Letters to the Editor
swilldog
Published Letters: 184 Editor's Choice: 20
-
why, you ask? (@ moira)
[Read the article: The witch ain't dead, and Chris Matthews is a ding-dong]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]why is it so surprising or wrong that resentment might - and I mean might - have played a role in Clinton's victory? For more than 200 years, white male resentment has fueled politicians to victory. Wallace. Thurmond. Nixon. That dickweed in the White House. Amazing isn't it, that when those who have previously been excluded from a seat at the table - women, black people, etc. - get a shot, they and their supporters are expected to be better than their old enemies.
Certainly not surprising, but here's where I'll say it's wrong: why should people lend their support to a candidate they otherwise aren't behind simply because that candidate is being picked on or otherwise treated unfairly? Two wrongs don't make a right, after all.
It's victim politics, and I find it ironic that people who view themselves as feminists are so willing to disregard notions of fairness (i.e., judging everyone on their merits equally) just to make Chris Effing Matthews eat crow.
Mind you, if you were already a Hillary Clinton supporter, then more power to ya. I'm sure the day is even more delicious for you -- certainly it would be for me if my beleaguered candidate had a surprising win AND Chris Effing Matthews had to talk about it on the TeeVee with that I-just-ate-a-turd face. Lord knows that in the days to come I will be enjoying many YouTube moments watching that douchebag suffer through last night's results.
But if there truly were that many people who voted for Clinton even though she was decidedly NOT their candidate, just to stand in solidarity with other dual X-chromosomers, or to Stick It To The Man (by voting for the most pro-corporate Democratic candidate! Ha!)... sorry, but "us girls gotta stick together" has got to have it's limits, doesn't it?
[For the record: I'm an Edwards supporter, but I'd be delighted if Obama got the nod. Clinton's solidly my third choice. I'll vote for her if she wins the nomination -- not, however, with a song in my heart. And that has zero to do with her gender.]
-
preach on, Brother Beavis!
[Read the article: The witch ain't dead, and Chris Matthews is a ding-dong]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]How about some real reporting? You know what I'd really like to see? A comprehensive, side-by-side comparison of things that each candidate has said on the issues. I'd like to see side-by-side quotes on various controversies that have come up on the campaign trail: "Here's what Hillary said, here's what Obama said, here's what Edwards said..."
I'd like to see something that involves writing down facts and presenting them in a clear, logical way.
A-friggin-men. Thanks for saying that.
-
truthiness
[Read the article: Poll: Republicans have sex more often]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]People notoriously lie about how often they have sex, and as the last 30 or so years have shown, Republicans are accomplished liars. Ergo...
-
the Romo pile on
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]As a proud Cowboy-hater, I'm definitely enjoying the bile being thrown at "America's Team" today. Warms the cockles and all that.
But I gotta say that Romo's taking an unfair amount of criticism over it (thanks, King, for alluding to this). He played a decent game given what his receivers gave him, and given how badly the offensive line adjusted to the amped up pressure the Giants threw at them in the second half -- especially with the blown plays, dropped passes, and boneheaded penalties.
Once the blitzes came, Romo got rattled pretty hard and I thought he was gonna lose it. But then in that final significant drive the offense managed to get moving a little, and you could see in the huddle how Romo pulled it back together and was back in command. He didn't have enough to drag the rest of the team with him into the end zone, but the potential's definitely there.
People forget that he's still a young guy, and next year he'll fix the issue with holding the ball too long, and he'll be better prepared to deal with that kink of all-out pressure (not to mention that he'll probably have healthy enough recievers to bail him out, unlike yesterday). The game is clearly slowing down for him, and he's definitely got MVP potential.
And comparing him to Danny White? Yeouch. The Wes doth protesteth too much, methinks. ;-)
-
my favorite bad weather football memories
[Read the article: King Kaufman's Sports Daily]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]#1: Mediocre Packer team playing an equally bad Tampa team, sometime in the mid- to late-80s. Snowing like a mofo. The Bucs QB (DeBurg?) gets sacked falling face-first into about 6 inches of snow and slop. I'm sure my memory has embellished this some, but I could swear that he slid on his face about 2 yards. Must have been miserable.
#2: Packers vs. Raiders, 1993. It's beyond bitterly cold -- zero degrees, with a wind chill of minus 22. Minus friggin 22. During pregame warmups (ha!), the Packers came out of the tunnel with bare arms. In stunned response, the bundled up Raiders all looked like they'd rather be euthanized than play that day. Packers win 28-0, and if it were possible, the Raiders would have gone into negative points.
-
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand we're done.
[Read the article: Huckabee: Amend Constitution for God]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Was kinda hoping this guy would be able to hold off on loony theocracy talk until after he'd wrapped up the GOP nomination, but he had to open his big yap. Still, I guess I should be thankful he chose to speak openly about his residence in Crazytown rather than wait until after the general election.
On the down side, now we might have to actually take Guiliani (or 9ui11iani -- kudos to whoever coined that!) and Fred Thompson seriously again.