Letters to the Editor
Published Letters: 228 Editor's Choice: 9
-
@ Lotus Feet - so how's that non-response system working for you?
[Read the article: How Sarah Palin blew it]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Worked well for Sarah Palin. Or did it? Independents thought she lost, too...
We had gas lines under that wunnerful Democrat, Jimmah Cahata. remember him?
Why, 'course I do! I also remember Nixon and Hoover. And?
Democrat policies result in shortages, and then they can pat us on the head and hand out loaves of bread.
Right! Like those horrible shortages of war and poverty under Bill Clinton, for 8 years straight.
Reagan zapped the evil soviet empire,
That's right! All by himself. The policy of containing Soviet Russia was started by Harry Truman, which every President since then continued...but Reagan made it all happen by secretly meeting with Harry Truman while Reagan was still a brilliant Hollywood actor.
Corporations did lay off layers of unnecessary managers. Some corporations, unlike GM, actually stood up to the unions and streamlined their manufacturing.
Right! And the awesome improvements were immediate: factories closing, Flint and Detroit descending into poverty and hopelessness, and GM getting tax breaks for relocating jobs overseas. Woo-hoo!
Reagan had a Democratic Congress which held on to all the entitlement programs like a crab holds on to a dead fish.
Poor, powerless Reagan. After all, all he did was propose the budgets. Of course, those budgets were huge increases from all previous Presidents from the second they left the White House. But that must have been the Democrats controlling Reagan with a Voodoo Economics doll.
Reagan's welcome tax cuts set off a twenty year prosperity accompanied by high employment,
You do know that poverty increased and things got worse for the middle class, right? Oh, and Reagan also increased taxes. I can post that link again for you, if you want.
Oh, and this supposed 20-year prosperity somehow resulted in a recession in 1981-1982, and then again in 1988-1989, and then again in 1991-1992. Then Clinton got in. And somehow, by pursuing polices ***exactly the opposite** of Reagan's, Clinton's administration had 8 years of prosperity.
Which party controls our big cities? Drop out rates in places like Newark and Detroit have approached 70 per cent and have never been below 45% percent thanks to the wonderful efforts of a party which will not insist on teacher accountability and merit in places like Oakland and Cleveland.
Oh yes - teacher accountability. That must be it.
I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that these schools are underfunded, because:
(1)these cities have high populations with a low tax base, because industry built them up and then left them to rot (manufacturing in Newark, Oakland, and Cleveland, manufacturing plus GM in Detroit), and
(2) these cities are populated by minorities, which means Federal funding to help their schools are magically never a priority.
We can be like the English where elderly patients lie in their own waste some weekends because the hospitals are so understaffed.
Right. And that **never** happens in the US - and there's **never** any waiting lists. Because insurance companies are just so patriotically eager to make sure everyone gets the care they need.
And government-run health care is so terrible that it's the only care John McCain has had his entire life. Even though he could afford to have any insurance he wants, because he's wealthy enough to have 8 homes.
I eagerly await your thoughts.
-
@ AKA Smith - I absolutely, totally agree
[Read the article: How Sarah Palin blew it]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Maybe not be allowed to cry due to stress accounts for some of the greater instance of successful suicide in men.
Who knows what the heart attack rate would actually be if men could cry in reaction to stress.
I think that's absolutely dead-on right. And I think it contributes to a host of other issues, too - ulcers, drinking, hypertension, smoking...
Next time a men get mad because a woman in public life cries -- for stress or other reasons -- maybe instead they should lobby for more acceptance of tears from men.
Sure. I don't expect it just yet, but it would be a positive thing. Not just for maturity in our culture - but also for focusing on what actually matters in our candidates: what are their policies? What have been the results of their decisions? How has their judgement been shown to match up with reality?
I contend that even if Palin had teared up over her circumstances, it would have been seen as selfish because women are expected to be selfless nurturers and men get credit for it.
Mm, I disagree a bit. I do think it would have been bad in other ways, which are just as sexist - that she would be seen as more of a "Mom" than a strong woman qualified for Federal power.
Women exploring their masculine side -- the yang if you will -- should not have to give up femaleness. Men exploring their feminine sides -- yin -- should not have to give up their sense of maleness.
In yin and yang together, there is strength.
I absolutely agree - and I think this is what our civilization and culture are in the middle of sorting out, right now and for future generations.