Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Published Letters: 129 Editor's Choice: 24
So, all you righties -- whether you accept Bush as one of your own, or try to cast him as an apostate -- either way, YOU VOTED FOR HIM, didn't you?
Everything you've seen over the past year -- the various sellouts of the middle class, the abject failures of the most fundamental forms of government service, the continuing catastrophes that are Iraq and the entire mideast policy, the unforgivable inaction on really protecting the homeland (thank G-d we have not been attacked again -- YET), the continuing giveaways to the corporatocracy, and of course a stumbling economy -- it's all just what we told you was going to happen. It was all not only foreseeable but inevitable -- a necessary consequence of a claque that operates only on misinformation, manipulation, and deceit --and it will all get worse before it gets better.
So: whether he's the apotheosis of conservatism, or its opposite, or anything in between -- he's still YOUR DOING. Where the hell were you last year? And will you now accept your responsibility -- and learn from it?
The last line of Ms. Eaves' OpEd piece in the Times is:
A reasonably priced lap dance is not a right.
Coincidentally, a few minutes ago I was reading a post on the Washington Monthly blog by Kevin Drum, "Political Animal," about how the Congressional Dems have been meeting to find a national slogan on which to base their '06 campaigns to try to retake Congress. The current thinking is between "Together, We Can Do Better" and "Together, America Can Do Better."
But just think how it would reverse the gender gap to run on:
A reasonably priced lap dance IS a right!
THAT would get Joe SixPack's attention! Ms. Eaves may yet save our nation....
"But I just KNOW he really loves me!"
Though the husband has never (at least nothing was mentioned) physically assaulted her, I see no moral difference between what he has been doing to her and actual physical abuse.
However, although I agree with the other letter-writers that she would almost certainly be better off without him -- as would the kids -- I also think it appropriate for her to give him a final chance... with an ultimatum, as long as she has the strength to back up that ultimatum with definitive, non-negotiable action.
It is at least possible that his life, and their marriage, are salvageable, and I think for everyone's sake, that possiblity deserves every chance to come to fruition.
That said, though, I got my doubts. Behaviors can and do change -- but character rarely does, and I'm getting the sense (as some other letter-writers clearly have as well) that this boy is too far gone. Be nice if that turned out to be wrong.
dump her immediately.
And what did you say her number was again?
One mother suggests that cafe proprietor McCauley "be responsible for three children for the next year and see if he can control the volume of their voices for every minute of the day." But nobody's asking anyone to control anyone's volumes "every minute" -- just the 10-30 that are spent in the cafe. Anyone who can't recognize the distinction is either not terribly bright -- or is deliberately misstating the situation.
And anyone who can't keep their childrens' behaviors within appropriate bounds in a space clearly designed for the quiet enjoyment of its patrons of all ages -- or take them outside until they can quiet down, or come back at an other time, or any of a number of reasonable solutions -- is too selfish or inept or both to make a good parent, regardless of what parenting theories one subscribes to. This isn't anti-child, it's a simple recognition of the fact that the people around you have rights, too, and that those rights are sometimes defined by location and circumstances.
If you can't play nice, you can't complain when nobody will let you play.
Yes, in a world where women still make only 77 cents to the male dollar in the richest society on the planet; where access to reproductive health of all kinds -- abortion, contraception, education -- is under the worst attack in a quarter-century; when tens of thousands of women worldwide are literally, not figuratively, enslaved for the sexual satisfaction of men and the profits of organized mobs of pimps -- let's spend time and energy castigating some jerk of a restaurant owner because he's allowing some women to rent their bodies as dinnerware.
Do you not understand that it is exactly this sort of nonsense that allows the right to call feminists "feminzis" and lets far too many American voters NOT think that's completely insane?
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
