Letters to the Editor
mintosh
Published Letters: 70 Editor's Choice: 8
-
The Oil Conglomerate's reaction. . .
[Read the article: Did Al get the science right?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]that Gore is somehow inconsistent for flying around the world delivering his message -- given the CO2 his travels produce -- deserves a more substantial rebuttal. I mean, what is he supposed to do -- sit alone in his house with the lights off and only speak about the issue to his friends and family? Of course if Gore was playing by those rules, the Oil Conglomerate would have nothing to fear now would they. We can't live in a perfect world, but we can live in a better one. And if you compare Gore flying around the world delivering his message to Gore not flying around delivering his message, I think it highly likely that the first scenario will more likley lead to lower co2 emisions than the second.
-
Hey Prince ton
[Read the article: Did Al get the science right?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Are you from Princeton? You MUST be smart.
-
In a word. . .
[Read the article: Breast bullies]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Brilliant!
-
I Know. . .
[Read the article: Resolved: America great! Bin Laden evil! Go Bush!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Give them a kick in the nuts.
-
I ldo ike dark chocolate.
[Read the article: Sweet smell of snobbery]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Moreover, it is obvious that Broudy has no problem with people who like dark chocolate, asside from the associate snobbery. And on this point, hear hear!
The problem is -- people who waste their time and energy worshipping something so trifling. A special chocolate refrigerator for chrisakes? These same people probably purchase specialty made treats for their pets. Instead, why not donate this same time and money to your favorite charity?
-
I do like dark chocalate!!
[Read the article: Sweet smell of snobbery]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Moreover, it is obvious that Broudy has no problem with people who like dark chocolate, asside from the associate snobbery. And on this point, hear hear!
The problem is -- people who waste their time and energy worshipping something so trifling. A special chocolate refrigerator for chrisakes? These same people probably purchase specialty made treats for their pets. Instead, why not donate this same time and money to your favorite charity?
It's not the fancy dark chocolate itself which is akin to the story of The Emporer's New Clothes" -- its all the pretentious language used to describe the chocalate which is truly vacuous.
-
Just think about it. . .
[Read the article: The Fix]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]. . . why does a man bring a bottle of viagra to The Dominican Republic?
Perhaps this explains it -- www.flunk.de/english/sex-tourism.php
Worth looking into, if Salon still does important investigative reporting.
-
One reason this sucks so bad. . .
[Read the article: Kenneth Lay: Not the first to cheat the Big House]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]. . . is because now we will have to listen to the endless and inevitable conspiracy theories. I'm not saying that something untoward didn't happened - just that at most only one theory can be correct. And, moreover, that the bulk of the rest will be so absurd that you won't know whether to laugh or cry. I guess we will have to laugh. . . as those of us who have any sense have done at Oliver Stone.
-
Hmmm??
[Read the article: "Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Is it really a critics job to placate the status quo attitude of the masses? To hear how great this movie is, all you have to do is pay attention to all the MSM hoopla sourrounding its release. For a different angle, we turn to critics. I think pointing out how this movie goes out of its way to create a series is a good and interesting point - perhaps not often enough explored in the MSM (and, no, a third film in a series need not be made necessary by a cliffhanger in the second installment - the Bond films don't work this way). The huge corporate entertainemnt industry chugs forward, while alternate voices in the form of independent films drown in their wake. Come on guys. . . enjoy the movie if you must. . . but also be smart enough to recognize a smart reaction when you see one.
-
What I want to know. . .
[Read the article: The believer]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]. . . is how do you get from what sounds like a reasonably healthy skepticism of the dogmatism of atheism (and this from an agnostic who considers himself a practicing atheist)-- to belief in a very specific version of christianity. This discussion has a HUGE hole in it, to say the least. Sure, scientists get ahead of themselves when they argue that there is no rational reason to believe in God. Sure, there just might be a god who set in motion events which in turn created us and the world we know. But it is a great leap of faith from this kind of reasonable agnosticism, to evangelical Christianity.
-
What really gets me. . .
[Read the article: Unhappily ever after]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]. . . is how disengenuous Forbes is being about the whole affair. I mean, its a free country and they can publish whatever mysogynist crap they want to. . . and without apology (if they don't mind taking it in the pocketbook). But I must say that I would have a lot more respect for Forbes if they stood up for their original decision to publish (not that I agree with the article) than I do for this pretense that the article was somehow merely intended from the get go to be overtly provacative so as to inspire debate. In this way they cave to public pressure -- without looking as if they have caved. I mean, how wimpy is that.
-
First Forbes. . .
[Read the article: Unhappily ever after]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]. . . and now Salon. When I first read this article, the woman in chains was clearly a person of color. Now apparently they have thought better of that image. Kind of ironic, since part of the concern of the article itself is how Forbes has failed to own up to poor editorial decision making.
-
Change of artwork Continued
[Read the article: Unhappily ever after]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Shame on Salon (and this from a longtime subscriber). The "Whitewash" continues. Now, their artist has isued an apology of sorts (not that an apolgy is even what I was looking for) -- and the funny thing is that the apolgy is highlighted as an editorial favorite, while none of the original posts noting the strange discrepancy are. Consequently, a reader just reading the editorial favorites would not even be aware of what the hullaboloo was -- even while the rest of us are placated. The similarity to Forbes' editorial policy becomes more and more haunting.