seen the TV spots against Rudy, should he be the Republican nominee. They're already made and they WILL be run ad infinitum across the Red State/Red Neck South. By Election day 2008, there won't be a good ol' boy or girl who will not have seen Rudy (a) leading the gay pride parade in NYC, (b) declaring his support for abortion or (c) wearing Marilyn Monroe drag while kissing Donald Trump.
Marital issues to a Red Stater are one thing; wearing a flowered dress and female undergarments is quite another!
-
The 2008 Republican Mantra
[Read the article: Stalking Hillary]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]To hear Repooplicans these days, with their fulminations and recriminations that focus on Hillary being the bogeywoman-we-need-to-beat, tells me that they are absolutely terrified of her candidacy.
Thus, the Repooplicans have bastardized F.D.R.'s inspired mantra "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself" into "the only thing we have to offer is fear itself."
The American people can smell the odor rising from the corpse of the failed Bush Maladministration and the subsequent manure being shoveled by Dubya's minions. Peddling negativity is NOT the way to inspire the electorate nor win an election.
-
Pathetic, Joe...Really Pathetic
[Read the article: Joe Lieberman, from his indie perch]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The unctiousness with which Joe Lieberman addresses legitimate concerns about his political position(s), his estrangement from former fellow Progressives and his vacuous vapidity on holding Dubya accountable paint him as a lightweight who only gets lighter; this interview only underscores that appraisal.
Either Al Gore mis-read Joe in 2000 as a running-mate or Joe simply lied about his positions to become the first Jewish candidate for Veep; neither explanation is especially flattering for the Senator, who appears to be opportunistic rather than motivated by principle.
The good people of Connecticut may have "buyer's remorse" about Joe Lieberman. Whether he runs next time as an Independent, a Republican or a Venusian, I'd bet the voters will show him the door...having had enough of Joe's callous disingenuousness.
If it weren't for the fact that Joe caucuses with our side, I'd have told him to stuff his hubris up his tuchus long ago. The 2008 Senatorial elections can't come soon enough for me; adding even one or two more Democrats then will make Joe disposable and not indispensable.
Thank God!
-
Matt Damon Comes Of Age As Jason Bourne
[Read the article: "The Bourne Ultimatum"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]When I first saw Matt Damon on-screen about twenty years ago, my first thought was "light-weight pretty-boy"; I was a little hasty in that assessment. Hell, I was a LOT hasty!
He has gone from "pretty" to ruggedly handsome and from a "light-weight" to an actor of gravitas and seriousness. His Jason Bourne character is menacing without being menacing...if that makes sense. He can give multiple nuances with a single look. He was chilling in "Mr. Ripley", amusing in "Oceans" but absolutely deft as Jason Bourne. Strike that: he IS Jason Bourne.
Matt's future? I see him maturing into another Robert Redford-level character-actor of amazing dimensions. His future films should be multi-dimensional, as well.
That bodes well for those of us who appreciate actors who are masters of their craft.
-
No, No, No! NO Revisionist History, Please!
[Read the article: Conversations: Steven Okazaki]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm a Liberal/Progressive who believes in peace over war and in talk it over over military action. Having said that, let me weigh in on Hiroshima and Nagasaki: the Japanese deserved what they got. Period.
I think they earned that nuclear butt-kicking by their unprovoked attack on Pearl Harbor that included killing American civilians, the Rape of Nanking wherein thousands upon thousands of Chinese civilians were killed, the forced use of Chinese women as "comfort women", i.e. prostitutes, for Japanese soldiers who invaded China, the execution of Allied POW's, medical experimentation on Allied POWs including being injected with virulent strains of toxins...and an abject disavowal of the Geneva Conventions.
The use of nuclear weapons by the United States to end WWII has also had a side benefit: those who might have seen the US as weak and vascillating by NOT using weapons in a limited and judicious manner MIGHT have been tempted to attack us. They saw that we would defend ourselves with whatever weaponry necessary. The decision to use that weaponry was one of my distant cousin President Harry Truman's most difficult; he chose the nuclear option to prevent a huge loss of American troops at the hands of the Japanese who had declared they would defend the sure-to-come American invasion of their home islands to the last man, woman or child.
Now, having said that I believe the Japanese earned Hiroshima/Nagasaki and the Germans earned Dresden and more, they both are today two of our closest allies and friends. We did not start WWII; we did end it, however, and, in the case of the Japanese, nuclear weapons helped end it sooner.
If you believe that war in ANY case is horrible, then, please DO take the lessons of Hiroshima/Nagasaki as well as the horrors wrought by the Japanese throughout Asia during that period and similar horrors wrought by Germany toward Jews, gays, Gypsies, the mentally-disabled, et al, under the Third Reich and work for world peace.
But, please: eschew revisionist history and stop damning the United States for using weapons of war in response to being attacked in an unprovoked manner. Doing that simply shows a naivete on your part as to the true history of WWII.