Letters to the Editor
chimpygo
Published Letters: 201 Editor's Choice: 2
-
I've been drinking some Obama koolaid
[Read the article: Why Hillary Clinton should be winning]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]... in the hopes that it would make me delusionally happy, that I would see him as an infallible savior who leaves daisies growing in his footsteps. Sadly, it didn't happen. I merely see him as a mortal politician, but one who is head and shoulders above Clinton and McCain.
(except from my post on page 49 of this thread)
-
Crazy Libs in Ivory Tower
[Read the article: Cokie Roberts speaks out on the war on behalf of the American people]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It's interesting to note what is considered "liberal" these days: belief in the science of evolution, climate change; regulations to prevent toxic chemicals from entering our air, water, bodies; appreciation for civil liberties...
For the past seven years our national political discourse has centered around the notions like: checks and balances are for commies, patriotism = loyalty to George W., nuanced thought about complicated issues is sniveling weakness, and empathy for human beings outside of the appropriate In Group(though Christ-like) is a lack of mental toughness. In short, according to Rove, Cheney, Bush, & Co., anything outside the Neocon blueprint should be met with hostility and scorn.
There are to be sure plenty of liberal idealogues in academia,
(and many left-leaning people who do their best to treat all students honestly and fairly, and also moderates, independents, conservatives...).
Surely this perception is greatly amplified, however, by the fact that academics tend to think critically, to ask for evidence and logical reasoning. The GOP agenda and narrative don't stand up well to such things.
I don't mean this to be snide. I'm not implying that conservatives are inherently less intelligent, etc. That's certainly not true. But this political philosophy (and the propogandists who spread it) encourages lock-step group-think and academia (as a general rule) discourages it.
Finally, food for thought: a great many of these "liberal elite" profs come from working/middle class backgrounds, and tend to see "the people" as an integral part of American society and democracy rather than merely "consumers" or dullards to be duped because they're too stupid to deal with reality.
-
AKA Smith
[Read the article: Thank you, Rush Limbaugh!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Many black people sought to "reclaim" the word, to make it their own and pack into it meanings of pride, dissent, etc.
Check out Spike Lee's BAMBOOZLED for satirical insight into race/genetics, identity, etc., + mass media.
Paul Mooney's character gives a nice speech about why he says the word.
It's not a great film. In fact, "sprawling" and "heavy handed" come up a lot in reviews, (as do "brilliant" and "ambitious"). It's no DO THE RIGHT THING, but it's definitely worth seeing if you like to think about things, which you clearly do.
This doesn't mean I think it's a good idea to use the n-word.
-
<i>Reviving Ophelia<i> author Mary Pipher:
[Read the article: Thank you, Rush Limbaugh!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"I also make it clear that I don't like 'suffering contests.' I never compare girls' and boys' suffering. It is impossible to emperically verify which demographic group has suffered the most, and it polarizes an audience to make such comparisons. I want everyone on my side and eager to help change our culture."
This is from Pipher's introduction to Real Boys: Saving Our Sons from the Myths of Manhood.
Joan, my eyes glazed over just a little. Did you mention Limbaugh's strategy of supporting Hillary because he thinks she is the weaker candidate?
Many posters have pointed out that it beggars belief to pretend that the only valid reason a person could have for not supporting H.C. is sexism. I agree with them.
Welcome to higher "circulation" and lower standards.
Here's a headline from yahoo news:
Clinton's tale part truth, part errors
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080408/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_hospital_fact_check
"Errors," aye? Is this euphemistic enough, or are they sexist, too?
-
JohnCorvo and suffering contests
[Read the article: Thank you, Rush Limbaugh!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This a very good point. An earlier poster (page 3ish?) mentioned that racism in America has only been around 300 years while sexism is age-old.
I found this a little silly because racism isn't just about melanin levels--it's about class, culture, and human tendency to form In/Out Groups. Minority groups of people have been oppressed and brutalized for a very long time, too. This is the basis of the story of the Good Samaritan.
That said, though, how many women have been beaten and raped (often by their spouses, partners)? How many have been held virtual prisoner by violent men and/or social norms? How many had their feet bound, their clitorises removed? How many have been rudely or even kindly steered away from fulfilling their potentials because they were born female?
But this is the thing with suffering contests. They always come down diminishing the suffering (and thus "authenticity'?) of the fellow contestant.
I don't have the answer, but maybe we could come up with a way to discuss the complex realities of our world in a way that isn't constantly forming new In/Out Groups.
-
@MBlack: Ms. Walsh's principled stand
[Read the article: Thank you, Rush Limbaugh!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I agree with you and jackal that this is a real issue and we Obama supporters shouldn't let partisanship get in the way of acknowledging it.
The trouble is, Joan's columns about sexism seem to be a) using the issue to elect Hillary rather than b) using the election to highlight the issue. This is an important distinction, and certainly gets in the way of her discussing the issue in an accurate and constructive fashion.
Also, this isn't scientific, but I have a hard time believing a dude who would marry Michelle Obama (have you seen her youtube vid "Be Not Afraid"?) doesn't like or is intimidated by strong, smart women.